SAVE UNESCO'S
WORLD HERITAGE SITES
Tropical Rainforest Heritage
of Sumatra
Spanning across a total area of approximately 25,000km2, the Tropical Rainforest Heritage of Sumatra (TRHS) the Tropical Rainforest Heritage of Sumatra (TRHS) stretches across three distinguished national parks named Gunung Leuser, Kerinci Seblat and Bukit Barisan Selatan in Indonesia. The rainforest is home to a plethora of flora and fauna species, including critically endangered ones. There is dire necessity to protect the natural heritage assets found in the TRHS due to the environmental values stemming from such diversity and its immense educational potential for long-term conservation.
Unbeknownst to many, the forest also produces almost 80% of the world's oxygen supply. Despite such importance, it remains that there is little attention paid worldwide to the threats faced by the TRHS. In fact, it was placed on UNESCO's Danger List in 2011 for the apparent destruction and risks posed to wildlife and fauna within the forest areas - just 7 years following its inscription as a World Heritage Site.
The TRHS is also home to some of the world's last remaining indigenous tribes, such as the Mentawai and Rimba people to name a few. While forest fires and overwhelming tourism rates have threatened their liveability, they remain in the forests because of customary traditions pertaining to their responsibility as protectors of the forest. In fact, reports have stated that there have been multiple incidents whereby the state attempted to blame them for the forest fires, eventhough it was conglomerates responsible for palm oil-related activities who are accountable.
As such, protecting the forests would also mean protecting Indonesia's indigenous people who are equally worthy of welfare and autonomy like the rest of us.
Outstanding Universal Value (OUV)
The TRHS fulfils three different UNESCO World Heritage Sites criteria; first on the list would be Criterion (vii) hinging upon the presence of natural phenomena and exceptionality in ecological aesthetics offered on-site. UNESCO’s assessment states TRHS as laden with pleasing mountainous backgrounds due to its adjacency with Bukit Barisan Mountains. Moreover, on its land sits the highest lake in Southeast Asia named Lake Gunung Tujuh as well as the Mount Kerinci Volcano.
Secondly, TRHS fulfils Criterion (ix) focused on the representation and diversity of various ecological species, whether flora or fauna. As a matter of fact, UNESCO reports that there are approximately 10,000 species of plants in TRHS, along with 201 mammal species and 580 bird species residing on-site. It is imperative to acknowledge at this point that these species are facing utmost threat of extinction or – at the very least – jeopardy to their safety and wellbeing due to the various risks posed to TRHS such as agricultural encroachment and infrastructural constructions which this report will thoroughly break down.
Additionally, the TRHS is also home to indigenous tribes such as the Mentawai and Anak Dalam people and adjacent town residents who are involved agriculturally.
Lastly, TRHS fulfils Criterion (x) contingent upon the potential for in-situ conservation which would contribute to scientific and research developments worldwide. This is largely due to the fact that TRHS houses more than 50% of Sumatra’s plant diversity, hence making it the optimal choice for local conservation sites.
Identification of Threats
TRHS was put on UNESCO’s Danger List in 2011 due to threats posed such as poaching, illegal logging, agricultural encroachment and infrastructural plans to build roads through the national parks. One of the two most pressing threats is agricultural encroachment which often manifests as illegal logging and deforestation. The other is infrastructural plans by the government to further facilitate tourism and accessibility of the forests at the expense of the ecology.
A primary threat to the forest heritage is posed by agricultural encroachment. Research has shown that most of the fires that have engulfed forests in Sumatra are man-made and traceable to clearing of land for expansion of monocultures such as oil palm plantations.
The responsibility for the destruction of the forest heritage thus lies in the hands of large conglomerates, although it is usually locals living amongst or around the forest that are tasked and paid to carry out land clearing. It is notable that these take place despite the fact that the use of fire to clear land in Indonesia is deemed illegal.
Yet, the phenomena and lack of punitive measures imposed upon responsible parties are ineffective at best - a few studies have attributed this to the complications of patronage politics whereby plantation companies have established relationships with key leaders among socio-political elite classes. This means that the latter are protected from the repercussions of their actions so long as the leaders stay in power, and two-way beneficial relationships are maintained.
This is worsened by the fact that there are fractures within the legislative and park management systems in Indonesia; the responsibilities of National Parks management lie in the hands of central government, but this has become inefficient due to the sheer size of Indonesia.
In conjunction, district governments lose touch with the forest heritage and resort to treating the assets inappropriately. For example, they encourage locals to set up dwellings within the demarcated park boundaries by providing grants and building public facilities such as schools. This creates a vicious cycle in which conglomerates have a more extensive list of locals to reach out to for on-site land clearing, and more locals being attracted to the viability of a future if they were to work on-site.
The repercussions of such deplorable actions on the forest heritage include the loss of flora and fauna, some of which are labelled critically endangered. Not only do animals suffer in the process of having their habitats engulfed by fire, this also means that the future of biological studies on ecological diversity is threatened - not just for Indonesia, but for the rest of the world. This is because the TRHS is home to many flora and fauna that cannot be found aplenty in any other part of the world. As such, it can be said that the risks are high according to the framework for threat assessment.
Another pressing threat to the forest heritage is posed by infrastructural developments. Reports have shown that local district governments have always been unhappy with the park’s large expanse and restrictions on road development. This is primarily because of the way that inaccessibility contributes towards the National Parks' economic isolation, and devalues the importance of conservation.
However, there is a good reason for the inaccessibility and the fact that 78% of forest remains unroaded; an increase in the number of roads - and consequently human activities - would result in a disruption towards fauna interactions. This is especially pertinent for animals such as the Sumatran Tiger that are averse to human-rich sites. As a result, their range of movements will be limited, thus predisposing them to higher risks of poaching.
In 2017, there were claims the Indonesian government assured UNESCO that there was no ongoing infrastructural developments, and that no requests have been filed. Yet, the conservationists claim of the dishonesty in that statement given that developments were allegedly still being advanced.
Even if there is a lack of definitive proof over the incident, it cannot be denied that the same pattern materialized in 2021; despite calls by UNESCO not to upgrade a 36km road that has parts cutting through Gunung Leuser National Park, authorities went ahead with the unprocedural activity. Historically, upgrades made to roads have resulted in more dwellings being set up, thus causing concerns for more risk of deforestation as well.
Lastly, there is also a hydroelectric dam project taking place at Batang Toru which is an adjacent forest area. The project entails the construction of 20km of roadways and 13km of hydrotunnels which would clearly harm the ecological welfare of the TRHS.
Not only that, there are also heightened risks of flooding in adjacent forests and vulnerabilities in ground constructions. This justified the World Bank's and Asian Development Bank's refusal to fund the project. Still, the Bank of China became the primary sponsor due to its interests in China's Belt & Road Initiative.
An NGO by the name of Walhi filed a lawsuit against the government for threatening the forest heritage, only to have it rejected by Medan State Administrative Court. Given that the court is of district-level, this corroborates with the argument that district-level governance is extremely out of touch with the welfare of the TRHS. Given the complexity of the intertwined issues and failure of governance, the risk posed by infrastructural developments is hence high.
Assessment of Conservation Management Plans
Sumatra is one of the only 78 world sites have been described as “exceptionally irreplaceable” (UCN., 2013), with conservation issues presented in the previous chapter, it is vital for Indonesia to have a well maintained disaster risk management system.
This consists of the key elements for consideration in a Disaster Risk Management (DRM) plan relating the context of the Sumatra forest, followed by the fundamental structure/system of the Indonesian DRM plan, furthermore proposing specific additions and changes.
Sumatra has to deal with two branches of considerations for its DRM plan.
Human considerations are primarily through the country's intensive deforestation. The driver for this is both ‘need’ and ‘profit’. Indonesia has an intensive growth of population, with an increased need of space and infrastructure.
Corporate greed would be unjust as a conclusion, as the country is a major exporter of crude petroleum and natural gas, moreover a main supplier of rubber, coffee, cocoa, and palm oil. Hence without alternatives, deforestation is crucial for the country’s well being.
Natural considerations are vital, a considerable amount of human lives have been lost, moreover economic damage. For instance, from 1900-2015, Indonesia has lost approximately 10 million lives to floods. This is the equivalent of killing every Swedish or Portuguese inhabitant right now.
These happenings on occasion being reported as being exacerbated by human-cause deforestation.
The national administrative framework works in two parts, with provinces (34 in total) and regencies (416 in total)/cities (98 in total). There is an aim at decentralization, so separating provincial administration reporting directly to the Indonesian government, and regencies/cities working at the second order.
.png)
In relation to DRM, the Indonesian National Board for Disaster Management (BNPB), formed in 2008, has essentially shifted from an advisory board to a now minister-level official (since a recent 2019), hence being able to take commanding functions during natural disasters (hence also directly responsible to the President). Alongside are separate provincial/local BPBD’S (Disaster Management Agencies) reporting back to the national agency.
Sumatra is composed of 10/34 provinces in Indonesia, many conservation/DRM legislation in Indonesia directly come from its condition. Primary actors are top down from government/president, to BNBP’s and BPBD down to who is employed to monitor, with secondary actors such as international bodies for in person aid/ research such as GIS/EWS etc. They all, accompanied with the legislation play a part in the DRM framework.
Suggested Conservation Management Strategies
Firstly, according to a checklist assessment report by the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC), overall Indonesia’s DRM framework has been reviewed as comprehensive and strong. Its issues seem to arise from a lack of the relation between local and central government. A concern being that sub-national resources/capacities, skills and knowledge, make it so whatever target is proposed nationally are difficult if not impossible to guarantee.
Indonesia reportedly has difficulties to “guarantee adequate preparedness for response and to balance sustainable recovery”. Fixing coordination issues between actors and stakeholders, whether it be at a national or international level, can often be a way of circumventing economic problems.
Indonesia has a similar issue to Singapore’s OneMapSG and the URA. The OneMap policy was rolled out over a decade ago, aimed to merge all sprawling lands, as to have a better control on conflicting land claims. Yet, although initially proposed as transparent and open, the OneMap portal is only accessible to the government.
A straightforward way of addressing the issue is to re-evaluate the boundaries drawn, by opening up the portal publicly, furthermore allowing a period of time for contestation of land for local communities/ indigenous groups. Following this a panel of experts to discuss and review conflicts of interest, to be updated back into OneMap.
Another method for acceleration of mapping would be encouraging and incentivizing crowd-sourced processes, such as Urundata, based of the Pokemon Go model of gathering data.
.png)
.png)
Thirdly, three aspects can be looked into: if national funding is better re-distributed to sub-national, it will allow for a more developed/ rapid delivery of information from BPBD to BNPB. Moreover (political conflicts about Timor Sea aside), Australia can/does serve an important source of preventional EWS for natural disasters such as earthquakes/floods, hence further sharing of data for disaster mitigation is invaluable.
Finally, similar to idea of crowd sourced GIS, an implementation on EWS can be tested and developed, especially for signs that are harder to recognize (ie: landslides can be noticed/reported in person).
As discussed, the environment/land is key to the economic progress of the country. Concern arises when trying to juggle between social and economic development and environmental degradation. Indonesia has to balance the progression of its inhabitants and the ecological systems/biodiversity.
A major factor of deforestation comes from a specific crop, palm oil. Together with Malaysia, Indonesia holds half the world’s total production, palm oil being the world’s most popular vegetable oil, found in over 50% of consumer products, moreover a major role in many industrial applications.
In response to the hectares used by crops that damage the environment during/after production, President Widodo announced that the country would impose a nationwide moratorium on issuing new permits for plantations, moreover ceasing all forest clearing activities in an attempt to control deforestation.
But this effort is circumvented, as “The environment ministry has identified 3.37 million hectares (8.33 million acres) of such illegal oil palm plantations throughout the country, amounting to an area the size of the Netherlands. More than a fifth of this illegal plantation area will soon be legalized, as the operators are applying for a change in the designation of the forest.”
.png)
The first proposal is to retain the moratorium, to let the landscape regain its biodiversity, but this is likely improbable, due to the inherent value of these lands for production.
A political change that would impact DRM, as Indonesia/Malaysia hold a monopoly on palm oil, can be bi-national agreement with stricter taxing can in turn fund the BPBD/BNPB and conservation efforts generally. Another proposal, similar to GIS and EWS proposals, utilising and developing tools that clearly communicate boundaries are absolutely key to addressing land border issues, with a transparency so that illegal deforestation is kept more controlled.
Additionally, legislation for reforesting is necessary to preserve land and decentivize the ‘use-and-throw-away’ method that many plantation owners employ. According to the RFF (Rhino and Forest Fund), oil palm plantations have been reforested, but only if done with illegal plantations or land bought over. A piece of legislation that would respond indirectly to DRM, would be mandating land to be reforested after use, rather than effort given by conservationists to deal with.
The End.
Bibliography
Basten Gokkon (2019). “Nothing was left”: Flash floods, landslides hit Indonesia’s Papua region. [online] Mongabay Environmental News. Accessed on: 21/10/27
Deforested peatland cleared to make pulp and paper products in Sumatra, Indonesia in 2014. ULET IFANSASTI/GETTY (2014). Accessed on: 21/10/14.
https://e360.yale.edu/features/despite-government-pledges-ravaging-of-indonesias-forests-continues
Disaster Risk Reduction in Indonesia. (2020). UNDRR, ADPC.
Accessed on: 21/10/14
Gotta catch 'em all: Pokemon-style app aims to save Indonesia’s forests. (2020). The Straits Times. Accessed on: 21/10/14. https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/se-asia/gotta-catch-em-all-pokemon-style-app-aims-to-save-indonesias-forests
Indonesia’s map project ignores indigenous land, risks conflicts. (2021). Reuters. Accessed on: 21/10/14.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-indonesia-landrights-map-trfn-idUSKBN2BN10I
Indonesia NSDI: One Map for the Nation
https://www.esri.com/news/arcnews/spring12articles/indonesia-nsdi-one-map-for-the-nation.html
IUCN. (2013). Scientists identify the world’s most irreplaceable protected areas. Accessed on: 21/10/14
https://www.iucn.org/content/scientists-identify-worlds-most-irreplaceable-protected-areas.
Jokowi’s War on Pandemic: Growing Dependence on TNI? (2020). Accessed on: 21/27/14 https://www.rsis.edu.sg/rsis-publication/rsis/global-health-security-covid-19-and-its-impacts-jokowis-war-on-pandemic-growing-dependence-on-tni/#.YXj4bBpBwu
Leuseur Watch, PT Agram Bumi Niagra continues to destroy (2017). Accessed on: 21/10/14
Mongabay Environmental News. (2020). Conservationists replant legal palm oil plantation with forest in Borneo. Accessed on: 21/10/14
Post, T.J. (2018). Indonesia launches One Map Policy to resolve land conflicts. The Jakarta Post. Accessed on: 21/10/14 https://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2018/12/11/indonesia-launches-one-map-policy-to-resolve-land-conflicts.html
Strengthening Law and Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) in Indonesia (2020). Accessed on: 21/10/14
Swain, F. (2020). How do we go palm oil free? Accessed on: 21/10/14
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200109-what-are-the-alternatives-to-palm-oil.
Timor sea dispute mapped by settlement/agreement (2018). Accessed on: 21/10/14.