Keywords

13.1 The Peatland Problem: Defying Definitive Formulation

This volume addresses a range of issues that emerge from the peatland degradation and fires occurring in Indonesia. It specifically looks at the local governance of peatland, using Rantau Baru Village in Riau Province as its main case study. Researchers from a range of academic and activist backgrounds participated in the investigation, allowing them to address the issues from multiple perspectives.

First analyzing the mapping of peatlands, the volume immediately identifies the dysfunction of government policies in both the formulation and implementation of spatial planning (Chap. 2). The volume then turns to Rantau Baru, investigating the link between land use and villagers’ aspirations for the future (Chap. 3). The next two chapters examine fishing in the Kampar River, as it is the main source of livelihood in the village. Chapter 4 points to the decrease of fish resources in recent years in village fishing grounds, while Chap. 5 highlights the limits of traditional fishing methods and the potential of fishing tourism for village development. The following five chapters shed light on the social issues that emerged in Rantau Baru during the process of implementing government policies to prevent peatland fires and improve livelihoods. These social dimensions include the idealized promotion of local wisdom (Chap. 6), unequal gender participation in village spatial planning (Chap. 7), the asymmetry of political power in decision-making about village budget expenditures (Chap. 8), the impact of low incomes and limited access to education on environmental protection measures implemented in cash-poor areas (Chap. 9), and the consequences of land grabbing (Chap. 10). Chapters 11 and 12 examine government policies aimed at addressing peatland degradation and fires in two additional villages in Riau. Chapter 11 highlights how government programs have accelerated economic disparities, while Chap. 12 examines the advantages of promoting ecosystem services valuation to achieve sustainable peatland use. Several chapters provide concrete suggestions to resolve or mitigate the issues raised. These suggestions include establishing a freshwater protected area (Chap. 4), promoting fishing tourism from urban areas (Chap. 5), and expanding customary common lands with the support of the district government (Chap. 10). The authors in this volume have concretely engaged with the social and ecological problems affecting peatlands, committed to affected communities, and collaborated with the various actors involved—that is, we have carried out the transdisciplinary approach we believed is necessary to address peatland degradation in its real complexity.

Although we summarize various issues emerging around peatlands as “the peatland problem,” the chapters confirm that the problem also involves a wide range of inter-related environmental and social challenges. For example, while increasing global carbon emissions (Chap. 1) and land grabbing (Chap. 10) are each distinct problems of their own, they are also caused by the exploitation of the peat environment. Responses to such problems are also inextricably linked, as the response to any one issue may create new challenges. For example, as demonstrated in Chaps. 8 and 12, policies that support the prevention of peatland fires exacerbated the inequality of political and economic power in local communities. While the peatland problem begins with the drainage, drying, and burning of peatlands, these actions in turn cause a cascade of additional, and distinct, social and environmental problems that is not completely predictable. Therefore, the “peatland problem” cannot be definitively formulated in any single dimension.

Similarly, the agencies of the stakeholders involved in the peatland problem cannot be addressed in a formulaic way. Stakeholders’ attempts to respond to (or ignore) peat degradation and fire are complex and sometimes contradictory. These responses therefore cannot be simplified into a single motivation or trajectory. For example, while the central government has adopted a moratorium policy on peatland development, it has not yet taken steps to ban peatland development in a strong and effective manner (Chap. 2); while oil palm companies provide a certain amount of budget to prevent peatland fires, they also promote the expansion of oil palm plantations that may cause or increase fire events (Chaps. 8 and 10); and, while villagers are threatened by frequent peatland fires and strongly concerned about the future of their community, they also sell peatland to outsiders, plant oil palm, and drain peatlands themselves (Chaps. 3 and 10). The peatland problem is the product of a complex interplay of diverse stakeholders’ knowledge, interests, and aspirations. It is therefore impossible to assign stakeholders’ attitudes to a reductive dichotomy of development versus conservation.

In this situation, we cannot identify a single formulated or fixed solution to the peatland problem. Trade-offs between environmental conservation and economic activities are complex phenomena that cannot be solved with a simple to-do list. Banning peatland use entirely, for example, may deprive local people of their economic development potential and lead to poverty, even in areas where oil palm can be grown without causing fire. Or it may create new, unpredictable patterns of peatland exploitation that leads to increased fire incidents and ecosystem degradation.

In short, the issues, stakeholders, and solutions related to the peatland problem cannot be easily defined or easily addressed. Peatland degradation is one of today’s “wicked problems”, with “no definitive formulation, no stopping rule, and no test for a solution” (Ludwig 2001, p. 759; see also Rittel and Webber 1973). Such problems have no true or false solutions, but rather have “better or worse” or “satisfying or unsatisfying” ones (Rittel and Webber 1973, pp. 162–163). Fundamentally, there is no single solution to the peatland problem, because with each response, new challenges arise, including the breakdown of ecosystems and conflicts between stakeholders.

13.2 A Transdisciplinary Approach: Continuously Directed toward the Future

How, then, given its local, national, regional, and global significance, should the peatland problem be addressed? One possible way is to promote understandings of how different stakeholders think about the peatland problem and to increase mutual understanding among them (Ludwig 2001). As noted above, the motivations and orientations of stakeholders are not one-dimensional or held in isolation. Each actor has unique intentions, interests, and desires formed in a complex social context. Promoting mutual understanding of these intentions, interests, and desires positively impact communication, negotiation, and cooperation among different stakeholders, which can contribute to “better” solutions to the peatland problem.

It is also necessary to pay attention to the specific interface where the concrete social and environmental issues of the peatland problem emerge—that is, the local communities and the environment around them. Each location has its own unique social and environmental characteristics, to which no one-size-fits-all solution can be applied. Even within a location, a variety of social and environmental issues result from peatland degradation and fires, and one issue may cause several additional and inter-related issues to emerge. These must be addressed in both concrete and long-term ways. Given that long-term and detailed efforts are required, the main agents of peatland restoration activities are the people of local communities. However, central and local governments, companies, and urban residents are also principal drivers of the peatland problem; local people do not have sufficient capital or labor to address the problem alone (Chap. 6). Therefore, all actors must be involved in solving the peatland problem, and appropriate support should be provided by non-locals who are also implicated in the problem.

Academic researchers and NGO staff play an important role in the pursuit of “better” solutions by: (1) identifying social and ecological issues and their inter-relationships; and (2) facilitating communication among local residents and other stakeholders. These efforts require flexible, continuous, and tailor-made approaches to address the challenges that emerge in the community. Researchers and NGOs may not always provide innovative, ultimate, or universal solutions. However, given that the peatland problem involves so many stakeholders and at the same time affects such a broad array of social and environmental conditions, it is necessary to maintain continuous and patient responses, staying close to and following up on issues as they emerge in the local community and surrounding environment.

With this outlook in mind, the researchers involved in this investigation have begun to implement suggestions to mitigate or solve the social and ecosystem challenges in Rantau Baru. Here, recent negotiations with the district government around customary land rights and the conservation of floodplains and peat swamps along the Kampar River are of particular importance.

First, to strengthen customary land rights, we are working to reinforce mutual understanding between the villagers and district government officials under the initiative of the local NGO, Hakiki. From 2020 to 2022, we held several meetings with senior officials of the Pelalawan District government, in which we presented maps of Rantau Baru customary territory (Chap. 10) and requested protection of rights to customary territory.Footnote 1 In addition, in 2021, we produced a short film on honey collection from sialang trees (see Chap. 3), which demonstrated the village custom of maintaining the sialang forest as common lands. We also organized a workshop to screen the film in the village for government officials. We plan to hold similar workshops for additional stakeholders, including urban residents and oil palm/acacia companies. Although these meetings and workshops will not immediately change the situation in Rantau Baru, the maps will be an important reference when the district government designates the adat area (wilayah adat: see Chap. 10), and demonstration of customary management of sialang forests appearing in the film will support negotiations aimed at strengthening the customary rights of the villagers.

Second, in October 2022, we began a new project to establish protected areas in the floodplain and swamps of Rantau Baru. As mentioned in Chap. 3, during the last decade, oil palm plantations have been expanding onto the floodplain and peat swamps near the Kampar River. However, most of the palm trees planted in these areas were destroyed by seasonal floods and are not providing sufficient returns to the villagers (see Chap. 3). Wetlands are drained for oil palm plantations, destroying the submerged forests and peat swamps that provide important spawning grounds and habitat for small fishes at the bottom of the river’s food chain (see Chap. 4). Protecting these wetlands will increase fish resources in the future. As part of our project, ecologists and social scientists will assess the social and ecological processes associated with these protection activities. Hakiki members are also working to spread awareness of the potential of protection areas. The villagers have begun to embrace the aims of the protection activities and actively engage in discussing the details of the protection scheme.

These activities do not provide ultimate solutions to the various issues that have emerged due to peatland degradation and fire in the village. It is also quite possible that our attempts will give rise to new issues. However, what characterizes our activities is our continuous and flexible engagement with the social and environmental issues in the village, including any new issues that may emerge. In this process, Rantau Baru villagers, NGO activists, university researchers, local government officials, and other stakeholders are closely linked and work together in a collaboration. This is done to find better solutions to the peatland problem —or, to realize a better future for the society—together with those involved in the problem. This ongoing and dynamic commitment to the village community is the transdisciplinary approach we believe is necessary to mitigate and resolve the highly complex and mixed-interest problems of peatland degradation and fire.