Ecological Economics 136 (2017) 101–113

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Ecological Economics

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon

Analysis

Smallholder Farmers and the Dynamics of Degradation of Peatland

Ecosystems in Central Kalimantan, Indonesia
Medrilzam Medrilzam a, Carl Smith b, Ammar Abdul Aziz b,⁎, John Herbohn c, Paul Dargusch a
a
School of Geography, Planning and Environmental Management, The University of Queensland, Australia
b
School of Agriculture and Food Sciences, The University of Queensland, Australia
c
Forest Industries Research Centre, University of the Sunshine Coast, Australia

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:
Received 1 October 2016
Received in revised form 23 January 2017
Accepted 1 February 2017
Available online 21 February 2017

© 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Over the last three decades, the tropical peatland ecosystems in In-
donesia have been under intense pressure from anthropogenic activi-
ties. Clearing of the peat swamp forests for agricultural activities,
logging and drainage, local roads and mining activities have been wide-
spread throughout Indonesia (mostly in Sumatra and Kalimantan
Islands) causing ecological disasters in the form of biodiversity loss, de-
forestation, forest and peat fires, peatland degradation and resulting in
massive carbon emissions (Murdiyarso et al., 2010; Miettinen et al.,
2012a; Miettinen et al., 2016; Osaki et al., 2016). The destruction of
tropical peatlands has also caused socio-economic problems for the
country, particularly for the communities living around and within the
peatland areas, because their livelihoods depend upon the natural re-
sources provided by this ecosystem (Anshari and Armiyarsih, 2005;
Silvius et al., 2008; Laterra et al., 2012; Law et al., 2015).
Various actors, ranging from private companies, different levels of
government and communities, play a role in peatland conversion with
each having different objectives and levels of impact. The adverse im-
pacts of private company operations (such as palm oil plantations and
logging concessions) on peatland areas have been widely discussed in
the literature (e.g. Carlson et al., 2012; Miettinen et al., 2012b). Mean-
while, many studies (e.g. Page et al., 2002; Fuller et al., 2004; Hooijer
et al., 2009) have examined the impacts of government initiatives,
such as the Mega Rice Project (MRP) in Central Kalimantan (Noor et
⁎ Corresponding author at: School of Agriculture and Food Sciences, The University of
Queensland, Gatton Campus, Gatton, QLD 4343, Australia.
E-mail address: a.abdulaziz@uq.edu.au (A.A. Aziz).
al., 2005), on the deterioration of peatland ecosystems. The MRP was a
centralised Indonesian Government project aimed at increasing nation-
al rice production and simultaneously supporting the goal of rice self-
sufficiency by dividing and converting 1.2 million ha of peat swamp for-
est into five large blocks of rice fields.
Recognising that peatland conversion has contributed to more than
half of Indonesia's terrestrial greenhouse gas emissions (MoE, 2009),
and the ambitious target of Indonesia's President to reduce carbon
emissions by 26% by 2020, the Indonesian Government has released a
2-year Moratorium Policy on Primary Forest and Peatland Conversion
(Presidential Instruction No. 10/2011). Besides banning any new
licenses to private companies to exploit peatland areas and primary
forests for any purpose (including for palm oil plantations, pulp
wood and logging concessions), the moratorium policy also aims
to allow time for the Government to improve its forestry manage-
ment and land-use planning practices and improve its data on
forests and peatlands (Austin et al., 2012). However, the moratorium
does not preclude the clearing of peatlands and primary forests by
other actors such as communities practicing traditional agriculture
practices.
In the peatland ecosystems of Kalimantan, the communities com-
monly grow their crops (i.e. rice paddies using shifting cultivation and
rubber (Hevea brasiliensis) agroforestry on mineral and shallow peat
soil on a small scale (Page et al., 2009a). The communities use fire as
the main mechanism for land clearing activities. In the past, this method
has been relatively safe because the peatland was always wet through-
out the year, preventing fires from spreading into peatland areas. How-
ever, recent land cover change on many peatland areas has made them
susceptible to fire. The construction of canals to drain the peatland has
caused extreme changes to the hydrological system (Hooijer et al.,

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.02.017
0921-8009/© 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
102 M. Medrilzam et al. / Ecological Economics 136 (2017) 101–113
2006) and peat surface subsidence (Wösten et al., 2008), which has in-
creased their susceptibility to fire in dry seasons (Page et al., 2002).
Communities have also changed their livelihood practices in re-
sponse to limited and degraded agricultural land, such as reducing the
fallow length of shifting cultivation (Setyawan, 2010; Akbar, 2011),
opening new cropping areas on mineral soils exposed along peatland
drainage canal banks, converting more non-irrigated rice paddy fields
(ladang) to permanent rubber agroforestry, and intensifying land
claiming around built infrastructure (such as roads) in order to claim
compensation from others wanting to use the land. Most of these activ-
ities use fire as the preferred method to clear land. Unless strict burning
controls are applied by the communities, the fires may spread and cause
severe forest and peat fires that further degrade the peatland.
The MRP in Central Kalimantan is a clear example of how an initial
disturbance to peatland, through clearing and draining, has changed
the way communities conduct traditional agriculture and other liveli-
hood activities, and the magnitude of their impact on the peatland.
The implementation of the MRP began in 1996 based on the Presidential
Decree No. 82/1995. Dephut (2007) recorded that, within the first
2 years (1996–97) of the MRP, 187 km of primary drainage canals
(Saluran Primer Induk/SPI) were built. These connected the Kahayan,
Kapuas and Barito Rivers. In addition, about 958 km of sub-primary ca-
nals (Saluran Primer Utama/SPU) were built on Block A, B, C and D of
the MRP. In Block A, an area strongly affected by the MRP and where
the whole canal network was completely built, only 30,000 ha of rice
paddy fields were eventually developed out of a total block area of
315,894 ha (Dephut, 2007; Suyanto et al., 2009).
Instead of producing land suitable for agriculture, the MRP had a
range of disastrous impacts on the peatland ecosystems and community
livelihoods. The construction of drainage canal networks destroyed peat
swamp forests that were previously used by the local communities for
collecting latex from the jelutung tree (Dyera sp.), collecting bark from
the gemor tree (Alseodaphne spp.), collecting commercial rattan species,
fishing in traditional ponds known as beje, and hunting wild animal
(Galudra et al., 2011). The MRP also eliminated the traditional commu-
nity canal system known as Handel and Tatah, which had been used by
the community as a drainage system and to gain access to their liveli-
hood areas. The MRP drainage canals also created unstable peatland hy-
drology that produced extreme changes in the water table between dry
and wet seasons. In 1997, a dry El-Nino year, the drainage canals
allowed the peat to dry and a massive forest and peat fire occurred with-
in the MRP. The fires in the MRP area was estimated to have emitted be-
tween 0.12 and 0.15 Gt of carbon to the atmosphere and resulted in the
dense smog that affected much of Southeast Asia during that time (Page
et al., 2002; Page et al., 2009b).
Following the rapid political transformation in Indonesia, the MRP
was terminated by the new Indonesian Government in 1999 and most
of the MRP land were abandoned. From the time the MRP was terminat-
ed to 2009 (before the commencement of the Kalimantan Forest Carbon
Partnership), the Indonesian central government's focus within the
MRP area was peatland rehabilitation planning (Presidential Instruction
No 2/2007). However, conflict arose between the centrally controlled
Ministry of Forestry, the provincial government and a number of local
governments over land tenure due to the ambiguity of new forestry
and decentralisation laws and regulations (McCarthy, 2004; Galudra
et al., 2011). As a result, the local governments within the MRP area con-
tinued to improperly issue licenses to palm-oil and small scale mining
companies without approval from the Ministry of Forestry, which claimed
that the MRP land was still under its jurisdiction. According to the MRP
Rehabilitation Secretariat in Bappenas (2011, personal communication),
most of the central government agencies are reluctant to implement the
peatland rehabilitation plan until land tenure disputes are resolved.
With stalled peatland restoration activities as a result of land tenure
disputes, peatland within the MRP continued to degrade. Recurrent fires
and the existence of drainage canals have caused the peat to subside and
release greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere (Harrison et al., 2009;
Page et al., 2009b; Moore et al., 2013). The recurrent fires have been
caused by the peatland clearing activities of private companies and
local communities. While private companies use fire to clear peatland
primarily for financial benefit realized through the plantation crops de-
veloped on the land, local communities, on the other hand, uses fire to
clear peatland mainly because this method is the only affordable option
for them to create areas suitable for subsistence activities. The local
community, almost an annual basis, use uncontrolled fire to burn vege-
tation to allow boats to locate and access fish habitats during the wet
season, to create pools of water that provide refuge for fish and to pro-
vide flushes of nutrients to stimulate algal growth and maintain high
levels of fish populations (Chokkalingam et al., 2005).
Understanding the dynamics of the trade-offs between conservation
and livelihood goals in the tropical peatland ecosystems in Central Kali-
mantan is crucial to the efforts of promoting sustainable livelihoods, de-
veloping benefit sharing mechanisms and reducing emissions (Luttrell
et al., 2014; Jewitt et al., 2014; Suwarno et al., 2016). In this study we in-
vestigate the dynamics of peatland change in two blocks previously
assigned for the MRP as a result of local community livelihood activities.
We focus on what has occurred subsequent to the MRP, that is, from
2000 to 2009. Therefore, our study does not cover the peatland degrada-
tion directly caused by the MRP (which has already been covered in pre-
vious studies), but the peatland degradation indirectly caused by the
MRP post-abandonment. Our study targets the drivers influencing com-
munity livelihood activities such as shifting cultivation, rubber planting,
land claiming and the shift to permanent agroforestry, and highlights
the associated changes to land cover and above-ground carbon stocks.
We do not measure the impact of community livelihood activities on
total carbon stocks (above plus below ground carbon) because there is
limited data on below ground carbon stocks (such as peat) within the
study area. Therefore, the impact of community livelihood activities
on carbon stocks presented here only represents a partial impact on
the total carbon stock.
2. Case Study Area: Block A-NW and Block E of the Mega-Rice Project
Region in Central Kalimantan
We selected Block A-NW (North West) and Block E (Eastern part) of
the MRP as our study area because both of these blocks have been free
from small or large scale private company or government activities
post MRP termination in 1999 (Fig. 1). Hence, any peatland degradation
that has occurred within both blocks post MRP termination has been
caused by local community livelihood activities. Block A-NW represents
a peatland area that was heavily deforested and was drained by the MRP
between 1996 and 1998, while Block E represents an area that was only
slightly disturbed by the MRP. Although there was only one drainage
canal that extends into Block E, it but it worth noting that there are
smaller canals (tatas) that was constructed to facilitate timber extrac-
tion activities. These blocks are the same as those used by the Kaliman-
tan Forest Carbon Partnership (KFCP), which is a Reducing Emissions
from Deforestation and forest Degradation + (REDD+) demonstration
project of the Governments of Indonesia and Australia. The KFCP began
in the case study area in 2007 and it had no direct impact on the results
presented in this paper.
Block A-NW and Block E are separated by the MRP's primary twin
drainage canals (Fig. 2). Administratively, the whole of Block A-NW
and about three-quarters of Block E are located within the Mantangai
sub-district, and the remaining quarter of Block E is located within the
Timpah sub-district of the Central Kalimantan Province. The Kapuas
River is the boundary of both blocks on the western side and the
Mantangai River runs along the southern and eastern boundary of
Block A-NW and along the eastern boundary of Block E. The total
study area covers about 120,000 ha: 44,000 ha in Block A-NW and
76,000 ha in Block E.
In 2009, there were 14 settlements found in the study area, compris-
ing seven villages and seven hamlets, with a total population of about
 M. Medrilzam et al. / Ecological Economics 136 (2017) 101–113
Fig. 1. Location of study area in Central Kalimantan.
10,000 people (about 2600 families). All settlements are spread across
the western side of both Block A-NW and E, along the bank of the
Kapuas River. The Mantangai village in the southern part of Block A-
NW and the Petak Puti village in the northern part of Block E are the
‘entry gates’ to the study area by road. People usually travel among
the villages or hamlets within the study area using small motor boats
known as klotok or small motorised canoes called ces. The klotoks and
ces are also used by the communities to travel to and from sites where
they conduct livelihood activities such as cropping and fishing. Nine-
ty-five per cent of the population is local Dayak Ngaju who have already
been exposed to ‘modern living’, such as the use of mobile phones and
television.
As with the other Dayak people in Kalimantan described by Hudson
et al. (1967), traditional shifting cultivation practices have naturally di-
minished in both blocks. Before the late 1960s, traditional shifting culti-
vation, with its long fallow periods, was the common agriculture
practice of Dayak Ngaju communities (Miles, 1970; Page et al., 2009a).
In addition, fishing, hunting, rubber cultivation (known as the ‘jungle
rubber’ agroforestry), and gathering forest products, such as rattan
and gemor tree bark for mosquito repellent, were major sources of
food and income for the communities. However, during the timber con-
cessions era from 1969 to 1996, and the MRP era from 1996 to 1998,
103
legal and illegal logging gradually changed the community livelihoods
in both blocks (Suyanto et al., 2009). Traditional shifting cultivation de-
clined and new values introduced by outsiders slowly influenced the so-
cial capital of local communities.
After the MRP was terminated in 1999, the Indonesian Government
intensified law enforcement activities to curb illegal logging within the
MRP area. This had caused the larger community in Block A-NW to shift
their focus back to shifting cultivation, latex collection and fishing for a
source of income. Instead of using traditional long fallow shifting culti-
vation, communities established short fallow cultivation to grow non-
irrigated subsistence rice along the banks of the MRP drainage canals
(known locally as ‘lading’). Most communities also increased the area
of rubber plantation on poor mineral and shallow peat soils, and sold
non-timber forest products, such as rattan and gemor tree bark, and
fish to mid-traders for cash income. This was more profitable compared
to traditional shifting cultivation (Suyanto et al., 2009).
In Block E, an existing logging road, which was unofficially upgraded
to a mining road after the MRP era, provided better access for commu-
nities to sell fish and non-timber forest products to Northern villages.
Because the rubber trees that were passed down by their ancestors
were getting old and unproductive, the communities also started to
change from jungle rubber agroforestry to rubber monoculture. By
104 M. Medrilzam et al. / Ecological Economics 136 (2017) 101–113

Fig. 2. Study area in Central Kalimantan.

2009, only a few families in Block E were practicing traditional shifting above-ground carbon stocks between 2000 and 2009; and 3) fire loca-
cultivation (Suyanto et al., 2009). tions and the probability of fire occurrence within both blocks. In the
following sub-sections we describe the methods used to analyse these
3. Methods three factors.

To investigate the dynamics of peatland change attributed to local 3.1. Assessment of Community Socio-Economy Condition
community livelihood activities in the study area, we assessed three
key factors: 1) The socio-economic condition of the community; 2) We conducted group interviews in three villages (Mantangai Hulu
the trajectory of land cover change and its associated impact on and Kalumpang villages in Block A-NW and Petak Puti village in Block
 M. Medrilzam et al. / Ecological Economics 136 (2017) 101–113 105

E) and a household survey (n = 50) in four villages (Kalumpang and Sei
Ahas villages in Block A-NW, and Kanjarau hamlet and Petak Puti village
in Block E). The questions used in the group interviews and the house-
hold survey were designed to collect basic information on community
welfare (income, expenditure and savings), land ownership, the main
livelihood activities undertaken (such as rubber agroforestry, rice culti-
vation, fishing and fuel wood collection) and the causes of forest and
peat fires. We also obtained population statistics for seven villages
from census data (PODES) collected during 2003, 2005 and 2008, and
from CARE International data collected during 2009 (unpublished
report).
3.2. Assessment of Land Cover Change and Greenhouse Gas Emissions
We used land cover data and maps covering 2000, 2005 and 2009
from Siegert et al. (unpublished report) and the KFCP GIS database to
measure the impact of community livelihood activities on land cover
change. The KFCP land cover data were based on Landsat images (39
Landsat ETM+, 10 Landsat TM5). To simplify the assessment, the nine
land cover classes used by the KFCP were reclassified into six classes:
primary peat forest, secondary peat forest, swamp shrubs, shrub–
mixed dryland farms, settlement and water (Table 1). From these six
land use classes, we developed a land cover transformation matrix for
both blocks between 2000 and 2005, and between 2005 and 2009 by
assessing the net land cover change for each land cover class between
these two observation periods. Then, we determined the average rate
of change (ha/year) from one land cover class to another over the period
2000 to 2009. The overall rates of land cover change between forest,
shrub and farmland for both blocks are shown in Fig. 3 (changes in
the area of settlement and water were small so are not shown).
Based on the average rates of change between land cover classes, we
constructed two land cover change simulation models (one for Block A-
NW and one for Block E), in the form of stock and flow models, using
iThink version 9.1.4 system modelling software. The area of each land
cover class in the year 2000 was used as the initial value of each land
cover class stock and the average rates of change between land cover
classes where used as flows between the land cover class stocks. We
then used the average above ground carbon values for each land cover
class, as described by Hergoualc'h and Verchot (2011) (Table 1), to esti-
mate the change in above ground carbon stocks associated with the
change in land cover class stocks between 2000 and 2009 (Eq. (1)).
dC it ¼ dAit  AGBi ð1Þ
where,dCit: Change in carbon stock for land cover class i over time t
(tons C).dAit: Change of area for land cover class i over time t
(hectare).AGBi: Average above ground carbon for land cover class i
(tons C/ha).i: Land cover class.t: Time of simulation.
3.3. Assessment of Fire Occurrence Probability
Land cover for years 2000, 2005 and 2009 (see Section 3.2), fire
hotspots for years 2001, 2005, and 2009 (mapped from Moderate Reso-
lution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) data), peat depth, and the
location of roads, rivers and drainage canals were obtained from KFCP
(Fatkhurohman, personal communication). In addition, rainfall data
was obtained from the Center for Climate Risk and Opportunity Man-
agement/CCROM (Boer, Personal Communication). Before the analysis,
the land cover was classified into six classes (see Section 3.2) and peat
depth into three classes (mineral soils and shallow peat 0.0–1.0 m, me-
dium depth peat 1.0–3.0 m, and deep peat N3.0 m). To estimate fire oc-
currence probability, we used Maximum Entropy (Maxent) version 3.3
(Phillips et al., 2006; Elith et al., 2011), which was originally developed
to estimate species distribution probability using species presence data
and the spatial distribution environmental variables. We applied
Maxent to estimate fire occurrence probability as a function of land
cover (six classes), rainfall (continuous in mm/year), peat depth
(three classes), distance from rivers (continuous in meters), and dis-
tance from drainage canals (continuous in meters) using fire hotspot
presence data. The modelling was conducted at a spatial resolution of
0.01km2 (100 × 100 m grid cells).
We performed five Maxent model runs: (1) one for 2000 (using
2000 land cover, 2001 rainfall and 2001 fire hotspot data), (2) one for
2005 (using 2005 land cover, 2005 rainfall and 2005 fire hotspot
data), (3) one for 2009 (using 2009 land cover, 2009 rainfall and 2009
fire hotspot data), (4) all combined (using 2000, 2005 and 2009 land

Table 1
Change of land-cover, hotspots and above-ground biomass.

No Land-covera Block Area (in ha) Hotspots Above-ground biomass

(Tons C/hectare)h
2000 2005 2009 2001–2004 2005–2009

1 Primary peat forestb A-NW 5343.40 4960.28 4312.26 22 74 181.9i

E 40,171.49 38,410.33 37,767.84 31 89
2 Secondary peat forestc A-NW 4008.58 3793.07 2012.70 26 48 85.1j
E 29,901.09 30,013.00 30,901.18 51 73
3 Swamp Shrubsd A-NW 26,747.1 23,401.48 22,335.27 739 837 4.8k
E 3412.07 2557.59 2484.2 55 52
4 Shrubs-mixed farmlande A-NW 8213.17 12,149.55 15,639.10 882 837 12.4l
E 1594.24 4076.08 3960.10 80 83
5 Settlementf A-NW 1.78 1.78 1.78 0 1
E 16.50 16.50 16.50 0 0
6 Waterg A-NW 111.24 119.10 124.17 0 4
E 216.59 218.97 198.66 1 1

Source: Recalculated from KFCP database in 2012 (Fatkhurohman, personal communication); Hergoualc'h and Verchot (2011).
a
Characteristic of each land-cover is explained in the footnotes.
b
Dense, large diameter trees (more than 30 cm diameter), rich biodiversity, difficult to access, some areas experienced logging activities prior to MRP.
c
Dense, but small diameter of tree (less than 30 cm diameter), some areas experienced logging activities prior to MRP.
d
Dominated by high ferns, swamp and combined with early pioneer trees.
e
Combination of shrubs, jungle rubber, dry land paddy field.
f
Dominated by housing and building areas.
g
MRP canals, community canals, Kapuas river branches
h
Only cover above-ground biomass, does not include necromass, below ground, and peat soil biomass soil.
i
Mean value of virgin peat swamp forest carbon biomass.
j
Mean value of logged forest carbon biomass.
k
Mean value of rice carbon biomass. Rice paddies were mostly located around the swamp shrubs in both blocks. For consistency, we used rice biomass for the swamp shrubs from the
same study.
l
Mean value of mixed cropland and shrubland carbon biomass.
106 M. Medrilzam et al. / Ecological Economics 136 (2017) 101–113

Fig. 3. The flows of land use transfer from 2000 to 2009 (in Hectare/year).

cover; 2001, 2005 and 2009 rainfall data and 2001, 2005 and 2009 fire
hotspot data) and finally (5) all combined but excluding those land
cover years that were significantly correlated (using Pearson's correla-
tion p N 0.01) with the land cover year that had the highest percentage
contribution to fire occurrence in the fourth (all combined) model run.
Peat depth, distance from roads, distance from rivers and distance from
drainage canals were also included in all model runs but remained con-
stant. Each model run was evaluated using AUC (area under the Receiv-
er Operating Characteristic curve), sensitivity (true positive rate),
specificity (true negative rate) and the True Skilled Statistics (TSS) (sen-
sitivity + specificity – 1). The percentage contribution of each variable
to fire occurrence was also recorded for each model run (Evangelista
et al., 2009).
4. Results
4.1. Community Livelihood Activities in the Study Area
The results of the household survey (Table 2) found that the average
income of households living within both blocks was approximately Rp.
1.9 to 2.1 million per month and the average basic household expendi-
ture was approximately Rp. 1.5 to 1.6 million per month. In Block A-NW,
 M. Medrilzam et al. / Ecological Economics 136 (2017) 101–113 107

Table 2
Socio-economic survey results.

Block A-NW Block E Notes

Welfare
- Total number of household (hh) 30 20
- Average income (Rp/hh/month) 1,897,667 2,059,000
- Average expenditure (Rp/hh/month) 1,649,333 1,463,000 Only for food and school
- Main sources of income (%) Rubber (68.7%) Rubber (80.0%)

Rubber tapping
- Number of households 27 18
- Average rubber area per household (ha/hh) 2.8 2.9
- Rubber tree density (number of trees/ha) 319 412
- Method of land clearing Fire (100%) Fire (100%)
- Latex sold to middle men (kg/transaction/hh) 17.8 4.8 Two to three transactions in a week
- Average prices (Rp/kg) 9521.0 8441.0 Depends on the quality and world price

Rice cultivation
- Number of households 17 –
- Number of households implement shifting cultivation 12 –
- Methods of land clearing Fire (100%) –
- Paddy field area (ha/hh) 2.4 –
- Paddy area planted (%) 38.50% –
- Average fallow period (years) 1.9 –
- Productivity (tons/ha/year) 1.3 –
- Number of harvests per year 1 –

Fishing
- Number of households 1 9
- Days of fishing (days/week) 3 4
- Production (kg/day) 3.5 14.7
- Self-consumed (%) 70% 12%
- Average raw fish price (Rp/kg) 15,000 12,500
- Average dried fish price (Rp/kg) 27,000 26,111

rubber latex collection (68.7% of income) and rice cultivation are the
main sources of livelihood. In Block E, the community collected fish as
the other main livelihood activity in addition to rubber cultivation
(80% of income). In general, the community produced low quality rub-
ber latex, with the price being controlled by middle men. Almost 57% of
households in Block A-NW produced rice for self-consumption but none
of the households in Block E produced rice.
Among the farmers in Block A-NW, 70.5% used shifting cultivation
practices with an average fallow period of 1.9 years. Most shifting culti-
vation was conducted on the mineral soil and shallow peat, including
that along the banks of the MRP drainage canals and the Mantangai
River. The community in Block E explained that the practice of shifting
cultivation significantly declined during 2000 to 2009, because the com-
munity preferred fishing, collecting rattan and gemor bark, and tapping
the existing old rubber plantations for their livelihood. From our survey
which was conducted in 2011, we found that the community stopped
collecting gemor bark because they could not find any gemor trees
close to their villages.
The communities used fire (100% of the respondents) for land clear-
ing, known as Manusul, to develop new rubber plantations and rice cul-
tivation areas. During interviews, the communities clearly stated that
they never light fires deliberately to burn the peatland. Instead, they
were aware of the adverse impact of wildfires within the peatland and
to their livelihood. The communities also stated that they commonly
used fire breaks, known as Batas Kehu, to avoid the spread of fires
from their livelihood areas to other areas. Hence, they know how to re-
duce the risk of wildfire during land clearing, however, they acknowl-
edged that on a few occasions in the dry season fires escape to the
shrub land, and further spread to burn the forest and peat soils. In
these cases, wildfire was unintentionally caused by escaped fires.
When forest and peat fires occurred, the communities stated that
they had limited capacity to suppress them. Other livelihood activities
involving fire were Mangaruhi (clearing vegetation in order to collect
trapped fish in an uprooted tree pond or canal during dry seasons)
and drying gemor bark. Although both activities could potentially
cause wildfires, the communities stated that the intensity of Mangaruhi
and gemor bark drying fires were far less than that of the fire used for
land clearing.
4.2. Land Cover Change and above Ground Carbon Emissions
Deforestation (loss of primary forest) and forest degradation (con-
version of primary forest to secondary forest) had occurred in both
blocks between 2000 and 2009 (Fig. 4a and b). The rate of primary forest
loss reached approximately 1.8% and 0.53% per year in Block A-NW and
Block E respectively. All of the deforestation and degradation rates
(solid lines in Fig. 3) were higher than natural regeneration rates (Fig.
3), except for the rates between swamp shrub and secondary peat forest
in Block E. The conversion of other land covers to shrub–mixed dryland
farms occurred at rates higher than the forest could regenerate,
resulting in a net increase in the area of shrubs–mixed dryland farms.
Because there were no logging concessions or palm-oil plantations in
both blocks, we presume that the increase in shrubs–mixed dryland
farm area occurred to meet community livelihood needs.
The overall changes in above-ground carbon in both blocks are
shown in Fig. 4c. We found that the net above-ground carbon emissions
from 2000 to 2009 in Block A-NW and Block E were 266,834 t C
(26,683.4 t C/yr or 0.61 t C/ha/yr) and 285,454 t C (28,545.4 t C/ yr or
0.38 t C/ha/yr), respectively. However, we believe that the total carbon
emissions per year would be greater when all carbon pools, including
below-ground carbon, are included in these estimates. We did not esti-
mate the total carbon emissions because of the lack of detailed data on
the below-ground biomass and peat soil degradation. Nonetheless,
over 10 years, the community activities in Block A-NW and Block E re-
duced the above-ground carbon by about 17% and 3%, respectively.
The reduction in carbon in Block A-NW was lower than in Block E, how-
ever, the small areas of deforestation and forest degradation in Block A-
NW caused a larger percentage reduction in the above-ground carbon
stock. Recurrent fires also made it difficult for the vegetation to regener-
ate in Block A-NW. In Block E, the reduction of above-ground carbon
stock in the primary forest was offset by an increase in secondary
forests.
108 M. Medrilzam et al. / Ecological Economics 136 (2017) 101–113

Fig. 4. The trends of land cover change and above ground carbon stock.

4.3. Land Cover Change and Fire
Post MRP, the conversion of swamp shrubs to shrub–mixed dryland
farms in Block A-NW has been the dominant land use change. One of the
reasons for this was land clearing caused by shifting cultivation. Instead
of rotating agricultural land with forest using long fallows, local com-
munities expanded agriculture onto swamp shrub land dominated by
grass (Imperata cylindrica) and ferns (Pteridium) using short fallows
(2–3 years). The community also actively searched for suitable places
for rice paddy fields and made use of the fertile soils that were dug up
and placed along the banks of the MRP drainage canals. The soil adjacent
to the MRP drainage canals mostly overlies deep peat and this has re-
sulted in an increase in shrubs–mixed dryland farm area overlying
deep peat (Fig. 5c) and a high number of fire hotspots occurring on
shrubs–mixed dryland farm and swamp shrub land areas overlying
deep peat (Fig. 6a and b).
Conversion of forest to shrubs–mixed dryland farms and to swamp
shrubs also occurred in Block A-NW (Fig. 3a), although during group
 M. Medrilzam et al. / Ecological Economics 136 (2017) 101–113 109

Fig. 5. Land cover change over various peat depths.

discussions the community stated that the current forests were far from
community settlements and they were afraid to practice agriculture
within the forests because they may be accused of illegal logging. In
any case, unintentional fires caused by uncontrolled burning did occur
at forest edges and played a significant role in forest cover reduction.
The construction of the MRP drainage canals meant that the forest
areas, which were mostly located on deep peat, were made accessible
and the community moved into the forest area to grow crops on the min-
eral soils fringing the canals. The result has been a significant reduction in
peat forest cover (Fig. 5a, b) and high fire occurrence within peat forest
overlying deep peat (Fig. 6c, d). The MRP drainage canals have also en-
abled the community to fish further inside Block A-NW, and fishing can
also introduce fire because it is used to clear fishing canals of vegetation.
In Block E, the total increase in shrub–mixed dryland farm area was
small compared to Block A-NW. However, primary peat forest is still
being converted into shrub–mixed dryland farms, and degraded to sec-
ondary peat forest (Fig. 3b). From our field observations, we discovered
that most of the conversion from forest and swamp shrubs to shrub–
mixed dryland farms in Block E was concentrated along an old logging
road that was built over mineral soils. On the shallow peat areas
110 M. Medrilzam et al. / Ecological Economics 136 (2017) 101–113

Fig. 6. Number of fire hotspots on various peat depths and land cover.

surrounding the road, community activities converted the primary for-
est edges and swamp shrubs into shrub-mixed dryland farms. Mean-
while, natural vegetation regeneration from shrub-mixed dryland
farms and swamp shrubs to secondary peat forest occurred over the
deep peat areas, which are not suitable for cropping (Fig. 5e, f, g and
h). Fire hotspots in Block E were detected over mineral soil and shallow
peat, medium depth peat and deep peat areas in both primary and sec-
ondary forest (Fig. 6c and d). It is highly possible that escaping fires from
land claiming activities on both sides of the logging road spread to adja-
cent secondary and primary forest overlying the deep peat areas.
The results of Maxent modelling runs 1, 2 and 3 (Fig. 7) clearly
show that increased community access provided by the MRP drain-
age canals and annual precipitation have had a major influence on
the probability for fire within the study area. For all model runs,
annual precipitation and distance from drainage canals were the
dominant contributors (N 75%) to fire hotspot occurrence (Table
3). The influence of a dry year (2009, Fig. 7c) can clearly be seen
as a larger area of increased fire probability. All models had good
fire hotspot discriminating power (AUC's above 0.8), were reason-
ably specific and sensitive (above 0.75) and performed around 51
 M. Medrilzam et al. / Ecological Economics 136 (2017) 101–113 111

Fig. 7. Fire occurrence probability in 2000, 2005 and 2009.

to 78% better than random (TSS ranging from 0.514 to 0.780)
(Table 4).
5. Discussion
Due to the formulation and execution of poor government policy,
the MRP resulted in the initial and substantial deforestation and degra-
dation of the peat forest within the study area. Our study focused on the
post MRP period and demonstrates that the negative impacts of this
flawed policy are still continuing. We found that the improved access
provided by the MRP drainage canals in Block A-NW and the mining
road in Block E, as well as changes in the shifting cultivation practices
of local communities, resulted in a net loss of forest cover and above
ground carbon.
Previously, the traditional Dayak community used mineral soils
along the higher river banks for shifting cultivation and rubber agrofor-
estry (jungle rubber). They rarely ventured into the deep peat areas be-
cause those areas were inaccessible and commonly covered by dense
peat forest. However, when they did venture into those areas, it was
for mainly for fishing, hunting and collecting non-timber forest prod-
ucts such as rattan, gemor bark and honey. In this manner, traditional
shifting cultivation, combined with jungle rubber and other subsistence
activities, were undertaken in harmony with the natural peatland eco-
systems (Hudson et al., 1967; Setyawan, 2010) for centuries (Hudson
et al., 1967; Arrow et al., 1995). It has been generally recognised that
traditional shifting cultivation with adequately long fallow periods is
an appropriate method of soil management and suits the local economy
and socio-environment (Arrow et al., 1995; Barlas, 1996).
With the establishment of the drainage canals in Block A-NW by the
MRP, local communities suddenly had access to new areas and this
allowed them to expand their livelihood activities into deep peat and
forest areas. The areas adjacent to the MRP drainage canals, where min-
eral soil were deposited on top of peat during canal dredging, became
new land for short fallow shifting cultivation (ladang) (Fig. 4), rubber
planting and the growing of fruit such as banana and pineapple. The
fire occurrence probabilities in Fig. 7a, b, and c indicate that land clear-
ing with fire occurred intensively around the drainage canals within
Block A-NW. This was a dual consequence of both land use activities in-
volving fire and lower moisture content of the peat immediately adja-
cent to the canals which made it more susceptible to peat fires.
In Block E, a mining road improved access for the community to ad-
jacent forest overlying deep peat areas. This access allowed the commu-
nity to claim land and convert the forest edges to permanent
agriculture, in particular rubber monoculture plantations. During field
observations in 2010 and 2011 in Petak Puti village, we found burn
scars and newly erected timber signs along both sides of the road. The
signs indicated that land was being claimed in order to obtain compen-
sation from the mining company, road contractors or the government.

Table 3
Contribution of Canals, Road, Peat Depth, Rainfall and Land Cover on Hotspots Occurrence.

Annual rainfall Land cover

No Scenario Canals road Peat depth 2001 2005 2009 2000 2005 2009

1 Hotspot01 44.7 7.9 4.8 34.5 – – 8.2 – –

2 Hotspot05 6.5 9.8 6.2 – 70.4 – – 7 –
3 Hotspot09 54.9 6.7 4.2 54.9 – 21.2 – – 13.1
4 Hotspot010509 43.5 5.4 1.1 32.5 1.8 6.1 1.1 3.5 5.2
5 Hotspot010509 vs LC 2009 39.6 5.1 0.9 34 4.6 6.4 – – 9.4
112 M. Medrilzam et al. / Ecological Economics 136 (2017) 101–113
Table 4
Sensitivity tests on Maxent simulation results.
No Scenario Number of variables AUC
1 Hotspot01 5 0.926
2 Hotspot05 5 0.949
3 Hotspot09 5 0.85
4 Hotspot010509 9 0.84
5 Hotspot010509 vs LC 2009 5 0.841
According to the communities, for a payment of Rp 150,000–250,000/ha
or about US$ 15–25/ha, one can obtain a Surat Keterangan Tanah (SKT)
or land ownership statement from the Village Head to own and clear
land. A similar type of land claiming process has also occurred in West
Kalimantan (Anshari and Armiyarsih, 2005). With fire as the main
method employed by the community for land clearing, the increased
probability of fire can be clearly seen along the western boundary of
Block E, which is where the road is located (see Fig. 7c).
The change in shifting cultivation toward shorter fallow periods is a
typical driver of deforestation in Southeast Asia. It occurs where farmers
look to find the ‘best’ short-term solution to maintaining their subsis-
tence regardless of the long-term consequences (Angelsen et al.,
2014). In our study area, a change from traditional shifting cultivation
and jungle rubber toward short crop rotations and rubber monoculture
plantations occurred because farmers believe that plantations will pro-
vide them with better production and income. With the desire to im-
prove their quality of life, and the destruction of local livelihoods
caused by the MRP, the pressure to crop land instinctively escalated
leading to shorter fallows. For some households in Block A-NW, shifting
cultivation is their routine livelihood activity and cannot be separated
from their local custom. We concur with Sulistyawati et al. (2005) on
the role of shifting cultivation as a food safety net in response to factors
such as; rubber price fluctuation which are affected by changing market
fundamentals and the decline in fishing yields which has been caused
by unsustainable practices (overfishing, use of poison and electricity)
and pollution from the gold mining activities (Suyanto et al., 2009).
In Block A-NW, the communities practiced at least three methods of
‘shifting cultivation’. The first method involves searching for mineral
soils adjacent to the MRP drainage canals and cultivating the identified
area adopting a fallow period of 2–3 years. This method is similar to the
traditional shifting cultivation method, but with a much shorter fallow
period. In the second method, the community applies a ‘harvest and re-
place’ rotation whereby rice is grown in the identified areas with miner-
al soils, and after the rice harvest, the rice paddies are replaced with
other crops (mostly rubber) after a one to two-year fallow. Once the
rubber trees are planted, the land became permanent agricultural
land. In the final method, the community practices a ‘back and forth’ ro-
tation, whereby they establish a rice paddy field on half of the land area,
leaving the other half to fallow for 2–3 years. After the rice harvest, they
move the rice paddy to the fallowed half for the next planting. As they
rotate between fallow and cultivated areas in quick succession, the fal-
low areas become dominated by ferns and grasses and suppressing
the ability for the forest to naturally regenerate. This is one of the rea-
sons why the rate of land cover change from swamp shrubs to shrub–
mixed dryland farms were so dominant in Block A-NW (Fig. 3).
The uncontrolled use of fire for land clearing, particularly in dry sea-
sons, is one of the main causes of tropical peatland degradation. Com-
munities in our study area admitted that fire was the only affordable
means they had for clearing land, whether for rice paddies or crops
such as rubber. Land clearing by fire (Manusul) is a tradition in Dayak
Ngaju communities inherited from previous generations. It is part of
the yearly planting cycle and is usually conducted in the dry months
from July to September. Traditionally, the community conducted
Manusul as a collective task involving community groups. However,
since the release of a series of Central Kalimantan provincial regulations
prohibiting the use of fire for land clearing, only some community
Fractional predicted area Specificity Training omission rate Sensitivity TSS
0.143 0.857 0.142 0.858 0.715
0.11 0.89 0.11 0.89 0.78
0.23 0.77 0.23 0.77 0.54
0.243 0.757 0.243 0.757 0.514
0.243 0.757 0.243 0.757 0.514
members still use Manusul. As a result, individual (non-collective)
land clearing with fire became more prevalent and secretive because
community members were afraid of getting caught by others. Individ-
uals find it difficult to keep fires under control and this is presumed to
be one of the reasons for the occurrence of wildfires within forest and
shrub areas within the study area. A survey conducted by CARE in
2009 (unpublished report to KFCP) found that 56% of fires in 2009
were caused by land clearing. Other causes of fire were found to be
land claiming, opening access to forest and agriculture plots, protests
against government policies, and the tradition of Mangaruhi (collecting
fish by clearing the vegetation surrounding swamp shrubs or canals
using fire). Extreme dry years caused by ENSO (El Nino Southern Oscil-
lation) in 2002, 2006 and 2009 also amplified the number of uncon-
trolled fires within the study area. The fire probability maps in Fig. 7
show that 2009 had an increased extent of high fire probability (Fig.
6c), particularly in Block E, due to 2009 being a dry ENSO year.
Another underlying factor driving local communities to exploit
peatland is poverty. Poverty is known to be one of the underlying causes
of deforestation and is widespread within communities in tropical
peatland areas (Silvius et al., 2008), including those within our study
area. Although the historical data on income and household expendi-
ture between 2000 and 2009 was unavailable, we believe that the com-
munities have been living around the poverty line (US$ 1.00 per day) for
a long time. During interviews, most community members stated that
they had struggled to maintain their subsistence for many years and
this situation worsened after the MRP era because many of the places
they depended on for their livelihood were destroyed. Suyanto et al.
(2009) reported that poverty was still a problem in 2009 and this was
confirmed by our survey in 2011. However, post abandonment, we
found that the MRP had inadvertently improved the livelihood opportu-
nities for local communities by providing them with access to land that
they previously could not use. From field observations it was evident
that there was an increase in land used for shifting cultivation along
the banks of MRP drainage canals. Despite the increase in shifting culti-
vation area, local rice production has yet to meet the local communities'
demand for rice due to low productivity (about one ton per hectare per
year). Our observations found that community members were buying
rice from the local market or floating kiosk boat. As such, it seems that
the improved land access provided by the MRP is not enough to com-
pensate for the loss of the original livelihoods that were in place before
the MRP.
The resulting increase in poverty is likely to also increase pressure on
the community to find other alternative livelihoods, such as illegal fish-
ing and illegal gold mining, in the Kapuas River. In the past, poverty has
forced some communities to carry out illegal logging, known as ‘mencari
kayu’. During the logging era in the 1980s and mid-1990s, legal and ille-
gal logging became one of the main income sources in the study area.
The community sold timber to three logging concession operators and
to outsiders. Those logging activities stimulated the local economy and
connected the Dayak with the outside world. As a result, local commu-
nities began abandoning their traditional farming practices (shifting
cultivation and jungle rubber) and turned to logging as their primary
source of income. When the government enforced illegal logging laws,
many community members were reluctant to go back to shifting culti-
vation and preferred to plant more rubber trees, intensify fishing, and
collect forest product such as rattan and gemor tree bark.
 M. Medrilzam et al. / Ecological Economics 136 (2017) 101–113
6. Conclusions
Triggered by the demise of the Mega Rice Project and the construc-
tion of logging roads, land clearing, land claiming and a shift toward
shorter fallows within farming systems by local communities has led
to large areas of deforestation, forest degradation and large carbon
emissions from the tropical peatlands of Central Kalimantan. In addi-
tion, the inability of local communities to prevent fire escaping form
their cropping areas has led to unintended forest and peat soil fires. Pov-
erty and a reduction in social cohesion triggered by the MRP have also
led local communities to shift toward more exploitative livelihood
practices.
Although this study focuses on the MRP area in Central Kalimantan,
there are many tropical peatland areas throughout Indonesia experienc-
ing similar situations. Simply enforcing regulations, as stipulated in
Indonesia's forest and peatland moratorium policy, to protect peatland
and primary forest will not be effective in reducing deforestation and
carbon emissions from these degraded tropical peatlands. An integrated
approach that improves the livelihoods and the social capital of local
communities is needed, along with efforts to stabilise water tables and
revegetate degraded peatland areas. Without policies to tackle these
underlying drivers of deforestation and peatland degradation (such as
poverty and a change in farming practices), any peatland restoration ef-
forts will have a high risk of failure.
Acknowledgement
We thank the KFCP and Indonesia-Australia Forest Carbon Partner-
ship (IAFCP) staff members, including the supporting organisations
(CARE International and Borneo Orangutan Survival Foundation), who
have facilitated data collection and field work activities for this study.
Special thanks goes to Mr. Fatkhurohman, the KFCP-GIS specialist who
provide us with land cover, fire hotspot and peat depth data, Professor
Rizaldi Boer who provided us with rainfall data, and Mr. Sanjiwana for
his advice on data processing. Special thanks also goes to Mr. Basah
Hernowo, the Technical Director of IAFCP/KFCP who permitted us to
use and release KFCP data in this paper. We confirm that the analysis
in this paper is unbiased and free from any intervention and influence
of the IAFCP/KFCP.
References
Akbar, A., 2011. Studi Kearifan Lokal Penggunaan Api Persiapan Lahan: Studi Kasus di
Hutan Mawas, Kalimantan Tengah (Study of Local Wisdom in Using Fire for Site Prep-
aration: A Case Study at Mawas Forest Area, Central Kalimantan). 8. Penelitian Sosial
dan Ekonomi Kehutanan, pp. 211–230.
Angelsen, A., Jagger, P., Babigumira, R., Belcher, B., Hogarth, N.J., Bauch, S., Wunder, S.,
2014. Environmental income and rural livelihoods: a global-comparative analysis.
World Dev. 64, S12–S28.
Anshari, G.Z., Armiyarsih, 2005. Carbon decline from peatlands and its implications on
livelihood security of local communities. In: Murdiyarso, D., Herawati, H. (Eds.), Car-
bon Sequestration and Sustainable Livelihoods. CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia, pp. 112–123.
Arrow, K., Bolin, B., Costanza, R., Dasgupta, P., Folke, C., Holling, C.S., Jansson, B.-O., Levin,
S., Mäler, K.-G., Perrings, C., 1995. Economic growth, carrying capacity, and the envi-
ronment. Science (Washington) 268, 520–521.
Austin, K., Sheppard, S., Stolle, F., 2012. Indonesia's moratorium on new forest conces-
sions: key finding and next steps. World Resources Institute, Washington DC.
Barlas, Y., 1996. Formal aspects of model validity and validation in system dynamics. Syst.
Dyn. Rev. 12, 183–210.
Carlson, K.M., Curran, L.M., Ratnasari, D., Pittman, A.M., Soares-Filho, B.S., Asner, G.P.,
Trigg, S.N., Gaveau, D.A., Lawrence, D., Rodrigues, H.O., 2012. Committed carbon emis-
sions, deforestation, and community land conversion from oil palm plantation expan-
sion in West Kalimantan, Indonesia. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 109, 7559–7564.
Chokkalingam, U., Kurniawan, I., Ruchiat, Y., 2005. Fire, livelihoods, and environmental
change in the middle Mahakam peatlands, East Kalimantan. Ecol. Soc. 10 (1), 26.
Dephut, 2007. Rencana Induk (Master Plan) Rehabilitasi dan Konservasi Kawasan
Pengembangan Lahan Gambut di Propinsi Kalimantan Tengah. In: Kehutanan, B.P.
(Ed.), Pusat Rencana dan Statistik Kehutanan. Badan Planologi Kehutanan, Jakarta.
Elith, J., Phillips, S.J., Hastie, T., Dudík, M., Chee, Y.E., Yates, C.J., 2011. A statistical explana-
tion of MaxEnt for ecologists. Divers. Distrib. 17, 43–57.
Evangelista, P., Stohlgren, T., Morisette, J., Kumar, S., 2009. Mapping invasive tamarisk
(Tamarix): a comparison of single-scene and time-series analyses of remotely sensed
data. Remote Sens. 1, 519–533.
113
Fuller, D.O., Jessup, T.C., Salim, A., 2004. Loss of forest cover in Kalimantan, Indonesia,
since the 1997–1998 el niño. Conserv. Biol. 18, 249–254.
Galudra, G., Van Noordwijk, M., Suyanto, S., Sardi, I., Pradhan, U., Catacutan, D., 2011. Hot
spots of confusion: contested policies and competing carbon claims in the peatlands
of Central Kalimantan, Indonesia. Int. For. Rev. 13, 431–441.
Harrison, M.E., Page, S.E., Limin, S.H., 2009. The global impact of Indonesian forest fires. Bi-
ologist 56 (3), 156–163.
Hergoualc'h, K., Verchot, L.V., 2011. Stocks and fluxes of carbon associated with land use
change in Southeast Asian tropical peatlands: a review. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 25,
GB2001.
Hooijer, A., Silvius, M., Jauhiainen, J., Canadell, J.G., Page, S., Kwadijk, J., Wösten, H., 2009.
Current and future CO2 emissions from drained peatlands in Southeast Asia.
Biogeosci. Discuss. 6, 7207–7230.
Hooijer, A., Silvius, M., Wosten, H., Page, S., 2006. PEAT-CO2, assessment of CO2 emissions
from drained peatlands in SE Asia. Delft Hydraulics Report Q3943 (2006).
Hudson, A.B., Hudson, J.M., Koentjaraningrat, 1967. Telang: a Ma'anjan village of Central
Kalimantan. Villages in Indonesia. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, pp. 90–114.
Jewitt, S.L., Nasir, D., Page, S.E., Rieley, J.O., Khanal, K., 2014. Indonesia's contested do-
mains. Deforestation, rehabilitation and conservation-with-development in Central
Kalimantan's tropical peatlands. Int. For. Rev. 16 (4), 405–420.
Laterra, P., Orúea, M.E., Boomana, G.C., 2012. Spatial complexity and ecosystem services in
rural landscapes. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 154, 56–67.
Law, E.A., Bryan, B.A., Meijaard, E., Mallawaarachchi, T., Struebig, M., Wilson, K.A., 2015.
Ecosystem services from a degraded peatland of Central Kalimantan: implications
for policy, planning, and management. Ecol. Appl. 25 (1), 70–87.
Luttrell, C., Resosudarmo, I.A.P., Muharrom, E., Brockhaus, M., Seymour, F., 2014. The po-
litical context of REDD+ in Indonesia: constituencies for change. Environ. Sci. Pol. 35,
67–75.
McCarthy, J.F., 2004. Changing to gray: decentralization and the emergence of volatile
socio-legal configurations in Central Kalimantan, Indonesia. World Dev. 32,
1199–1223.
Miettinen, J., Hooijer, A., Tollenaar, D., Page, S., Malin, C., Vernimmen, R., Shi, C., Liew, S.C.,
2012a. Historical Analysis and Projection of Oil Palm Plantation Expansion on
Peatland in Southeast Asia. CRISP National University of Singapore, Deltares, ICCT,
Washington.
Miettinen, J., Shi, C., Liew, S.C., 2012b. Two decades of destruction in Southeast Asia's peat
swamp forests. Front. Ecol. Environ. 10 (3), 124–128.
Miettinen, J., Shi, C., Liew, S.C., 2016. Land cover distribution in the peatlands of peninsular
Malaysia, Sumatra and Borneo in 2015 with changes since 1990. Global Ecology and
Conservation 6, 67–78.
Miles, D., 1970. The Ngadju Dayaks of Central Kalimantan, with special reference to the
upper Mentaya. Cross-Cult. Res. 5, 291–319.
MoE, 2009. The second national communication to the UNFCCC. In: M.O. (Ed.), Environ-
ment. Ministry of Environment, Indonesia.
Moore, S., Evans, C.D., Page, S.E., Garnett, M.H., Jones, T.G., Freeman, C., Hooijer, A.,
Wiltshire, A.J., Limin, S.H., Gauci, V., 2013. Deep instability of deforested tropical
peatlands revealed by fluvial organic carbon fluxes. Nature 493 (7434), 660–663.
Murdiyarso, D., Hergoualc'h, K., Verchot, L.V., 2010. Opportunities for reducing green-
house gas emissions in tropical peatlands. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 107 (46), 19655–19660.
Noor, Y.R., Heyde, J., Suryadiputra, I.N., 2005. Community-based approach to peatland ad-
aptation and Management in Central Kalimantan, Jambi and South Sumatra, Indone-
sia. In: Murdiyarso, D., Herawati, H. (Eds.), Carbon Sequestration and Sustainable
Livelihoods. CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia, pp. 124–138.
Osaki, M., Nursyamsi, D., Noor, M., Segah, H., 2016. Peatland in Indonesia. Tropical
Peatland Ecosystems. Springer, Japan, pp. 49–58.
Page, S., Hoscilo, A., Langner, A., Tansey, K., Siegert, F., Limin, S., Rieley, J., 2009a. Tropical
peatland fires in Southeast Asia. In: Cochrane, M.A. (Ed.), Tropical Fire Ecology: Cli-
mate Change, Land Use, And Ecosystem Dynamics. Springer and Praxis Publishing
Ltd., Chicester, UK., p. 263.
Page, S., Hosciło, A., Wösten, H., Jauhiainen, J., Silvius, M., Rieley, J., Ritzema, H., Tansey, K.,
Graham, L., Vasander, H., Limin, S., 2009b. Restoration ecology of lowland tropical
peatlands in Southeast Asia: current knowledge and future research directions. Eco-
systems 12 (6), 888–905.
Page, S.E., Siegert, F., Rieley, J.O., VanBoehm, H.-D., Jaya, A., Limin, S., 2002. The amount of
carbon released from peat and forest fires in Indonesia during 1997. Nature 420,
61–65.
Phillips, S.J., Anderson, R.P., Schapire, R.E., 2006. Maximum entropy modeling of species
geographic distributions. Ecol. Model. 190, 231–259.
Setyawan, A.D., 2010. Review: biodiversity conservation strategy in a native perspective;
case study of shifting cultivation at the Dayaks of Kalimantan. Nusantara Bioscience 2,
97–108.
Silvius, M., Joosten, H., Opdam, S., 2008. Peatlands and people. In: Parish, F., Sirin, A.,
Charman, D., Joosten, H., Minayeva, T., Silvius, M., Stringer, L. (Eds.), Assessment on
Peatlands, Biodiversity and Climate Change: Main Report. Global Environmental Cen-
tre and Wetlands International, Kuala Lumpur and Wageningen.
Sulistyawati, E., Noble, I.R., Roderick, M.L., 2005. A simulation model to study land use
strategies in swidden agriculture systems. Agric. Syst. 85, 271–288.
Suwarno, A., van Noordwijk, M., Weikard, H.P., Suyamto, D., 2016. Indonesia's forest con-
version moratorium assessed with an agent-based model of Land-Use Change and
Ecosystem Services (LUCES). Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change,
pp. 1–19.
Suyanto, S., Khususiyah, N., Sardi, I., Buana, Y., Van Noordwijk, M., 2009. Analysis of Local
Livelihoods from Past to Present in the Central Kalimantan Ex-Mega Rice Project
Area. Working paper 94. World Agroforestry Centre, Bogor, Indonesia, p. 70.
Wösten, J.H.M., Clymans, E., Page, S.E., Rieley, J.O., Limin, S.H., 2008. Peat–water interrela-
tionships in a tropical peatland ecosystem in Southeast Asia. Catena 73, 212–224.