ArticlePDF Available

Mitigating Tensions over Land Conversion in Papua, Indonesia: Land Conversion in Papua

Wiley
Asia & The Pacific Policy Studies
Authors:
  • Independent Researcher

Abstract and Figures

In the south of the biodiversity-rich Indonesian province of Papua, a large agricultural program is planned for the districts around Merauke, with the ostensible aim of helping to meet Indonesia's food requirements. Questions arise over the scheme's compliance with national laws and sustainability policies, as well as its likely impacts on indigenous livelihoods and biodiversity. It is also contrary to the recent low-carbon development priorities of the provincial and national governments. For the initiative to be consistent with law and policy, therefore, considerably improved planning effort would be needed, taking into account many factors that have so far been ignored.
Content may be subject to copyright.
Policy Forum Article
Mitigating Tensions over Land Conversion in Papua, Indonesia
Mochamad Indrawan,*Julian Caldecott and Ermayanti
Abstract
In the south of the biodiversity-rich Indonesian
province of Papua, a large agricultural
program is planned for the districts around
Merauke, with the ostensible aim of helping
to meet Indonesiasfoodrequirements.
Questions arise over the schemescompliance
with national laws and sustainability policies,
as well as its likely impacts on indigenous
livelihoods and biodiversity. It is also contrary
to the recent low-carbon development
priorities of the provincial and national
governments. For the initiative to be consistent
with law and policy, therefore, considerably
improved planning effort would be needed,
taking into account many factors that have so
far been ignored.
Key words: Papua, sustainable development,
low carbon, policy, land conversion
1. Introduction
The western half of the island of New Guinea
(Figure 1) has an area of 416,129 km
2
and
became a province of Indonesia through a
19611969 process that involved military
confrontation with the Netherlands, a tempo-
rary United Nations administration, and a
controversial plebiscite (Timmer 2007). It
was known as West Papua in 19611973 and
as Irian Jaya in 19732002, and the province
was managed primarily as a mining and petro-
leum resource region by the 19671998 regime
led by President Suharto. It was also the target
of a number of major proposals to use the
provinces land resources, including the
mid-1980s Scott Paper scheme that would
have involved a 790,000 ha Eucalyptus planta-
tion and pulp mill in Merauke district and the
mid-1990s Mamberamo scheme that would
have involved diverse agro-industrial invest-
ments over some eight million hectares of Irian
Jaya (Carr 1998; Marr 2011), and these were
respectively halted by international protests
and uncontrolled logging, followed by
abandonment. Meanwhile, the province also
received government-sponsored transmigrants
and other settlers from elsewhere in
Indonesia, resulting in a dilution of the indige-
nous Papuan share of the total population from
96 per cent in 1971, to 59 per cent in 2005, and
50 per cent in 2010 (Elmslie 2010). After 1998,
however, decentralising reforms affected the
whole of Indonesia and also resulted in Special
Autonomy for Indonesian New Guinea under
the new name of Papua. This gave the provin-
cial government powers to plan development
and formulate regulations based on local
conditions, as well as a 2 per cent share of the
*Research Center for Climate Change, University
of Indonesia, Depok 16424, Indonesia.
Corresponding author: Indrawan, email:
<mochamad.indrawan@gmail.com>
<Mochamad.Indrawan@ui.ac.id>.
Asia & the Pacic Policy Studies, vol. ••,no.•• ,pp.••–••
doi: 10.1002/app5.157
© 2016 The Authors. Asia and the Pacic Policy Studies
published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd and Crawford School of Public Policy at The Australian National University.
This is an open access article under theterms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License, which permits
use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial
purposes.
bs_bs_banner
national budgets block grant over 20 years.
Resistance to Special Autonomy came from
mining, plantation and settler interests, the
latter based particularly in western parts of the
territory. Political events then led to its parti-
tion into the two new provinces of Papua and
West Papua, which are collectively known
among many Papuans as Tan a h P a p u a (the
Land of Papua). This partition was disputed
before the Constitutional Court, which
however ruled in 2004 that the creation of West
Papua was indeed lawful.
In 20082011, a succession of national
government recommendations, policies and
laws revealed the intention to develop the
Merauke Integrated Food and Energy Estate
(MIFEE) in south-eastern Papua (Zakaria
et al. 2011), this being justied in terms of
Indonesias strategic needs for food and
energy. The targeted area had previously been
zoned as suitable for plantations, and its at ter-
rain and accessibility to the southern coast had
already attracted loggers and transmigration
projects (Haarstad et al. 2009). According to
detailed plans announced in 2010, the MIFEE
was to cover more than a million hectares in
the districts of Merauke, Mappi and Boven
Digoel and to be used for growing food crops
such as rice (Oryza sativa), maize (Zea mays),
soybean (Glycine max) and sugar cane
(Saccharum spp.), as well as oil palm (Elaeis
guineensis) and fast-growing Acacia tree spe-
cies for wood chips to be used in paper or as
an energy source. A national policy, namely,
Presidential regulation No 32 of 2011 regard-
ing acceleration and expansion of the eco-
nomic development of Indonesia, 201125
further strengthened MIFEE and its links to na-
tional food and energy-security perceptions.
At the end of 2014, Susilo Bambang
Yudhoyono (SBY) was succeeded as
President of Indonesia by Joko Widodo
(Jokowi), who further extended SBYsmora-
torium on issuance of logging licenses (which
had been introduced in 2011 and extended in
2013). The new president also set out new
Figure 1 Tanah Papua (map courtesy of Bruce Beehler)
2 Asia & the PacicPolicyStudies •• 2016
© 2016 The Authors. Asia and the PacicPolicyStudies
published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd and Crawford School of Public Policy at The Australian National University
targets for self sufciency, involving the
doubling of palm oil production by 2020, a
23 per cent share of renewable energy in the
energy mix by 2025 and targets and subsidies
to encourage the use of biodiesel (i.e. palm
oil processed for use as a fuel oil). The
re-launch of MIFEE was announced by
President Jokowi during his visit to Papua in
May2015(Barahamin2015).
From the central governments point of
view, the case for MIFEE is clearly based on
the need to assure an adequate energy and rice
supply for voters in the populous island of Java
and on the need for export revenues, with palm
oil expected to be especially protable (CIFOR
2009). The quest for food security is every-
where deeply intertwined with politics, but
especially clearly so in Indonesia. For exam-
ple, Figure 2 depicts national rice production
from 1960 to 2010 and records the rapid
increase in rice production in the 1970s
induced by the Green Revolution, which did
much to stabilise and allow the full establish-
ment of the New OrderSuharto regime after
the famines of the 1960s. It also shows the
downturn in rice production in the mid-1990s,
which drove the regimes decision in 1996 to
establish the (subsequently failed) One Million
Hectare Peatland Development Project or
Mega Rice Projectin Central Kalimantan
(see the following).
But the MIFEE project seems less attractive
from the point of view of Papua province than
it does from that of Jakarta (Ginting & Pye
2013; Lang 2013; Takeshi et al. 2014), and in
many ways it encapsulates the conict between
alternative visions of the role of Papua in
Indonesia: as a resource supplier to the nation
or as an ancestral homeland of traditional peo-
ples. Assuming the central governmentswish
to establish the MIFEE by importing capital
and labour, expropriating and converting lands
as needed and directing the resulting revenue
streams, key points of concern expressed by
various stakeholders during interviews with
the authors are summarised subsequently,
alongside ways to reconcile these contrasting
visions, at least partially, through the compli-
ance of all parties with existing Indonesian
law.
This article is based on a synthesis of infor-
mation from a number of sources, ultimately
resting on interviews with knowledge holders,
direct observations, literature review and par-
ticipation in low-carbon development work-
shops for Papua and West Papua provinces.
Figure 2 Areas Harvested and Yield of Rice in Indonesia between 1960 and 2010
3Indrawan et al.: Land Conversion in Papua
© 2016 The Authors. Asia and the Pacic Policy Studies
published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd and Crawford School of Public Policy at The Australian NationalUniversity
The process began with a study leading to the
forestry and climate change update of the
ECs Country Environmental Prole
(Caldecott & Indrawan 2009) and continued
through the formulation of EC-Indonesia cli-
mate change cooperation (Caldecott &
Indrawan 2010), both of which included exten-
sive dialogue with Papuan authorities sur-
rounding their low-carbon development
priorities. Further detail was provided through
subsequent participation (by senior author
Indrawan) in meetings in Papua and dialogue
and correspondence with provincial and other
stakeholders (e.g. Indrawan et al. 2011).
2. Concerns over the MIFEE
There are several kinds of concern over the
MIFEE proposal, reecting the priorities of
different stakeholder groups. First, the provin-
cial and district governments of Papua and
Merauke have different views on how the
south-eastern part of Papua should be devel-
oped, with the district government being better
disposed to large-scale estate development. In
2007, for example, 4 years before the presiden-
tial regulation that authorised the MIFEE
development plan, the then regent of Merauke
established a Merauke Integrated Rice Estate,
and this plan by the district government served
as precursor of MIFEE (Hidayat & Yamamoto
2014; Takeshi et al. 2014).
Second, there is a general concern, wide-
spread in the outer islands of Indonesia (i.e.
the islands beyond the national coreislands
of Java, Bali and Madura), about central gov-
ernment initiatives that result in sudden,
large-scale land-use change. This arises from
the historic cancellation of traditional rights to
lands and forests in the 1960s, the allocation
of those resources to central government
control and their uncompensated consumption
by non-local interest groups ever since. An
example of this process was the One Million
Hectare Peatland Development (or Mega Rice)
Project in Central Kalimantan, Indonesian
Borneo. This involved the logging and
draining of forested deep peatland and the
movement of about 100,000 migrants into the
area, where they were expected to grow rice,
thus shoring up ofcial targets for both assisted
transmigration and rice production. Once
logged and drained, the peatland became
re-prone as well as being unsuited to rice
growing, so the initiative led to an ecological
disaster that produced desertication, local
extirpation of forest-dwelling species, the
release of an estimated 150 million tonnes of
carbon-based greenhouse gases (GHGs) in
1997 alone (Rieley & Page 2008) and eco-
nomic calamity for in-migrants and indigenous
people alike. The MIFEE initiative is of a scale
that invites comparison with the Mega Rice
Project, and with this as a precedent, there is
the expectation within Papua that most of the
nancial benets owing from the MIFEE will
be captured by stakeholders outside the
province, while the greatest environmental
and social costs will be borne locally. There
is also the probability of massive GHG release
due to planned and unplanned forest conver-
sion as the MIFEE is developed. The area is
drought-prone and vulnerable to re during El
Niño events, and has burned extensively
during the current severe El Niño (Jong 2015;
WRI 2015).
Third, there is the fear that the MIFEE
would involve extinguishing the resource
tenure rights of local people, replacing ecosys-
tems that have provided them with important
resources for millennia, displacing communi-
ties to new and unsuitable locations and
importing up to eight million workers and their
families from other parts of Indonesia
(Pangkali 2010; Yudhistira 2011). Papua as a
whole has long been receiving ows of sponta-
neous migrants (Barter & Côté 2015), and fear
of in-migration is particularly intense in
Merauke, which in 2010 had a population of
only 250,000, half of whom were already mi-
grants (Zakaria et al. 2011).
A fourth kind of concern draws on indigna-
tion that Special Autonomy is being infringed
by pressure to accept an initiative originating
outside Papua, other than on terms freely
negotiated, understood and accepted by
Papuans. Connected with this is the fact that,
while MIFEE was being designed and
activated, the provincial government was for-
mulating its own low-carbon development
4 Asia & the PacicPolicyStudies •• 2016
© 2016 The Authors. Asia and the PacicPolicyStudies
published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd and Crawford School of Public Policy at The Australian National University
(LCD) plan for Papua (Suebu 2009). Papua
Province has developed its sustainable
development vision, also known as Papua
2100, which includes the aim of maintaining
90 per cent of the territory under forest with
two-thirds of this being totally protected. The
resulting provincial spatial plan for
20132033 was formalised by provincial regu-
lation in 2013.
The LCD plan envisioned greatly reducing
deforestation for oil palm, saving up to four
billion tonnes of GHG emissions (4 GtCO
2
e),
and quickly attracted the interest of ofcial
donors and potential investors (Caldecott &
Indrawan 2009, 2010). The LCD plan ruled
out large-scale development projects unless
geared to green investment and established
principles including recognition of traditional
rights, free prior informed consent and effec-
tive conict resolution, as well as the effective
establishment of conservation areas. A starker
contrast in intent and impact can scarcely be
envisioned than that between the provincial
governments LCD plan and the central
governments MIFEE initiative. One key issue
was the historical licensing and permitting
system for forest use, which did not allow the
implementation of alternative land uses, and
implied an urgent need for more open-access
data to support spatial planning at all scales,
including synchronised data between the
national and subnational levels.
Afth kind of concern is that the MIFEE
conicts with the Government of Indonesias
own policies to reduce GHG emissions. These
have been prominent since the Presidents
commitment in 2009 to reduce emissions by
26 per cent against a business-as-usual estimate
of emissions in 2020, leading to a huge amount
of policy, legislative and executive work in
order to make meeting this target achievable.
To begin with, the earlier 5-year development
plan (RPJMN 20102014) addressed climate
change through the three cross-sectoral themes
of food security, energy and environment and
disaster management. This is continued within
the current medium-term development plan
(20152019), which puts climate change under
the main national development agenda, along
with the direction of and policies for sectoral
development. The 26 per cent target was
increased to 29 per cent in 2015, as part of
Indonesias Intended Nationally Determined
Contributions commitment under the United
Nations Framework Convention on Climate
Change. At the subnational level, the
medium-term development plan for Papua
Province (RPJMD Papua 20142018)
mandated the involvement of traditional
communities in safeguarding ecosystem
sustainability including climate change mitiga-
tion and adaptation. All these paralled a
presidential regulation in 2011 that mandated
GHG reduction measures through action plans
at national and provincial levels. Because
63 per cent of Indonesias Intended Nationally
Determined Contributions-dened GHG
emission reductions are estimated to be found
in the land use, land-use change and forestry
sector, and about a fourth of these are available
from altering land conversion plans in Papua
(Suebu 2009), it can be seen that MIFEE is
deeply contrary to these priorities. With about
200,000 ha of tropical moist forest immedi-
ately exposed to conversion by MIFEE
(Greenomics Indonesia 2012) there is little
chance that a centrally planned MIFEE will
achieve lower emissions over a comparable
time scale than the small-scale land conver-
sions that are already happening in the region.
Thus, the MIFEE constitutes a forgone oppor-
tunity to stem high carbon development in
Indonesia, and it could fatally undermine
Indonesias credibility as a serious actor in
addressing the challenge of climate change.
A sixth concern is that complications arise
with the national governments policy to
recognise land tenure rights. The Constitutional
CourtrulingNo35inMay2012stipulatedthat
the land rights of peoples living by customary
law (Masyarakat Adat) must henceforth be
recognised fully by government. Yet, MIFEE
is expected to infringe on 2.5 million hectares
of ancestral lands belonging to the Malind-
Amin community (Barahamin 2015).
Numerous ecosystem services have yet to be
factored in to the aforementioned concerns.
There are compelling lessons from Aceh,
another well-forested special autonomous
province at the opposite end of Indonesia, that
5Indrawan et al.: Land Conversion in Papua
© 2016 The Authors. Asia and the Pacic Policy Studies
published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd and Crawford School of Public Policy at The Australian NationalUniversity
was subjected to conversions for large-scale
monoculture and/or subsistence farming. The
studies showed that oods, including inunda-
tion of rice elds, caused net economic loss
across the landscape, with direct costs conser-
vatively estimated at US$27 million per year
(van Beukering et al. 2003). Increased produc-
tivity per unit land area through improved
husbandry and investment would greatly
relieve pressure on forests; for instance, a
5 per cent per year increase in productivity
would halve demand for 220,000 ha of land
for oil palm conversion in Aceh under the
business-as-usual scenario for 20152019
(Leggett et al. 2015).
Further, there are issues related to the loss of
biodiversity, for instance, the Malind
communitys traditional staple food is not rice
but a mix of sago, sweet potatoes, fruits and
wild meat. In terms of wildlife richness, the area
in question is characterised by major seasonal
concentrations of migratory water birds and a
diverse and endemic-rich biota (Johns et al.
2007; Polhemus & Allen 2007). The potential
ofbiodiversityasaresourceforsustainablede-
velopment is appreciated by the provincial gov-
ernment and integrated in their LCD planning
(Indrawan et al. 2011), so the destruction of
biodiversity assets in the MIFEE area is an ad-
ditional unwelcome factor that is of concern to
international and local observers alike.
Finally, spontaneous in-migration is likely
to constrain development in Papua the prov-
ince which is deemed as the most lagged be-
hind in Indonesia in terms of human
development index, and deeply challenged by
the lowest scores in Indonesia for incomes, ed-
ucational levels, and life expectancies, which
contrasted with the highest maternal and child
mortality rates in the nation (BPS 2014).
Not all of these concerns can be fully accom-
modated within a development program in the
Merauke area that depends on wholesale
conversion of natural forests to plantation
agriculture. While it is possible to imagine
alternatives, in which sustainable wealth would
mostly be captured locally and would mostly
come from green initiatives of various kinds,
the process of large-scale land development is
already underway, albeit probably in a more
fragmented way than originally conceived
because of patchy soils and drainage and
practical difculties of access and supply. In
these circumstances, with declining but still
available opportunities to do so, the aims
should be to minimise harm and maximise
sustainability. This would depend, however,
on modifying the MIFEE approach by apply-
ing existing Indonesian and Papuan policies
and laws that were developed with these aims
specically in mind. Some ways in which this
might be achieved are considered in the follow-
ing sections.
3. Opportunities to Mitigate Conict
There remains scope to minimise tensions
among policy priorities at the local level (e.g.
self-determination, equity and environmental
security), the national level (e.g. food security
and export revenues) and the global level
(e.g. GHG emission reductions). Some of these
issues require choices between incompatible
objectives, which may be contested by differ-
ent stakeholders. The process by which the
MIFEE is being developed provides an oppor-
tunity to apply mitigation measures based on
the following principles, which are offered as
a potential checklist for negotiators.
3.1 Free prior and informed consent
A negotiated rather than an imposed outcome
requires the recognition by all parties that each
has a legitimate interest in what happens.
Active participation in decision-making is
needed by the provincial and district govern-
ments, with priority given to the resolution of
issues related to land rights traditionally
claimed by local communities. One way to
promote free prior and informed consent would
be to increase effectiveness of the formal
processes of Musrenbang (participatory forum
for yearly development planning)whereby
stakeholders work together to protect bottom-
up planning from intervention by outside
interests. Conict resolution mechanisms
involving local stakeholders are mandated by
Papua provinces medium-term development
plan (20142018).
6 Asia & the PacicPolicyStudies •• 2016
© 2016 The Authors. Asia and the PacicPolicyStudies
published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd and Crawford School of Public Policy at The Australian National University
3.2 Transparency
Closed-door decision-making can be the
enemy both of justice and of sustainability,
because it offers opportunities for corruption,
collusion and nepotism and prevents the
growth of public understanding and potential
support for decisions. Act 14/2008 on Public
Information Transparency obliges public
entities in Indonesia to reveal all public infor-
mation under their control, the content of
deliberations and outcomes of decisions, all
policies that apply to the public entity con-
cerned and all of its agreements with third
parties. Papua is among the rst provinces of
Indonesia to have developed open-access data
on spatial planning, known as Simtaru (infor-
mation system for the management of spatial
planning; BAPPEDA 2015), and this system
displays the provinces spatial planning regula-
tion from 2013. Agencies and ofces that hold
sectoral data are obliged to upload their data
into the system, thus helping to build a single
development map as a tool for avoiding plan-
ning conicts.
3.3 Inclusive policy framework
Decisions on initiatives on the scale of MIFEE
should involve public welfare, security,
agriculture, forestry, village development and
other viewpoints while also considering
Papuas LCD plan and climate change aspects,
not only in terms of GHG emissions but also
the vulnerability of the investments themselves
to climate change and the scope for adaptation
to it. The relevant Presidential regulation (i.e.
No 32 of 2011 regarding acceleration and
expansion of the economic development of
Indonesia, 20112025) would need to be
reviewed and replaced to provide for such an
inclusive policy framework. The implication
would be to expose MIFEE to a much higher
level of public consultation, including through
national, provincial and district parliamentary
dialogue. Fiscal incentives might be used to
encourage companies to set parts of their land
holdings aside where they are of particularly
high environmental or cultural value.
3.4 Ecosystem goods and services
Changes in land use have consequences that
include the loss of ecosystem goods and
services (e.g. water catchment functions, ood
control, carbon storage, biodiversity and sacred
areas) and substitute others that may have
lower, less inclusive or shorter-term socio-
economic utility. Hence, there is a need for
detailed comparative analysis of costs and
benets that include all known ecosystem
goods and services, even if they cannot be
quantied, and the interests of all stakeholders,
coupled with a precautionary approach and a
preference for maintaining existing goods and
services where possible, or adequately com-
pensating for them if lost. The potential use
of green budgeting, in which social and
environmental factors are fully integrated with
the economic paradigm, is now being
promoted as a development tool in several
Indonesian provinces (Qibtiyyah et al. 2015).
3.5 Environmental change management
Where land conversion for a food estate has
been agreed or is unavoidable, the process is
legally required to be undertaken in a measured
and step-wise manner. Compliance is manda-
tory with Act 32/2009 concerning environmen-
tal management, which requires strategic
environmental assessments (SEA) and then
for individual projects (such as concessions)
environmental impact assessments (EIA). This
obliges the central government to provide
backstopping and capacity-building support
to the district governments concerned, so that
they can perform adequate assessments. Again,
the main challenges lie in compliance and
enforcement.
3.6 Principles of spatial planning
A key part of the process by which decisions on
land conversion are made in Indonesia is spa-
tial planning, as mandated by Act 27/2007,
which obliges governments at the central,
provincial, district and municipal levels to dis-
seminate information relating to spatial plan-
ning, including to local communities. This
7Indrawan et al.: Land Conversion in Papua
© 2016 The Authors. Asia and the Pacic Policy Studies
published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd and Crawford School of Public Policy at The Australian NationalUniversity
contributes to transparency but is also intended
to allow stakeholders to articulate their devel-
opment visions and priorities in relation to irre-
versible decisions on the use of resources
before those decisions are made. Papua prov-
inces own regulation for spatial planning regu-
lation thus prioritises sustainability and has
been approved by central government authori-
ties including the Ministry of Planning, but
the process needs to be enforced so that forestry
licenses can be handled with proper reference
to spatial planning beforehand. There is also a
need for better alignment between provincial
and village spatial plans.
3.7 Private sector participation
Policy instruments should provide more than
mere scal and infrastructural incentives, and
from the very beginning, private capital inves-
tors should be required to design, and locally
consult on, their contribution to the social and
economic sustainability of Papua. In practice,
this would mean that business plans are
reviewed both by government and by local
communities and positively screened for such
contributions. Here, it can be helpful to dene
accurately what constitutes a resourceto the
communities (Banks 2008), followed by par-
ticipatory analysis leading to conict manage-
ment plans (Warner 2000).
4. Conclusions
The process of integrating Tanah Papua into
Indonesia presents both opportunities and
hazards. Among the latter is the fact that the
whole area is exposed to decisions made far
away, by people acting under pressures that
are powerful to them but alien to the circum-
stances of most Papuans. Following reforms
since 1998, however, provincial governments,
particularly in Papua, have much more power
than before to reject any plan imposed by
central government. Hence, at least on paper,
any major decision on the scale of MIFEE
simply has to be made through consultation
and mutual agreement. Lessons from Aceh
special province are especially relevant
because of numerous parallels involving top-
down decision-making and implementation
that resulted in degradation, deforestation and
net loss of sustainability and productivity.
The drivers of demand for MIFEE are
complex and include corporate land-hunger,
for areas to use for speculation, for harvestable
resources such as wood pulp and for export
crops such as palm oil, as well as a political
requirement to be seen to safeguard national
rice supplies. Papuans may or may not benet
from opportunities linked to land speculation
and commodity exports, but in any case, they
seldom eat rice. The growth in demand for rice
is driven largely by population growth within
Indonesia, and food estates are not a long-term
solution to this challenge, which instead
requires a sustainable relationship between
human numbers and the productive capacity
of ecosystems. Meanwhile, the global econ-
omy is now recognised as being constrained
by environmental limits, notably by climate
change, so the days of freely liquidating
carbon-storing ecosystems in order to export
food and biofuels are clearly numbered.
Indonesia has already begun participating in
efforts to create a lower-carbon world econ-
omy, and this participation is important and
should continue as a matter of urgency.
On the immediate matter of MIFEE, how-
ever, we have listed key principles that if
applied consistently and together in accordance
with Indonesian law would greatly mitigate the
impacts of MIFEE and similar schemes, or else
greatly change their nature so they contribute
to building sustainable human development,
rather than undermining it. Contained in this
issue, however, is the challenge of making
choices between paths that lead in different
directions, whereby decisions need to be justi-
ed through the complete understanding of
costs and benets of all options, and the conse-
quences of decisions fully explored. Where
ecosystem change is decided upon, educational
dialogue is essential to build consensus around
new ways of relating to the affected resource.
This applies also to in-migration, because
indigenous Papuans have much to share with
settlers about how to live sustainably in a land
very different in climate and biota to where
they came from. Whether settlers can learn to
8 Asia & the PacicPolicyStudies •• 2016
© 2016 The Authors. Asia and the PacicPolicyStudies
published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd and Crawford School of Public Policy at The Australian National University
respect and use this local knowledge, or will
remain as inexible as those who tried to intro-
duce European farming systems into Australia
in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries
(Flannery 1994), remains to be seen but should
be a topic for environmental education of
newcomers in Papua. Meanwhile, as a new
common vision is developed, revenue sharing,
arbitration, new investment, compensation and
compulsion will all then have their places in
putting it into effect. Applying these principles
to the MIFEE initiative would be consistent
with Indonesian law and with the desires of
those who seek sustainable outcomes among
the central and provincial governments, local
people and other concerned citizens of
Indonesia. Conversely, one may question the
taking of decisions that are not consistent with
law and evidence. By summarising the issues
and opportunities raised by the MIFEE initia-
tive, we hope to support more effective public
debate on a subject of critical importance to
Papua, to Indonesia, and to the world as a
whole.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The manuscript was developed following dis-
cussions by senior author Indrawan with mem-
bers of Commission VII of the Indonesian
Parliament. Resources for the preparation of
the manuscript were provided by the Univer-
sity of Indonesia, the Asian Public Intellectual
Fellowship, the Nippon Foundation, and the
Indonesian Institute of Sciences (Indrawan),
and Creatura Ltd (Caldecott). Data on rice
harvesting trends were kindly provided by
Professor Soichi Ito (Kyushu University).
Constructive comments were provided by Dr
Bruce Beehler, Ms Helen Belleld, Dr Manuel
Boissière, Dr Jim Davie, Dr Matt Legget, Mr
Neville Kemp, Dr Jeffrey Luzar and Ms Mary
Monro.
September 2016.
References
Banks G (2008) Understanding resource
Conicts in Papua New Guinea. Asia Pacic
Viewpoint 49(1), DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-
8373.2008.00358.x.
BAPPEDA (2015) SimtaruInformation Sys-
tem for the Management of Spatial
Planning (in Bahasa Indonesia). Develop-
ment Board of the Province of Papua,
viewed 4 November 2015 <http://simtaru.-
papua.go.id/simtaru-papua-v052/map_pro
vinsi_papua.phtml?resetsession=GEOEXT,
groups>
Barahamin A (2015) Hikayat beras pemangsa
sagu, etnosida terhadap malind amin
melalui mega proyek MIFEE [Ataleofrice
preying on sago: ethnocide against the
Malind-Amin community through the
MIFEE megaproject]. (in Bahasa
Indonesia), viewed 15 August 2016
<http://indoprogress.com/2015/10/hikayat-
beras-pemangsa-sagu-etnosida-terhadap-
malind-anim-melalui-mega-proyek-mifee>
Barter SJ, Côté I (2015) Strife of the Soil? Un-
settling Transmigrant Conicts in Indonesia.
Journal of Southeast Asian Studies 46(1),
6085. DOI: 10.1017/S0022463414000617.
Published online: 12 January 2015
BPS (Statistical Agency of the Republic of In-
donesia) (2014) Human Development
Report of Indonesia. Tabel Indeks
Pembangunan Manusia Propinsi dan
Nasional 19992014 [in Indonesian],
viewed 20 February 2016 <http://www.
bps.go.id/linkTabelStatis/view/id/1796>.
Caldecott JO, Indrawan M (2009) Update of
the Country Environmental Prole for
Indonesia. EU Delegation, Jakarta,
Indonesia.
Caldecott JO, Indrawan M (2010) Identica-
tion and Formulation of EC-Indonesia
Climate Change Cooperation.EUDelega-
tion, Jakarta, Indonesia.
Carr F (1998) Mamberamo Madness. Inside
Indonesia 55 (Jul-Sep 1998), viewed 15 Au-
gust 2016 <http://www.insideindonesia.
org/mamberamo-madness>
CIFOR (2009) The Impacts and Opportunities
of Oil Palm in Southeast Asia: What Do We
Know and What Do We Need to Know?
Occasional Paper 51. Centre for In-
ternational Forestry Research, Bogor,
Indonesia.
9Indrawan et al.: Land Conversion in Papua
© 2016 The Authors. Asia and the Pacic Policy Studies
published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd and Crawford School of Public Policy at The Australian NationalUniversity
Elmslie J (2010) West Papuan Demographic
Transition and the 2010 Indonesian Census:
Slow motion genocideor not? CPACS
Worki ng P ap e r ,11/1. Sydney, Australia:
The West Papua Project at the Centre for
Peace and Conict Studies, University of
Sydney
Flannery T (1994) The Future Eaters: an
Ecological History of the Australasian
Lands and Peoples.ReedBooks. Victoria,
Australia.
Ginting L, Pye O (2013) Resisting Agri-
business Development: The Merauke
Integrated Food and Energy Estate in West
Papua, Indonesia. ASEAS - Austrian Jour-
nal of South-East Asian Studies 6(1),
16082.
Haarstad J, Sandbukt Ø, Deddy K, Disch A
(2009) Environmental and Socio-Economic
Baseline StudyPapua, Indonesia.
Norwegian Agency for Development Coop-
eration, Oslo, Norway.
Hidayat H, Yamamoto S (2014) Papuas
Threatened Forests: Conict of Interest.
Government versus Local Indigenous
People. South PacicStudies34(2), 7198.
Greenomics Indonesia (2012) Peatland and
Forest at Serious Risk from Merauke Food
and Estate Development, viewed 31 Octo-
ber 2015 <http://www.greenomics.org/
docs/Report_201202_Mer
auke_Food_and_Energy_Estate>
Indrawan M, Kapisa N, Rumansara A (2011)
Conference Report of the International
Biodiversity Conference for Sustainable
Development in Papua Land (Jayapura,
1115 November 2009). Development in
Practice 21(6), 8814.
Johns RJ, Shea GR, Puradyatmika P (2007)
Lowland Vegetation of Papua. In: Marshall
AJ, Beehler BM (eds) The Ecology of Pa-
pua, pp. 94561. Periplus, Singapore.
Jong HN (2015) Food Estate Project May Turn
Papua into Forest Fire Hotbed - The Jakarta
Post, 30 Oct. 2015.
Lang C (2013) Massive Seizure of Indigenous
Lands is Causing Starvation and Poverty
in Papua. REDD Monitor, viewed 31 Octo-
ber 2015 <http://www.redd-monitor.org/
2013/09/03/mifees-massive-seizure-of-
indigenous-lands-is-causing-starvation-and-
poverty-in-papua/#more-14321>
Leggett M, Lubis MI, Nuruliawati, Pusparini
W (2015) Aceh and the Archipelago Econ-
omy. Brieng Note. Global Canopy
Programme and Wildlife Conservation So-
ciety, Oxford, UK.
Marr C (2011) Twenty-two Years of Top-
down Resource Exploitation in Papua.
Down to Earth 89-90 (November 2011,
Special Papua edition), viewed 15 August
2016 <http://www.downtoearth-indonesia.
org/story/twenty-two-years-top-down-re-
source-exploitation-
papua#sdendnote1sym>
Pangkali L (2010) Dampak Positif MIFEE
Masih Penuh Tanda Tanya [Positive impact
of MIFEE is in question]. (in Bahasa
Indonesia), viewed 12 August 2010
<http://sorpatom.wordpress.com/2010/08/
12/lyndon-pangkali-dampak-positif-mifee-
masih-penuh-tanda-tanya/>
Polhemus DA, Allen GR (2007) Freshwater
Biogeography of Papua. In: Marshall AJ,
Beehler BM (eds) The Ecology of Papua,
pp. 20745. Periplus, Singapore.
Qibtiyyah RM, Wigjoseptina C, Anindita D et
al. (2015) Menginternalisasikan aspek
lingkungan ke dalam proses penganggaran
[Internalizing environmental aspects into
the budgeting process]. Green Budgeting
Newsletter No 1. Indonesia, Depok: Insti-
tute for Economics and Social Research -
Universitas Indonesia (in Bahasa
Indonesia)
Rieley J, Page SE (2008) Peat Swamp Forests
of South East AsiaDo They Have a Fu-
ture? European Tropical Forest Research
Network News,45/46: Forests, water and
livelihoods, viewed 19 May 2011 <http://
www.etfrn.org/etfrn/newsletter/news4546/
nl45_oip_29.htm>
Suebu B (2009) A Global Solution: Building a
Low Carbon Economy for Papua Province,
Indonesia. Government of Papua, Jayapura,
Papua.
Takeshi I, Rachman NF, Savitri LA (2014)
Power to Make Land Dispossession Accept-
able: A Policy Discourse Analysis of the
Merauke Integrated Food and Energy Estate
10 Asia & the PacicPolicyStudies •• 2016
© 2016 The Authors. Asia and the PacicPolicyStudies
published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd and Crawford School of Public Policy at The Australian National University
(MIFEE), Papua, Indonesia. The Journal of
Peasant Studies 41(1), 2950.
Timmer J (2007) A Brief Social and Political
History of Papua, 19622005. In: Marshall
AJ, Beehler BM (eds) The Ecology of
Papua,pp.1098124. Periplus, Singapore.
van Beukering PJH, Cesar HSJ, Janssen MA
(2003) Valuation of Ecological Services of
the Leuser National Park in Sumatra,
Indonesia. Ecological Economics 44(1),
4362.
Warner M (2000) Conict Management in
Community-based Natural Resource Pro-
jects: Experiences from Fiji and Papua
New Guinea. Overseas Development Insti-
tute, London, UK.
WFSG (2012) World Rice Statistics and
Graphics: Indonesia, viewed 7 May 2012
<http://worldfood.apionet.or.jp/graph/graph.
cgi?byear=1960&eyear=2009&country=
INDONESIA&article=rice&pop=0&type
=e1>.
WRI (2015) Global Forest Watch Fires.World
Resources Institute, viewed 11 December
2015 <http://res.globalforestwatch.org/
app/js/views/report/report.html#aoitype=
ISLAND&dates=fYear-2015!fMonth-12!
fDay-4!tYear-2015!tMonth-12!tDay-11&
aois=Papua>.
Yudhistira G (2011) Food Estate Unlikely to
Keep Indonesia from Food Crisis. The
Jakarta Post, viewed 27 February 2011
<http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2011/
02/27/food-estate-unlikely-keep-indonesia-
food-crisis.html>.
Zakaria RY, Kleden EO, Franky YL (2011)
MIFEE tak terjangkau angan Malind
[MIFFE is an unattainable dream for the
Malind people]. Jakarta, Indonesia: Yayasan
Pusaka, viewed 19 May 2011 <http://www.
forestpeoples.org/sites/fpp/les/publication/
2011/06/mifee-buku-low-res.pdf>.
The opinions expressed in the Policy Forum are
those of the author(s) alone and do not neces-
sarily reect those of the Journals Editors and
partners.
11Indrawan et al.: Land Conversion in Papua
© 2016 The Authors. Asia and the Pacic Policy Studies
published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd and Crawford School of Public Policy at The Australian NationalUniversity
... ha), agricultural land into industrial land (450.43 ha), and agricultural land into business and trade areas (31.75 ha) [8]. However, the area of agricultural land outside of Java tends to increase [9][10][11]. ...
... Agricultural extensification programs are mainly carried out in provinces outside Java Island by implementing various policies, for example, the MIFEE (Merauke Integrated Food and Energy Estate) policy. This policy aims to increase the availability of agricultural land by clearing unproductive land and converting it into agriculturally productive land [9]. The analysis results using the multiple linear regression method show that the factors that influence the agricultural land sustainability in Indonesia are agriculture, forestry, and fishing value-added, real consumption of households and government, rural population growth, and human capital index. ...
... Pro dan kontra terhadap pemekaran wilayah papua tak terbendung. Dengan pemekaran ini orang Papua menuntut hak-haknya yang selama ini terabaikan (Indrawan et al., 2017). Untuk meminimalisasi keadaan terutama tuntutan untuk menentukan nasib sendiri/ merdeka maka langkah strategis yang ditempuh adalah pemekaran Provinsi untuk mempercepat pembangunan, rentang kendali serta mempercepat peningkatan kesejahteraan orang Papua (Kusumaryati, 2019). ...
Article
Full-text available
ABSTRAK Penelitian ini memiliki tujuan untuk memperoleh data dan menganalisis tentang sikap politik mahasiswa Papua UNJ terhadap pemekaran wilayah Papua. Pendekatan yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah pendekatan metode campuran (mixed). Pada penelitian ini dilakukan pengumpulan data melalui angket serta wawancara dalam kurun waktu yang bersamaan kepada informan yaitu mahasiswa Papua yang terdapat di UNJ, angket dibagikan secara Online dan wawancara dilakukan dengan masing-masing informan. Pada penelitian ini didapatkan hasil yakni 87,5% atau sejumlah 7 dari 8 orang mahasiswa Papua yang ada di Universitas Negeri Jakarta tidak setuju dengan kebijakan pemekaran wilayah Papua yang telah dilakukan oleh pemerintah Indonesia. Berdasarkan wawancara yang telah dilakukan kepada para mahasiswa Papua. Dalam penelitian ini dihasilkan dua pendapat terhadap pemekaran Papua, yakni menolak atau mendukung Penolakan yang dilakukan oleh mahasiswa Papua berlandasakan masih banyaknya kasus pelanggaran HAM dan berpotensi menyingkirkan orang asli Papua karena akkan adanya Transmigrasi, sedangkan dukungan beralasan adanya pemekaran lapangan pekerjaan akan mudah didapatkan bagi para mahasiswa Papua yang telah lulus dan kembali ke Papua. Berdasarkan hasil penelitian dapat dikatakan sebagian besar dari mahasiswa Papua UNJ menolak akan kebijakan pemekaran wilayah Papua. Kata kunci: papua, pemekaran wilayah, sikap politik mahasiswa
... Effective conservation strategies must be implemented to minimize the negative impacts of human activities and promote sustainable management to conserve remaining biodiversity (Aratrakorn et al., 2006). Strict forest clearing monitoring and regulation should be prioritized to conserve threatened flora and fauna (Aratrakorn et al., 2006;Singh & Bhagwat, 2013;Indrawan et al., 2016). ...
Article
Timber companies in West Papua operate within a strict regulatory framework set by the government and efforts to manage forests sustainably. The study aims to determine the environmental impact of logging around the PBPH area of PT Wijaya Sentosa, Teluk Wondama Regency, West Papua. The research method used is mixed using secondary data from AMDAL documents and RKL-RPL implementation report documents for 2019-2023. The study's results in the last five years have shown a decrease in abiotic components (increased noise, decreased surface water quality, and decreased air quality) and decreased biotic components (decreased biodiversity, decreased diversity of aquatic biota species). Changes in positive impacts on social components (job opportunities, opening up business opportunities, increasing community income). Balancing the various interests and stakeholders in forest management is crucial to achieving sustainable results. As well as empowering local communities, improving law enforcement, and coaching.
... There is a criticism from some people towards the making of Law Number 7 of 2020 because there is no community participation despite of the requirement for transparency (Indrawan, 2017) 49 in the law-making or policy-making process (Rosser, 2004) for making good laws as written in Article 5 letter G of Law 12/2011. 56 Then, it can be concluded that getting involved in a law-making process from the preparation, drafting, and discussion process is community right that should be fulfilled in a lawmaking process. ...
Article
Full-text available
The establishment of the Constitutional Court as the guardian of constitution that protects the citizens’ human rights gives hope for the implementation of “rule of law” principle. The Constitutional Court is expected to play a big role in upholding and protecting the citizens’ constitutional rights through each of its decisions. This expectation has become meaningless since Article 59 (2) of Law Number 8/2011 is declared to have no binding legal force by the Constitutional Court Decision Number 49/PUU-IX/2011. What are the impacts of the elimination of Article 59 (2) which has been formulated in Law Number 7/2020? This research is socio legal studies that uses secondary data that are collected through literature study. The elimination of Article 59 (2) in Law Number 7/2020 shows violation of the rule of law principles. In addition, the legislation products which are legitimized based on Law Number 7/2020 are unable to guarantee the citizens’ constitutional rights.
... The process by which an individual organizes and interprets his sensory inputs and makes sense of his environment [5][6][7][8] is the process that leads to different perceptions. An individual's perception is influenced by factors within the individual, such as experience, thoughts, standard framework, and so on. ...
Article
Full-text available
Since the development of public and social infrastructure, such as road infrastructure, affects people's welfare, regional discrepancies in development are a key problem for Papua's infrastructure development. True, it's a top priority. When planning, executing, and overseeing road building, as it should be with the Trans-Papua route, public awareness and participation in the physical implementation of infrastructure development should be considered. The construction of the Trans-Papua Road drew a negative reaction and a huge amount of criticism from many social circles. A lack of community engagement in the development and implementation of the Trans-Papua Road project, as well as a public perception of ignorance, are accused of causing resistance and conflict. This research is an effort to understand better the awareness of specific communities, which may be used to design a participatory development strategy. The study's focus is on how the public views the Trans-Papua road's development from sociocultural, economic, and environmental viewpoints. The data was gathered through a survey and complemented with statistics from the local Central Statistics Bureau. The results showed that the community and stakeholders have different perspectives and understandings of the Trans-Papua road's construction, and it has been determined that the community should be involved in the planning and implementation of development measures based on the response of the local. This study demonstrates the importance of reducing community-government conflicts, especially those involving protected forest conservation, community empowerment, and transportation network development. The findings of this study can be used to provide recommendations for infrastructure development, particularly in locations where native communities are at threat of conflict. Doi: 10.28991/CEJ-2022-08-05-011 Full Text: PDF
Article
Full-text available
Indonesia's archipelago presents a unique challenge for language education. The land arrange form Merauke in the east (Papua) to Sabang in the west (Sumatera). Diverse communities residing in highland and coastal regions often possess distinct mother tongues, creating disparities in educational access and outcomes. This study examines current language education policies in these two areas, highlighting the existing gaps and proposing strategies to achieve greater equity. Both areas are Wamena (Papua Pegunungan) as the case study of Highland. In addition, the Kendari city (Southeast Sulawesi) is the case study of coastal area. The article explores the specific challenges faced by these regions. Limited access to qualified teachers trained in multilingual education and a lack of resources tailored to local languages hinder effective learning. The current curriculum might not adequately address the needs of students whose primary language differs from the language of instruction. The study proposes a multi-pronged approach to address these issues. Firstly, it emphasizes the importance of recruiting and training teachers equipped to handle multilingual classrooms. Secondly, it advocates for the development of culturally appropriate learning materials that incorporate local languages. Finally, it calls for policy reforms that promote Forum for Linguistic Studies 2024, 6(1) 694 multilingualism and recognize the value of indigenous languages within the education system. By implementing these strategies, Indonesia can work towards a more equitable language education system that empowers students from all backgrounds to succeed. This not only fosters social inclusion but also celebrates the rich linguistic tapestry of the Indonesian nation.
Article
Full-text available
This study aims to show what kind of problems and challenges occur in the middle of Papua Province development, as well as the extent of complexity of these development problems and the challenges of the New Autonomous Region to answer it. We use the systematic literature review method by showing a collection of literature from the Scopus database that discusses the development of Papua and analyzing the literature collection into several clusters. Bibliometric analysis is used to generate statistical models that show the relationship between each study. 151 literature sources were used in this study and produced three clusters namely development process, environment, and communication. From these aspects, several development efforts have been carried out by the government such as collaboration with the private sector, community capacity building through local value development, and the involvement of indigenous peoples. Moreover, there are several things that need to be considered such as land acquisition issues, the difficulty of access, planning and control functions, political intervention and interests, along with the communication system that has not been integrated. The New Autonomous Region can have a narrow span of control so it will optimize supervision and monitoring functions, but there are several things that need to be considered when implementing it such as planning, existing human resources capacity, and financial aspects. There are some limitations in this paper, where we cannot reach some highland areas to directly observe the challenges that occur there. Future research can develop discussions about Papua development through direct observations in those areas.
Article
Pembangunan infrastruktur fasilitas umum dan sosial seperti infrastruktur jalan berpengaruh untuk meningkatkan kesejahteraan masyarakat, sehingga ketimpangan pembangunan antar daerah menjadi perhatian penting dan prioritas pembangunan infrastruktur di Papua. Persepsi dan partisipasi masyarakat dalam perwujudan fisik pembangunan infrastruktur perlu menjadi masukan dan pertimbangan proses perencanaan, implementasi dan pengawasan pembangunan jalan Trans Papua. Keberadaan pembangunan jalan Trans Papua belum sepenuhnya disambut dengan dukungan, menuai banyak kritik dari berbagai kalangan masyarakat. Kurangnya pelibatan warga dan tidak diketahuinya persepsi masyarakat dalam perencanaan dan pelaksanaan pembangunan jalan Trans Papua diduga menimbulkan resistensi dan konflik. Penelitian ini dilakukan untuk menemukan suatu kejelasan kearifan lokal masyarakat yang dapat dijadikan sebagai landasan pengembangan pendekatan pembangunan yang partisipatif. Pertanyaan penelitian adalah bagaimana persepsi masyarakat terhadap pembangunan jalan Trans Papua ditinjau dari aspek sosial budaya, ekonomi dan linkungan. Ditemukan perbedaan persepsi, pemahaman antara masyarakat lokal dan stakeholders dalam pembangunan jalan Trans Papua, diperlukan suatu pelibatan masyarakat dalam aktivitas perencanaan dan implementsi pembangunan. Hal ini, merupakan salah satu upaya meminimalisasi konflikt antara masyarakat dan pemerintah khususnya yang terkait dengan konservasi hutan lindung, isu-isu pemberdayaan masyarakat, maupun persoalan teknis pembangunan jalan.
Chapter
The Indonesian provinces of Papua and West Papua—which together comprise the western half of the island of New Guinea and for the purposes of this paper will be collectively termed West Papua—are rich in both indigenous cultures and natural resources. About 250 ethnic groups live in the West Papua provinces (KPE-IJ 1993), with some of the languages spoken by fewer than 1,000 people.
Article
Full-text available
The Merauke Integrated Food and Energy Estate (MIFEE), launched in 2010 by the Indonesian government, aims to transform 1.2 million hectares of indigenous and forest land in West Papua into large-scaleagribusiness estates for food and bioenergy production. This article looks both at the power structures and geopolitics behind the project and at the emerging resistance to the MIFEE land grab. What is the extent of local opposition to the project? What coalitions between local groups and organized movements and NGOs are developing and what national and international alliances are theyinvolved in? How do they counter the state narrative of MIFEE as a development path for the region? Analyzing key documents of the diff erent organizations and initiatives involved, we examine three distinct but connected narratives of opposition around the discourses of customary forest rights, Indonesian ‘imperialist’ subjugation of Papua, and land reform and food sovereignty. We argue that their relation to each other needs to be rethought in order to overcome internal divisions and to broaden and deepen the social movement opposing the project.
Article
Full-text available
Challenging conventional wisdom, this article argues that Indonesia - long home to both large-scale transmigration programmes and a range of conflicts - has not witnessed transmigrant conflicts. The vast majority of Indonesian transmigrants were resettled in parts of Sumatra which have remained peaceful. In some conflicts, the role of transmigration has been exaggerated. In others, interethnic violence has involved spontaneous migrants rather than state-led transmigrants. We conclude with a discussion of two potential outliers, where violence has been directed towards transmigrants, but only those from disaster-affected regions who arrived en masse. This article argues for a more nuanced understanding of the distinctions between different forms of internal migration, some of which have the potential to spark future violence in recipient areas and communities.
Article
Full-text available
The Merauke Integrated Food and Energy Estate (MIFEE) in Papua, Indonesia, is a state-led mega-project to transform local agriculture through large-scale corporate investment in food crops and biofuels for foreign markets. The project has led to extensive land dispossession, accompanied by devastating social and ecological impacts. This contribution analyzes how discourse regarding food and energy crises has been employed to release land from customary tenure to a coalition of state, corporate and local elite actors. The interests of these actors have converged on the state-led mega-project to transform local agriculture through large-scale corporate investment in food crops and biofuels in the name of national food security.
Article
Global Forest Watch (GFW), which is an international effort to map the condition and development threats to the world's forests is described. Recently, boreal forests which lie between the arctic tundra to the north and the temperate forests to the south have been mapped. These forests are a mosaic of forestlands, rivers, lakes, and wetlands and are mainly constituted by coniferous trees. GFW Russia used an innovative, inverse, stratified approach to identify the forests landscapes of Russia. Less-expensive information was used which decreased the cost of the work without reducing the accuracy of the results.
Article
The International Biodiversity Conference for Sustainable Development in Papua Land (Jayapura, 11-15 November 2009) gathered inputs and best practices from various sources, and initiated commitments towards conservation and sustainable development in one of the earth's areas of richest biodiversity and bio-cultural heritage. The conference resulted in mandating the establishment of a local working group which will mainstream sustainable development. In particular, it is proper development of Papua's social capital that should drive the fight to save one of the earth's most unique yet endangered ecosystems and ways of life.
Article
Papua New Guinea, with its heavy dependence on natural resources, limited economic development in the past two decades, poor record of governance and high-profile separatist conflicts such as the Bougainville civil war, appears to be an exemplar of the ‘Resource Curse’ theory – the notion that natural resources actively undermine economic development. Using a number of examples from a range of scales, this paper argues that what appear to be ‘resource’ conflicts in Papua New Guinea are actually better conceived as conflicts around identity and social relationships. The very different conceptualisation of natural resources in most Melanesian societies – as elements of the social world as much as any external environmental sphere – means that resources become a conduit for local social and political agendas and tensions to be expressed. The nature of traditional conflict in Melanesian societies is discussed as a guide to the better management and resolution of what appear to be ‘resource’ conflicts in Papua New Guinea.