Plantation companies challenged by haze-causing fires in Indonesia

With political pressure mounting on plantation companies, including threats of fines and legal action by the Indonesian and Singaporean governments and boycotts in consumer countries, palm oil and timber giants in Indonesia are embracing an array of tactics to battle haze-spewing blazes burning across the islands of Sumatra and Borneo, according to Mongabay.com’s informal survey of six major companies.

Responses from Asia Pulp & Paper, Asia Pacific Resources International Limited (APRIL), Golden Agri Resources (GAR), Cargill, Wilmar, and Musim Mas indicate that several companies have adopted systems for monitoring fires within their concessions and supplier concessions, including ground and helicopter patrols, utilization of drones and cameras, and use of satellite data including Global Forest Watch, a platform that provides regular updates on potential hotspots, wind patterns, and forest cover. Those systems are helping companies concentrate fire-fighting and fire-prevention efforts, sometimes in concert with local and federal governments.

Nonetheless most companies reported challenges in battling peat fires, which with virtually unlimited amounts of fuel, are exceptionally difficult to extinguish. Complicating fire-fighting efforts is the limited availability of surface water due to severe drought conditions. All noted active deployments of fire-fighting brigades. APP provided footage of fire-fighting efforts as well as maps.

All of the surveyed companies adamantly stated they do not use fire to clear land. Several companies cited long-standing no-burn policies, while APRIL expressly said that fire is detrimental to its operations, posing a major threat to its timber stocks.

“We do not tolerate the use of fire in land preparation or development,” said GAR. “GAR adopted a no-burn policy in 1997 and no development on peat in 2010. These policies apply to all our subsidiaries. Since November 2014, we have voluntarily stopped all new plantings in our concessions.”

“[Our] No Burn policy […] has been in place since 1994,” said APRIL. “This policy commitment also applies to all suppliers and we will not tolerate burning in our supply chain.”

However none of the companies acknowledged their sector’s role in creating conditions that exacerbate haze and fires, specifically draining peatlands and replacing forests with industrial monocultures. Instead companies cited illegal encroachment and spread of fires from adjacent areas as the cause of the current environmental crisis.

“While we are committed to No Burning, we recognize that slash-and-burn practices remain rampant among small-scale farmers and local communities,” said Wilmar. “According to Global Forest Watch, research has found that majority of fires on agricultural land occur outside of oil palm concessions, and these are often managed by small companies and small-scale farmers. Clearing land by mechanical means cost significantly more, compared to using fire which is the most cost-effective way of clearing land for them. This often leads to uncontrolled fires that may inevitably spread to our plantations or those of our suppliers.”

“Fire is a hugely complex issue and it involves the rights of local communities, illegal activity by small enterprises often with political links and fundamental complexities over land use rights, maps, ownership and protection,” said APP’s Aida Greenbury. “Land conflict is not black and white, some communities will have genuine land claims and responsible businesses must ensure that resolutions are found. Equally, it is also clear that concessions are vulnerable to encroachment from smaller businesses operating with questionable permits, or opportunists whose sole intention is to sell the land they claim.”

That sentiment was echoed by GAR: “Analysis by the World Resources Institute (WRI) and the Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) shows that fire is an extremely complex issue. Their research does show that the majority of fires are started by people outside the plantations as well as illegal activities of small and medium sized businesses interested in opening up areas for agriculture.”

APRIL provided a detailed breakdown of causes of fires in its concessions.

“Incident data shows that the root cause in our concession area and the surrounding landscape is burning to clear land. Per our records, suspected arson is responsible for 44 per cent of all fires, with a further 34 per cent clearing for small-scale agriculture,” said APRIL. “Sadly, 10 per cent is due to the discard of cigarettes while the balance is due to cooking fires left unattended, hunting fires, etc.. Given that around 23 percent of our concessions are allocated to community lands, we do have the risks of having some of these fires started within the concessions.”

“We know from our fire incident data over the past five years that 100% of fires are deliberately lit. We have no incident of fire from a natural cause in our records.”

None of the companies were critical of authorities’ handling of the situation, but several called for stronger law enforcement and better maps to improve clarity land rights and ownership.

“These [issues] exist in the murky context of land conflict, where land licenses and land claims overlap, with the reality that many concession licensees are not in full control of what is happening in their licensed concessions,” said APP’s Greenbury. “These illegal activities are reported to the law enforcement agencies, with several arrests already made. But this is not an isolated issue in APP concessions, and is instead a wider problem across parts of Indonesia.”

“Law enforcement is required, but this will only work if effective maps exist to show who manages what and who has rights and responsibility to the land in question.”

Cargill expressed a similar view.

“Legislation must make burning of land illegal, and laws must be more effectively enforced. Local communities must change mindsets that regard land burning as an acceptable practice,” the company said. “Industries (plantation and others) must be open and transparent with the management of issues.”

Beyond better law enforcement and mapping, companies highlighted other steps that need to be taken to address fire and haze in the long-term, including increased collaboration with civil society and authorities, regulatory reform to support more sustainable practices, improved outreach to local communities, and even ecosystem restoration.

“Landscape level conservation and ecosystem restoration programs must be incorporated in this solution where the needs of the different stakeholders are balanced and the communities are integrated in the approach from planning to implementation,” said APRIL.

“We believe that taking urgent steps to protect remaining areas of peatland forest, as well as reducing and avoiding climate emissions from peatlands, must be a priority,” said APP’s Greenbury.

COMPANY RESPONSES IN FULL

Asia Pulp & Paper (APP)

APP is one of the companies that has been named by various sources as having hotspots in its supplier concessions. What is your response to this allegation?

Our pulpwood suppliers, especially in South Sumatra, have had forest fires since mid this year.

The location of the hotspots has been reported by GFW under WRI. The data from GFW is correct since we have provided them with our suppliers’ digital shape file maps in 2014. Transparency increases scrutiny, and we expected that.

Our team has been working around the clock, day and night, deploying 2,900 trained firefighters to help deal with this tragic situation. We have increased our capacity since the fires picked up this month, also deploying more fire suppression helicopters. Our community engagement programs have to date reached more than 2,600 people across 220 villages in the local area, providing training and equipment for forest fire management.

We have also been working closely with the authorities, supporting the ongoing investigations on the causes of these fires.

Have you investigated the hotspots? Have you identified the origin of the burning?

There are a number of reasons why fires continue to be present in APP supplier concessions.

• Activities outside pulpwood plantation. This includes illegal logging in conservation area, land claims, and preparation by small scale operators within company concessions.
• Uncontrollable fires from outside concessions that easily spread inside despite suppression efforts. These include underground fires and wind-borne sparks originating in fires outside the plantation
• Peatland areas which are high risk for fires. In 2015, the high intensity El Nino makes fire suppression more difficult despite our best efforts and months of preparation.

A close-up example of the problem our suppliers are facing now – Rimba Hutani Mas (RHM) conservation areas:

Problems with illegal activities within conservation areas remain.

• In July, 2015, illegal activity in the RHM conservation area caused the forest fires inside RHM.
• Satellite data shows hotspot inside RHM concession area. Aerial patrols were conducted to verify satellite data on 4th July 2015, documenting photos of illegal logging activity and burning.

RHM conservation area example
Verification by helicopter documents illegal logging in conservation areas.

RHM conservation area example
Verification by helicopter documents illegal logging in conservation areas.

Spread of fires in RHM example

• Fires that start outside concessions easily spread inside despite months of planning and suppression efforts.
• No company in the forestry industry is completely isolated in the plantation landscape. Fires can spread easily from one area to another, especially from wind-borne sparks originating in fires outside the plantation.

South Sumatra was heavily impacted by 1997-1998 El Niño. ‘Forest Fire Prevention and Control Project’ (1999) stated that 2.8 million hectares were burnt. The interesting part is, the fact that APP suppliers did not exist in South Sumatra in 1997-1998. They only started in 2004-2005. The allegation that said that APP suppliers’ large scale plantations are the reason behind forest fires in South Sumatra is simply not true. It is obvious that slash and burn activities and the level of peatland degradation in the province was already high even in 1997. We hope that the implementation of Zero Burning, Zero Deforestation and peatland best practice in our suppliers’ concessions would improve the situation. But this won’t be achieved unless all actors in the landscape adopt the same approach.

What are you doing to try to address the situation?

Action Plan – What APP is doing now in regards to Fire Prevention: Retirement of 7,000 Ha plantation area on critical peatland to maintain water level, protect the surrounding peat landscape and prevent fire.

Peat experts identified canals for blocking on retired plantation areas:

Action Plan – What APP is doing now in regards to Fire Suppression:

Escalate Intensity of Action on the Ground

• Expansion of fire breaks
• Fire break surface drenching
• Water pumping from rivers to canals for fires suppression
• Development of additional water reservoirs
• Identify and secure large capacity water-bombing planes

Join Forces with Provincial and Central Government for Landscape Level. Initiative led by South Sumatra Government based on President instruction

Short term
• Continue resource sharing for fire fighting’
• Procure large capacity fire suppression airplane

Medium Term

• Consultation with fire and peat experts to find suitable action to increase water level in peat area as fire buffer

Long Term

• Landscape level masterplan for sustainable forest management, including forest fire management.

Supporting infrastructure to prevent fire spread – Fire Belt:

Water pumping to raise water levels:

Water pumping to raise water levels:

Injection pump to increases water level in canal. Increase of 1 m after 24hr operation

What are the biggest challenges to addressing the problem?

Fire is a hugely complex issue and it involves the rights of local communities, illegal activity by small enterprises often with political links and fundamental complexities over land use rights, maps, ownership and protection.
 
Rainforest Alliance’s finding cuts to the heart of the issues at play in Indonesia’s forests. These exist in the murky context of land conflict, where land licenses and land claims overlap, with the reality that many concession licensees are not in full control of what is happening in their licensed concessions. These illegal activities are reported to the law enforcement agencies, with several arrests already made. But this is not an isolated issue in APP concessions, and is instead a wider problem across parts of Indonesia.

Has the government — whether its local police, bupati, the governor, or central government — been helpful?

The government has been proactive in implementing certain policies to help address the fire problem.  But policies start with effective spatial planning and we therefore need to encourage the development of ‘One Map’ – an initiative by the Indonesian government to produce a single, comprehensive map on land-use.

Land conflict is not black and white, some communities will have genuine land claims and responsible businesses must ensure that resolutions are found. Equally, it is also clear that concessions are vulnerable to encroachment from smaller businesses operating with questionable permits, or opportunists whose sole intention is to sell the land they claim. Law enforcement is required, but this will only work if effective maps exist to show who manages what and who has rights and responsibility to the land in question.

How will this issue get resolved in the long run?

Fire suppression

• Strengthen fire response teams
• Number and location of fire suppression facilities (e.g. water ponds, water channels)
• Identify and pilot new/advanced forest fire suppression technologies (e.g. safe chemical fire retardants, special drones to direct fire fighters, wind modeling to guide fire fighting efforts)

• Establish and formalized a multi-stakeholder regional unit for a coordinated effort before and during the event/condition
• Identify additional external fire fighting teams and equipments (e.g. fire suppression airplane) for rapid deployment during extreme fires

Fire prevention => Addressing fire prone areas

• Improvement for hydrology management, incl. retirement, rewetting, additional area for canal blocking, buffer zones and alternative species

• Improvement of patrol and monitoring using Forest Threat Mapping result: number of patrols, technology (CCTV, drones), etc.
• Increase coordination with law enforcement agencies: joint patrol

• Involving other stakeholders in the landscape to adopt peatland best practice management: other concession holders, local & regional governments, local communities

• Extension of programs to communities outside the boundary surrounding the concessions

• Identify additional experts in forest fire suppression strategy
• Identify proven advanced forest fire suppression technologies and providers
• Development of a multi-stakeholder taskforce to anticipate and coordinate actions on the ground to address extraordinary event/condition
• Supplemental Fire Response Teams for rapid deployment in extreme fire conditions. Identify escalation triggers

Golden-Agri Resources / Sinar Mas

GAR is one of the companies that has been named by various sources as having hotspots in its supplier concessions. What is your response to this allegation?

GAR has a grievance process which requires us to address any potential violation of our sustainability policy reported by a stakeholder including those which involves our suppliers. GAR is also monitoring media reports about companies allegedly involved in causing fires. In the event that a third-party supplier is identified in the reports or a grievance is raised, GAR will in the first instance, engage with the supplier to get clarification about the matter and their efforts to manage and suppress fires.

In addition, GAR is currently monitoring and checking known hotspots against all our third-party suppliers’ locations. We will engage pro-actively with suppliers in high-risk areas to help them build capacity in fire management, prevention and suppression.

In the case of a GAR supplier, PT Langgam Inti Hibrindo (PT LIH) which the Indonesian authorities have alleged is linked to causing fires, GAR has currently halted purchases pending further clarification of the status of PT LIH’s operating license and pending the outcome of investigations by authorities.

Have you investigated the hotspots? Have you identified the origin of the burning?

With regards to hotspots or fires on our concessions, our teams on the ground will file a police report and work together with the local authorities to investigate the origin of the burning.

Analysis by the World Resources Institute (WRI) and the Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) shows that fire is an extremely complex issue. Their research does show that the majority of fires are started by people outside the plantations as well as illegal activities of small and medium sized businesses interested in opening up areas for agriculture.

This is consistent with our own experience of the fires which start outside GAR’s concession areas.

With regards to hotspots on our suppliers concessions, please refer to the previous response.

What are you doing to try to address the situation?

GAR regards the haze crisis as a very serious matter and we are channelling significant resources towards the prevention, management and suppression of fires.

We do not tolerate the use of fire in land preparation or development. GAR adopted a no-burn policy in 1997 and no development on peat in 2010. These policies apply to all our subsidiaries. Since November 2014, we have voluntarily stopped all new plantings in our concessions.

Due to the El Nino phenomenon resulting in a prolonged dry season, fires have started outside of GAR concessions but have then spread into some of our plantations. Currently, both vegetation and soil are extremely dry and water levels in rivers and streams have fallen drastically creating a conducive environment for fires to catch and spread. Despite having prepared extra water tanks and ponds, fires have progressed into our concessions.

Our approach to fire management takes several forms.

Firstly, we focus on prevention through education. We have been consistently engaging with the farmers and the community in areas where we operate to educate and advocate no-burning. This preventive approach also involves ensuring all illegal fires are reported to the authorities so that they can take appropriate action.

Secondly, we have set up a Fire Command Post at HQ in Jakarta to coordinate fire management and suppression with the teams on the ground. The teams work together to verify information about fire incidents. This enables the management and suppression of fires to proceed swiftly and accordingly

On the ground, we have put in place numerous measures to counter burning and to put out fires. To date, over 10,000 Emergency Response Team personnel have been trained and are stationed across all our plantations, ready to be deployed in the event of a fire emergency.

In addition we are taking the following actions:

• Managing the hydrology of peat areas by rewetting the areas
• Building fire-monitoring towers
• Preparing Emergency Response Teams consisting of about 30 to 40 personnel per team within a 10 – 15ha area to handle fire suppression
• Preparing water reservoirs around conservation areas to ensure adequate supply of water during a fire
• Having fire trucks at the plantation
• Transferring 20-ton water container tanks to areas that are burning
• Ensuring adequate number portable pumps to be used for fire suppression
• Using high-capacity pumps to pump water from the nearest river to wet peat areas
• Increasing the frequency of fire patrols and involving the community in fire monitoring
• Carrying out coordinated fire suppression with local authorities. A police report is also lodged for every incident.

(As an example, in a fire-prone region in West Kalimantan, across 7 plantations, we have over 350 fire extinguishers, 20 water tank trailers, 45 portable high-capacity water pumps with over 250 water hoses, 45 fire-monitoring towers, and around 650 well-trained Emergency Response Team personnel to handle fire suppression.)

With regards to our supply chain, please see response to question 1.

What are the biggest challenges to addressing the problem?

Preventing fires from spreading and fighting fires on the ground in extremely dry conditions and with surrounding water sources drying up does pose a challenge. Nevertheless, GAR is using its best efforts to prevent, manage and suppress fires.

Has the government — whether it’s local police, bupati, the governor, or central government — been helpful?

We continue to work closely with local authorities in fire management and suppression.

How will this issue get resolved in the long run?

We believe that in the long run it will require a combination of education and involvement of communities in sustainable practices including the conservation of peat lands and no burning. Programs which encourage the community not to practice slash-and-burn and offering them alternatives is essential. Such programs would involve building up community awareness; providing them with heavy equipment to help with land clearing; and involving the community in fire management and prevention.

We are also planning to align our CSR objectives to address this problem by focusing on poverty alleviation. Under that initiative, the community will identify the programs in which they need CSR support up to a total of 100 million IDR per village.

Given that fires are most prevalent in drained peatlands, how will GAR’s peat management policy be implemented or adjusted to help alleviate these problems in the future? And will those efforts make a difference at a landscape level?

GAR has had a policy of no development on peat regardless of depth since 2010. This applies to all our subsidiaries. We are also in the midst of launching a peat rehabilitation project in one of our plantations.

With regards to our supply chain, GAR is engaging with third-party suppliers to ensure that they are aligned with our policy of no development on peat. We are also offering them technical assistance and sharing best management practices in managing the hydrology of existing plantations on peat lands.

As peat land is an interconnected eco-system it is absolutely essential that a landscape approach be taken, and as such every effort to protect and manage peat is crucial. A strategy to tackle fires should therefore incorporate a strategy to protect and conserve peat lands at a landscape level. All stakeholders need to work together to promote best practices, regulations and enforcement to prevent further deterioration of peat lands.

APRIL

APRIL is one of the companies that has been named by various sources as having hotspots in its supplier concessions. What is your response to this allegation?

In this exceptionally dry season due to El Nino, we have experienced a large number of hotspots in and around our concession areas. Every single hotspot is ground-truthed by our fire teams and reported to the authorities. Fortunately, ground-truthing indicates that not every hotspot is a fire: in fact, our data indicates that less than 10% of hotspots are fires and less than 10% of fires are detected from hotspots.

There can be a number reasons for the high probability of error in hotspot identification, from hot areas on the ground to highly reflective roof surfaces. However, we consider hotspot identification as an important diagnostic tool and we monitor every single one regardless of this error margin. Additionally, we also cooperate with the World Resources Institute on the use of our maps for Global Forest Watch, which we also reference as an independent resource for hot spot and fire spot monitoring.

When a hotspot is identified as a fire, crews are rapidly deployed to the location and aggressive fire suppression takes place. As a result more than 50% of our fires cover less than 1 hectare, indicating quick suppression.

Have you investigated the hotspots? Have you identified the origin of the burning?

As mentioned, every hotspot is ground-truthed and reported. Furthermore, there is a considerable difference between burning and hotspots. We know from our fire incident data over the past five years that 100% of fires are deliberately lit. We have no incident of fire from a natural cause in our records.

The same incident data shows that the root cause in our concession area and the surrounding landscape is burning to clear land. Per our records, suspected arson is responsible for 44 per cent of all fires, with a further 34 per cent clearing for small-scale agriculture. Sadly, 10 per cent is due to the discard of cigarettes while the balance is due to cooking fires left unattended, hunting fires, etc.. Given that around 23 percent of our concessions are allocated to community lands, we do have the risks of having some of these fires started within the concessions.

What are you doing to try to address the situation?

We have invested heavily in fire suppression capability (2 helicopters, 2 airboats, 39 lookout towers, 215 water pumps and training efforts for 700 Rapid Response Team members, of which, 260 are full-time fire fighters) over many years with present estimate at $6 million, excluding operational costs. Our team has been working 24/7 on the ground to monitor and respond to fires not just in our concession areas but also in the surrounding areas, and even when called to assist with community fires.

Fire is a landscape problem so we coordinate our fire suppression activities closely with the local police, disaster management agency, and Indonesia Ministry of Environment and Forestry’s fire teams. We are training police officers in basic fire fighting, as well as assisting government disaster relief teams through the loaning of equipment, such as water pumps, hoses and fire fighting personnel. Given the health implications of fire and haze, we are currently running five public clinics that offer free medical services to the communities in Riau.

For us prevention is the long-term solution and our Fire Free Village Program is Riau’s first fire prevention plan that seeks to work collaboratively with the community. Under the FFVP, the partners work with local villages to: identify and support alternatives to fire as a land management tool; recruit, train and support community fire crew leaders; offer incentives to address the economic driver of burning; and raise awareness of the negative impact of fire and haze. We have written about this at http://aprildialog.com/2015/09/23/aprils-no-burn-policy-in-action/.

We believe we are making good headway here through the Fire Free Village Program, but also as a consequence of our focus on local economic development over many years that have been helping to ease the pressure on forest resources. However, this needs to be scaled up for transformational impact.

See stories in The Straits Times and The Jakarta Globe.

What are the biggest challenges to addressing the problem?

These have been widely canvassed and are multifaceted. The urgency at this point is to have a coordinated, collaborative response that involves all relevant stakeholders. Long-term wise, there are systemic issues that need broad, systemic solutions, addressing land governance, alternative economic and empowerment opportunities for the communities, and responsible management and active protection of forest resources.

The Indonesian government has identified a total forest area of 130 million ha. Of these, 74 million ha have been allocated to production forestry, leaving 43% of the land for conservation and water and soil protection. In reality, the government has allocated only 10 million ha to tree-plantation companies (of which only 3.2 million ha have been planted so far) and 34 million ha to logging companies. This shows the vast balance of unmanaged land which is vulnerable to economic pressures (i.e. encroachment and illegal conversion through slash-and-burn) in a country where 30 million people live below poverty line.

We would add that landscape level conservation and ecosystem restoration programs must be incorporated in this solution where the needs of the different stakeholders are balanced and the communities are integrated in the approach from planning to implementation.

Has the government — whether its local police, bupati, the governor, or central government — been helpful?

The partnerships guiding the Fire Free Village Program are encouraging and present a model to follow. We coordinate closely with governments across all levels and support where we can. As mentioned above, we also help train the local police team, for example, in basic fire fighting as well as assisting government disaster relief teams operating on the ground.

For the Fire Free Village Program, we enlisted help from two local NGOs, Rumah Pohon and Blue Green, to support the fire prevention socialization program, as well as support from local government, police, military and Riau’s Disaster Mitigation Agency.

How will this issue get resolved in the long run?

As mentioned above, there are matters of land governance, alternative economic and empowerment opportunities for the communities, and responsible management and active protection of forest resources that will require broad, systemic solutions.

In APRIL, we are adopting a landscape approach to forest protection that incorporates production, conservation, restoration and community as part of an overall sustainable forest management plan. Our 480,000 hectare plantation area will soon be matched by the same area of conservation and restoration forests (we are currently at 70% of target), following our 1-for-1 goal.

This landscape approach, and the involvement of community through livelihood plantation and related economic and social development programs, are intended to create a long-term balance that delivers multiple benefits and replace the economic incentives to burn. This process is undertaken with the participation of key NGO partners, who provide insight and expertise as well as checks and balances.

We reiterate that prevention is the key and this entails working closely and collaboratively with the communities to address their economic needs, assisting them with their agricultural practices and building their capacity. Our Fire Free Village Program is seeking to model this intervention and we intend to grow this initiative with support from civil society groups and the government over the long run.

The government’s strict liability approach to dealing with fires (if it’s in your concession, you’re responsible) doesn’t seem to be working. Is there something APRIL would do differently in terms of policy and law enforcement?

As the concession owner, we have the responsibility of ensuring that there is no uncontrolled fire in our concessions. This is completely aligned with our business interest as trees are our raw material for pulp and paper production. The Sustainable Forest Management Policy 2.0 announced in June already reinforces our No Burn policy which as mentioned has been in place since 1994. This policy commitment also applies to all suppliers and we will not tolerate burning in our supply chain.

We report every fire incident to the authorities, especially cases of arson, and we hope there is immediate investigation and resolution of such cases so we can address the illegal perpetrators.

For our part, we will continue with our strict enforcement of our policy, remain vigilant with our monitoring, response and suppression on the ground, and continue to advocate for concerted action on the prevention side of the problem.

Also given that fires are most prevalent in drained peatlands, how will APRIL’s peat management policy be implemented or adjusted to help alleviate these problems in the future? And will those efforts make a difference at a landscape level?

Our approach to responsible peatland management is a combination of best practices and the latest technology on land and water management, HCV assessment and conservation, and active protection.

We ensure that water levels are maintained at an optimal level that is conducive to long term plantation productivity, while mitigating impacts on the overall landscape and minimizing carbon emission and subsidence. For example, we keep the water level in the peatlands up in anticipation of the dry season because this reduces the risk of fires.

As part of the SFMP 2.0 commitment, APRIL is in the process of establishing a Peat Expert Working Group to advise on the science and operational best practices for improving our peatland management. There will be no new development on peat, including canal construction, prior to the establishment of and consultation with PEWG.

In 2013, we expanded our approach to include landscape restoration through the Riau Ekosystem Restorasi project, a long-term multi-stakeholder initiative where we protect, assess, restore and manage some 70,000 hectares of peat forests on the Kampar Peninsula in Riau. We expect this area to expand significantly in the next few months and we are prepared to make significant resource investment to see this project through, and hopefully to scale it up with support from other partners. The impact will be determined over the long term as more companies and the national government adopt and support the landscape approach, and where sustainability becomes not just about finding a balance among the imperatives but represents an integration of all these.

Cargill

Cargill is one of the companies that has been named by various sources as having hotspots in its concessions. What is your response to this allegation?

The alleged hot spots are outside of our location permit and not part of our Plantation Business License (IUP) or HGU land (land that has been granted the right of cultivation).

It is important to note that community enclaves exist within oil palm concessions that companies have no legal rights nor influence over. Cargill engages those communities living in enclaves within our concessions as part of our outreach on fire prevention awareness programs, and we act quickly to fight any fires that might have started in these enclaves.

Have you investigated the hotspots? Have you identified the origin of the burning?

There are currently hotspots outside of our PT Hindoli boundary that are being managed round-the-clock by our colleagues on-site, so that the burning does not spread to our own plantation and endanger the lives of our colleagues and their families who live in our estates.

[…] No large company would intentionally start a fire within our own estates. The risks of potential damage to our property, endangering the lives of colleagues – many of whom are friends – and their families, and irrecoverable damage to our reputation are not worth taking. The absolute need to avoid those risks are some of the reasons why we have a strict zero-burning policy. ALL land clearing – and we are presently not clearing any land in South Sumatra – is done mechanically. We categorically do not condone burning of land for any means: agricultural, economic or social.

What are you doing to try to address the situation?

We have deployed large and small excavators, numerous water pumps equipped with extension hoses to put out fires both in and outside of our boundary. At this stage, we have four firefighting teams deployed.

We report all fire incidents, complete with on-ground and drone photos to the local police, and have also mandated on-site colleagues work with the local community to immediately notify our regional offices and local authorities if any fires/burning on or near the boundaries of our plantation are detected.

We continue to provide firefighting assistance to the local government to manage fires that are often spread by burning embers from some distance away. Cargill also conducts regular fire prevention awareness programs within the community and always has firefighting vehicles and personnel on standby.

What are the biggest challenges to addressing the problem?

The extremely dry weather coupled with winds is the largest challenge to the current problem. During this extended very dry season, embers can quickly develop into fires when fanned by winds. The smoke haze from burning severely impacts the health and livelihoods of millions living in our local communities, including our colleagues.

We count on credible entities like Mongabay and other local media to help spread the message throughout rural Indonesia that burning of land – regardless of reason – must immediately stop.

Has the government — whether its local police, bupati, the governor, or central government — been helpful?

The current situation is at a point where local governments are severely challenged with firefighting resources; a reason why Cargill is providing firefighting support on the ground to help local authorities to contain the situation.

We are glad that the Indonesian government is accepting help from its regional neighbors to manage this crisis. The collective efforts of Indonesia and multiple countries will give us all a much stronger chance of overcoming this crisis.

How will this issue get resolved in the long run?

It can only be resolved in the long run with the engagement, enablement and participation of ALL stakeholders who live and work in and around Indonesia, and from multiple angles.

Legislation must make burning of land illegal, and laws must be more effectively enforced. Local communities must change mindsets that regard land burning as an acceptable practice. Industries (plantation and others) must be open and transparent with the management of issues.

Collectively, industry, governments, NGOs and the press must all collaboratively work towards a conducive environment that encourages companies to be more open with issues without the fear of persecution. This is especially key if we expect companies to openly seek help in addressing issues and identifying solutions. The current environment largely puts blame and persecution before all else, creating an environment of fear. This causes companies – both guilty and innocent alike – to hide their issues, be disengaged, isolated and unable to garner support to address the problems they face.

Wilmar

Wilmar is one of the companies that has been named by various sources as having hotspots in its supplier concessions. What is your response to this allegation?

Wilmar has taken on an active role in mitigating the occurrence of haze in the region, through the implementation of our No Deforestation, No Peat, and No Exploitation integrated policy. This policy applies to all Wilmar operations worldwide, including those of our subsidiaries and third party suppliers. We supplement these efforts with community education and awareness campaigns, as well as multi-stakeholder partnerships to entrench sustainable practices throughout the industry.

Wilmar has suspended purchases from suppliers which are being investigated by the Indonesian authorities. Despite the suspension of purchases, we remain in contact with the suppliers to follow the progress of the investigations and discuss areas for improvement. Should it be found that these suppliers have deliberately breached our No Burn policy, we will terminate all business dealings with them.

Have you investigated the hotspots? Have you identified the origin of the burning?

With one supplier, we have engaged 3rd-party auditors to conduct a joint field visit to the alleged concession; the audit has concluded and the report is underway. With the other, we are awaiting more information from them for monitoring and investigation purposes.

Further developments will be updated on our Sustainability Dashboard.

What are you doing to try to address the situation?

While we are committed to No Burning, we recognize that slash-and-burn practices remain rampant among small-scale farmers and local communities. According to Global Forest Watch, research has found that majority of fires on agricultural land occur outside of oil palm concessions, and these are often managed by small companies and small-scale farmers. Clearing land by mechanical means cost significantly more, compared to using fire which is the most cost-effective way of clearing land for them. This often leads to uncontrolled fires that may inevitably spread to our plantations or those of our suppliers.

Wilmar partners with community leaders and local governments to routinely conduct awareness campaigns at the grassroots level. Communities also undergo basic fire management training and are provided with fire-fighting equipment.

Wilmar recognizes that smallholders face unique challenges in conforming to enhanced sustainability requirements, and in attaining Roundtable for Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) certification. We conduct ongoing consultations with smallholders to support their compliance with our integrated policy. We have a time-bound plan in place to assist our associated smallholders to qualify for RSPO certification by 2019, and are on-track to achieve this by 2017. We are also working with reputable NGOs, such as Wild Asia and IDH, to help independent smallholders achieve RSPO certification.

Members of the public are also encouraged to raise their grievances, including suspected burning cases, against Wilmar or our suppliers via our grievance procedure. The progress on the actions taken to address these grievances can be tracked on our Sustainability Dashboard, accessible to all stakeholders.

What are the biggest challenges to addressing the problem? How will this issue get resolved in the long run?

The root cause of these slash and burn activities is poverty. To address this fundamental problem, there needs to be a sustainable, long-term poverty alleviation program that helps them shift away from traditional (slash and burn) practices. This requires the co-operation and co-ordination of all stakeholders, including the government, the private sector and the grassroots.

Some of the biggest palm oil companies, including Wilmar, have already initiated collaborative efforts such as the Indonesian Palm Oil Pledge (IPOP) that aims to seek solutions for sustainable palm oil, and is actively engaging the Indonesian government on regulatory reforms to support and institutionalize sustainable practices. Other stakeholders such as the banking sector, especially local banks, could also play a strong role in supporting the mitigation of fires by ensuring that the companies they finance are committed to no-burn practices.

Musim Mas

The crux of the haze crisis is a complex web of socio-economic and political considerations.

The suggested one map and a multi-stakeholder approach to land-use planning will be a good opportunity to reconcile the competing interests for land resources.

As announced also in our Haze Statement we are indeed impacted by facing fire incidents. Following our policies we are commitment to our zero burn policy which prohibits the use of fire in new plantings, replanting and other land development, resorting exclusively to the use of mechanical methods.

Still the fire occurrences started outside of our concession boundaries and spread from the outside into our concession. We review the hotspot data daily and verify by field investigation and the specific coordinates on the ground and report the details to the RSPO.

We have been proactive with our fire team on the ground in extinguishing the fires on the community lands and in the estate. We have a fire team with full firefighting equipment, dedicated fire brigades, watch towers and monitor with ground patrols the situation. Part of the process also involves the reporting of the fire incidents to the sectorial police and local government agency.

The sources of the fires are often difficult to establish and our focus has been around engaging with our communities about the drought and the root causes whereby slash and burn techniques by local farmers are discouraged. We have been active in offering our assistance with mechanical methods and have our heavy equipment’s such as excavators and bulldozers on standby for the communities to use and continue together to fight fires. So far we have been able to extinguish most incidences but are on high alert as the drought still continues.

Musim Mas is proactively working to verify the presence of haze-implicated suppliers in the Group’s supply chain. Most importantly, the Group is in an active dialogue with the authorities to seek out the status of haze-implicated suppliers and engages directly with suppliers as well to communicate and verify matters. – Musim Mas stand is that it will disengage any supplier found guilty by the authorities of the criminal charges related to the fires. The Group will also suspend any supplier whose license has been suspended or revoked by the authorities.

Article published by Rhett Butler

Agriculture, Air Pollution, Deforestation, Drivers Of Deforestation, Environment, Fires, Forest Fires, Forestry, Forests, Global Forest Watch, Haze, Law Enforcement, Logging, Mapping, Palm Oil, Peatlands, Plantations, Pulp And Paper, Rainforests, satellite data, Wetlands

Asia, Borneo, Indonesia, Kalimantan, Riau, Southeast Asia, Sumatra

Print