Indonesia - REHAB

Top ten provinces with degraded forest lands

Current facts

Illegal logging, forest fires and other inappropriate forestry and non-forestry practices have contributed significantly to an estimated 54.6 million ha of degraded forest lands, including Production Forests, and Conservation and Protected Forests and 41.7 million ha of degraded lands outside the forest areas (Ministry of Forestry, 2002). The livelihoods of an estimated 1.5 to 65 million forest dependent people have also been affected by such degradation according to the World Bank (1994) . The responsibility for rehabilitating the 96.3 million hectares of degraded land lies with the Ministry of Forestry.

Challenges for Indonesia to implement more applicable, cost-effective and socio-culturally acceptable rehabilitation approaches

Changes in forest area

Years	Area (Million ha)
1991	143.97
2000	109.57

Source: Ministry of Forestry (2001)

Deforestation Trends (1985-2000)

Period	Rate of deforestation (Million ha per year)
1985 - 1997	1.6
1997 - 2000	3.8

Source: Ministry of Forestry (2001)

Top ten provinces with degraded forest lands */

*/ Cover bush, barren land, mixed agricultural fields and shrubs
Source: Ministry of Forestry (2002)

Ministry of Forestry's initiatives

In 2002, the Ministry initiated a policy under the umbrella of social forestry in the direction of community-based rehabilitation programs. The technical plan was developed under the Five Year Plan on Forest and Land Rehabilitation Program (RHL-5 tahun) and will use catchment areas as the unit of management. The first priority category to be rehabilitated includes 60 watersheds. However due to financial constraints, the program will focus on rehabilitating only 17 catchment areas over the next five years at a total cost of USD 1.6 billion (Ministry of Forestry 2003). The policy complements the program of Allocated Reforestation Fund for Specific Purpose (DAK-DR) that has been implemented since 2001 under the coordination of the District government.

Rehabilitation Projects (1972 - 2002)

Project	Project Years	Coverage	Funding Agency	Executing Agency	Beneficiaries	Project Expenses (USD)
Watershed management and land conservation all over Indonesia (1972-1978)	6	36 prioritised catchment area	GOI	Government and Farmer Group	Local People	Ranges from 8.5 to 17.2 Million
INPRES Reboisation and Reforestation Projects in all districs of Indonesia (1976-1999)	23	60 catchment areas	Donor	Government	Local people	Ranges from 8.5 Million to 1.1 Billion
Reforestation and Tropical Forest Management Project Phase I to VI in South Kalimantan (1981-1996)	15	7,000 ha imperata grassland	Donor	Local Government	Local Government	n.a
Reforestation and land rehabilitation of marginal land in Palu, Central Sulawesi (1990-1992)	2	40 ha Semi arid barren land	Corporate Association	Corporate Association and University	Local communities, goverment, agencies, and youth organization	75,063
Generating Community Income through Rehabilitation of Degraded Lands (1996-1997)	1	One village in West Kalimantan	Donor	NGO	Local NGO and communities	45,000
Rehabilitation ex-concession areas in North Sumatra (1999-2001)	9	10,950	GOI	State Company	Local communities, company, local goverment	1.7 Million
Participate reboisation in Sanggau District, West Kalimantan (1993-2002)	9	2,400 ha covering 59 kampungs	GOI and NGO	International project continued by local NGO	Farmers who participatively planted trees on provate lands	504

GOI: Government of Indonesia

Challenges

More than a hundred projects dealing with forest rehabilitation on forestry, mining and catchment areas dating from the mid 1960s have been identified so far. Target project areas range from 10 to almost 500 thousand ha with project duration ranging from 1 to 35 years. Projects have been mostly dependent on state and donor funding, and focused mainly on technical aspects. Institutional arrangements for effective implementation of the programs on the ground were often inadequately developed and resulted in little adoption of techniques by local people in the targeted areas. There have been some successful projects mainly characterised by active involvement of local people. There is need to identify the most applicable and socio-culturally acceptable approaches for ensuring sustainability. Evaluation of the performance and impacts of the range of past projects can provide valuable lessons for identifying the most promising approaches and incentives.