Fires, Smoke Exposure, and Public Health: An Integrative Framework to Maximize Health Benefits From Peatland Restoration

Abstract

Abstract Emissions of particulate matter from fires associated with land management practices in Indonesia contribute to regional air pollution and mortality. We assess the public health benefits in Indonesia, Malaysia, and Singapore from policies to reduce fires by integrating information on fire emissions, atmospheric transport patterns, and population exposure to fine particulate matter (PM2.5). We use adjoint sensitivities to relate fire emissions to PM2.5 for a range of meteorological conditions and find that a Business‐As‐Usual scenario of land use change leads, on average, to 36,000 excess deaths per year into the foreseeable future (the next several decades) across the region. These deaths are largely preventable with fire reduction strategies, such as blocking fires in peatlands, industrial concessions, or protected areas, which reduce the health burden by 66, 45, and 14%, respectively. The effectiveness of these different strategies in mitigating human health impacts depends on the location of fires relative to the population distribution. For example, protecting peatlands through eliminating all fires on such lands would prevent on average 24,000 excess deaths per year into the foreseeable future across the region because, in addition to storing large amounts of fuel, many peatlands are located directly upwind of densely populated areas. We also demonstrate how this framework can be used to prioritize restoration locations for the Indonesian Peatland Restoration Agency based on their ability to reduce pollution exposure and health burden. This scientific framework is publicly available through an online decision support tool that allows stakeholders to readily determine the public health benefits of different land management strategies.

Full text

Fires, Smoke Exposure, and Public Health: An Integrative
Framework to Maximize Health Benefits
From Peatland Restoration
Miriam E. Marlier
1,2
, Tianjia Liu
3
, Karen Yu
4
, Jonathan J. Buonocore
5
,
Shannon N. Koplitz
3
, Ruth S. DeFries
2
, Loretta J. Mickley
4
, Daniel J. Jacob
3,4
, Joel Schwartz
6
,
Budi S. Wardhana
7
, and Samuel S. Myers
6,8
1
The RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA, USA,
2
Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Environmental Biology,
Columbia University, New York, NY, USA,
3
Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Harvard University, Cambridge,
MA, USA,
4
School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA,
5
Center for Climate,
Health, and the Global Environment, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Harvard University, Boston, MA, USA,
6
Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Harvard University, Boston, MA, USA,
7
Badan Restorasi Gambut, Jakarta,
Indonesia,
8
Harvard University Center for the Environment, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA
Abstract Emissions of particulate matter from fires associated with land management practices in
Indonesia contribute to regional air pollution and mortality. We assess the public health benefits in
Indonesia, Malaysia, and Singapore from policies to reduce fires by integrating information on fire
emissions, atmospheric transport patterns, and population exposure to fine particulate matter (PM
2.5
). We
use adjoint sensitivities to relate fire emissions to PM
2.5
for a range of meteorological conditions and find that
a Business‐As‐Usual scenario of land use change leads, on average, to 36,000 excess deaths per year into
the foreseeable future (the next several decades) across the region. These deaths are largely preventable with
fire reduction strategies, such as blocking fires in peatlands, industrial concessions, or protected areas,
which reduce the health burden by 66, 45, and 14%, respectively. The effectiveness of these different
strategies in mitigating human health impacts depends on the location of fires relative to the population
distribution. For example, protecting peatlands through eliminating all fires on such lands would prevent on
average 24,000 excess deaths per year into the foreseeable future across the region because, in addition to
storing large amounts of fuel, many peatlands are located directly upwind of densely populated areas. We
also demonstrate how this framework can be used to prioritize restoration locations for the Indonesian
Peatland Restoration Agency based on their ability to reduce pollution exposure and health burden. This
scientific framework is publicly available through an online decision support tool that allows stakeholders to
readily determine the public health benefits of different land management strategies.
Plain Language Summary Regularly occurring fires in Indonesia are associated with drought
conditions and agricultural practices. These fires contribute to dangerous levels of particulate matter
pollution that are harmful to public health throughout the region. We develop an interdisciplinary scientific
framework to connect land use decisions with fire activity and public health outcomes. Our estimates find
that if current trends continue, exposure to air pollution from Indonesian fires would cause, on average,
36,000 excess deaths per year across Indonesia, Malaysia, and Singapore. These deaths can be prevented
through land management strategies, which would reduce the number of deaths attributable to air pollution
from fires. Current plans to restore peatlands would reduce regional fire emissions‐related mortality by
approximately 66% if fully implemented.
1. Introduction
Over the past several decades, biomass burning in Indonesia has become a substantial contributor to glo-
bal fire emissions (van der Werf et al., 2017) and health impacts due to regional air pollution (Johnston
et al., 2012; Koplitz et al., 2016; Marlier et al., 2013). Most recently, the severe haze that blanketed equa-
torial Asia during 2015 was a stark reminder of the climate change and public health consequences asso-
ciated with land management activities in Indonesia. The fires, which peaked during September and
October of 2015, released CO
2
emissions comparable to Japan or India's annual fossil fuel emissions
(Field et al., 2016), exposed more than 69 million people to unhealthy air (Crippa et al., 2016), and
©2019. The Authors.
This is an open access article under the
terms of the Creative Commons
Attribution License, which permits use,
distribution and reproduction in any
medium, provided the original work is
properly cited.
RESEARCH ARTICLE
10.1029/2019GH000191
Key Points:
•Current trends in Indonesia's fire
activity would lead to 37,000 excess
deaths per year across the region
from air pollution exposure
•Restoring peatlands could reduce
fire‐related mortality by nearly 70%
•Our integrative scientific tool can be
used to support land management
strategies most beneficial for public
health
Supporting Information:
•Supporting Information S1
Correspondence to:
S. S. Myers,
smyers@hsph.harvard.edu
Citation:
Marlier, M. E., Liu, T., Yu, K.,
Buonocore, J. J., Koplitz, S. N., DeFries,
R. S., et al. (2019). Fires, smoke
exposure, and public health: An
integrative framework to maximize
health benefits from peatland
restoration. GeoHealth,3,178–189.
https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GH000191
Received 13 FEB 2019
Accepted 4 JUN 2019
Accepted article online 24 JUL 2019
Published online 24 JUL 2019
The copyright line for this article was
changed on 7 AUG 2019 after original
online publication.
MARLIER ET AL. 178

cost more than $16 billion USD, without considering long‐term health or ecosystem impacts (World Bank
Group, 2016).
In this study, we present a novel approach that integrates information on the drivers of fire emissions in
Indonesia (Marlier, DeFries, Kim, Gaveau, et al., 2015; Marlier, DeFries, Kim, Koplitz, et al., 2015;
Marlier, DeFries, Pennington, Nelson, et al., 2015), the transport of smoke to downwind regional popula-
tion centers (Kim et al., 2015), and the resulting population exposure to air pollution (Koplitz et al., 2016)
in order to quantify the health impacts of different land management scenarios. We apply this frame-
work to prioritize locations for peatland restoration sites to reduce population exposure to fire emissions
in Indonesia, Malaysia, and Singapore and to develop an online decision support tool to evaluate the effi-
cacy of other potential policy scenarios. This integrative framework is applicable to fire‐prone regions
around the world to develop strategies that reduce negative health outcomes associated with
biomass burning.
Indonesia's fire activity depends on complex interactions between land use and land cover (LULC) change,
the extent of burning on carbon‐rich peatlands, and meteorological variability. Indonesia's LULC has rapidly
changed over the past few decades (Figure 1). Satellite observations reveal substantial forest loss and degra-
dation across the islands of Sumatra and Kalimantan (Indonesian Borneo) in particular (Margono et al.,
2014). Although industrial‐scale plantations account for nearly half of Indonesia's deforestation (Abood
et al., 2015), monitoring forest degradation, such as logging, is also important because roughly 80% of
degraded forests are eventually cleared (Miettinen et al., 2012). In addition, the magnitude of fire emissions
depends on burning in fuel‐rich peatlands. Peatlands are naturally protected from fire by a high water table
Figure 1. (a) Distribution of 2005 land use and land cover across Indonesia (Hansen et al., 2013; Margono et al., 2014), including intact primary forest, degraded
primary forest, nonforested areas, and combined tree plantations and secondary forest. (b) Areas of change from 2005 to 2010 (light shades) and stable areas that did
not change (dark shades) in peatland and nonpeatland areas.
10.1029/2019GH000191
GeoHealth
MARLIER ET AL. 179

but become highly flammable following drainage and degradation (Wösten et al., 2008). Nearly 80% of tro-
pical peatlands are located in Indonesia (Page et al., 2011).
Fire activity also varies with meteorology. Higher fire activity typically occurs during droughts associated
with El Niño (van der Werf et al., 2008), but recent fire events in non‐El Niño years indicate that localized,
intense fires are associated with other meteorological mechanisms (Gaveau et al., 2014; Koplitz et al., 2018).
There is a nonlinear sensitivity of fires to drought conditions, particularly below 4‐mm/day precipitation
(Field et al., 2016), and anthropogenic influences have increased the susceptibility of the landscape to fires
during droughts (Field et al., 2009). Although undisturbed forests rarely burn, large inadvertent fire events
(escaped fires) associated with combined anthropogenic and drought influences have been observed since
the 1960s in Sumatra and 1980s in Kalimantan (Field et al., 2009).
Fires emit organic and black carbon (OC and BC) aerosols (in addition to trace gases) that are the primary
components of to smoke‐related surface particulate matter concentrations (Koplitz et al., 2016). Although
there are a limited number of epidemiological observational studies focused on health outcomes from fire
pollution in equatorial Asia (Ramakreshnan et al., 2018), at a global scale, exposure to fine particulate matter
(particles with diameter <2.5 μm, PM
2.5
) from fires is associated with all‐cause mortality, respiratory symp-
toms, and cardiovascular outcomes (Reid et al., 2016), including serious health impacts for children (Rees,
2016). Public health impacts of fires depend on the magnitude of emissions, atmospheric transport patterns,
spatial proximity to population centers, and underlying population characteristics. Fire activity and conse-
quent health impacts vary with meteorological conditions, with a roughly sevenfold increase in estimated
mortality observed between opposite phases of the El Niño‐Southern Oscillation (Johnston et al., 2012;
Marlier et al., 2013). Atmospheric modeling studies suggest that exceedances above World Health
Organization air quality guidelines across the region are largely due to the contribution of Indonesian fires
(Marlier et al., 2013). Singapore, for example, is repeatedly affected by fire emissions from peatlands in
Sumatra and, to a lesser extent, in Kalimantan (Kim et al., 2015; Marlier, DeFries, Kim, Gaveau, et al.,
2015; Reddington et al., 2014).
Potential policy interventions to reduce fires include the Indonesian government's moratorium on granting
new industrial plantation concessions in peatlands or primary forests and programs such as Reducing
Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD+). The Peatland Restoration Agency (Badan
Restorasi Gambut, BRG) was recently established following the 2015 haze event. BRG's mission is to restore
the hydrology of at least 2 million hectares of damaged peatlands in Sumatra, Kalimantan, and Papua over a
5‐year period (https://brg.go.id). Other policy interventions include supply chain certification schemes, such
as the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil. Finally, policies focused on cross‐border health impacts include
Singapore's Transboundary Haze Pollution Act, which holds plantation companies liable for proven contri-
butions to transboundary haze (Lee et al., 2016; Tan, 2015).
There is growing consensus on the need for government support of fire‐free land management alternatives
such as mechanical clearing or wet peat soil cultivation in order to avoid the public health impacts of fires
(Carmenta et al., 2017). In this study, we prioritize locations for reducing future fires in order to reduce
cumulative downwind exposure to smoke PM
2.5
from 2020 to 2030, based on future scenarios of LULC
and land management. Our interdisciplinary scientific framework to evaluate the public health implica-
tions of potential land use decisions in Indonesia is publicly available through an online decision
support tool.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Overview
Our modeling framework consisted of the following steps (Figure S1 in the supporting information): (1)
quantify trends in past LULC, (2) estimate relationships between observed fire emissions and past LULC,
(3) develop a spatially explicit BAU scenario of future trends in LULC and associated fire emissions (from
Step 2), (4) calculate the sensitivities of different receptor locations to the location of fire emissions, (5) quan-
tify future exposure to air pollution from fires, and (6) estimate population‐level future health outcomes. We
use the BAU future scenario as a baseline case against which to compare multiple spatially explicit fire
reduction strategies.
10.1029/2019GH000191
GeoHealth
MARLIER ET AL. 180

2.2. Land Use and Land Cover
The LULC classification was based on the Margono et al. (2014) data set for 2005 and 2010, which mapped
primary intact forests, primary degraded forests (subject to forest utilization, such as logging), and nonfor-
ested areas. We aggregated the original 30‐m resolution to 1‐km resolution. We also made several modifica-
tions. First, within the large nonforested areas (67% and 44% of total area in Sumatra and Kalimantan in
2005), we incorporated the Hansen et al. (2013) Global Forest Change (v1.4) data set to further allocate these
areas into areas with tree cover (tree plantations or regrowth) and without tree cover (shrubland, agriculture,
or cleared areas). Hansen et al. (2013) mapped annual forest change but did not distinguish between primary
(intact or degraded) forests, secondary forests, or tree plantations, so by combining with Margono et al.
(2014), we could separate an aggregated tree plantation and secondary forest class from other nonforested
areas. Second, we separated peatlands, which have a high fire emissions potential, from nonpeatland areas
for all LULC types (Ministry of Agriculture, 2015; Figure 1).
We used Dinamica EGO Version 3.0.17 (Soares‐Filho et al., 2009) to simulate future LULC. Dinamica EGO is
a spatially explicit model that uses a Bayesian Weights of Evidence approach to calculate the effect of differ-
ent spatial variables on a given LULC transition and estimate the spatial probabilities of a given transition.
Input data sets were static variables for landform type (Margono et al., 2014), soil type (FAO, IIASA, ISRIC,
ISSACAS, JRC, 2012), elevation (Jarvis et al., 2008), slope, protected areas (World Resources Institute,
2017a), oil palm, logging, and wood fiber industrial concessions (World Resources Institute, 2017b, 2017c,
2017e), population density (CIESIN, 2016), distance to roads (CIESIN, 2013), distance to rivers (https://
hydrosheds.cr.usgs.gov), and distance to oil palm mills (World Resources Institute, 2017d), as well as
dynamic variables that were updated at each model time step and represented the distance to each indivi-
dual LULC class. We checked for multicollinearity of all input data sets for a variance inflation factor <5.
Spatial patterns of change were calibrated with observed behavior from 2005 to 2010.
Using the 2005 and 2010 maps as a training period (Figure S2), we simulated a BAU scenario in 5‐year incre-
ments from 2010 to 2030 (Figure S3). The BAU scenario assumes that observed 2005–2010 trends continue in
the future and is used as our baseline estimate from which we explore the impact of multiple fire reduction
strategies. In 2005, 40% of peatlands and 31% of nonpeatlands in Sumatra were covered by intact or degraded
primary forests; by 2010 this had declined to 33% and 30%, respectively (Figures 1 and S3). In Kalimantan,
intact and degraded forest coverage declined from 49% to 45% in peatlands and 57% to 56% in nonpeatlands
from 2005 to 2010; much of the remaining forest is located in mountainous areas that are difficult to access.
2.3. Fire Emissions
We downscaled 0.25° × 0.25° emissions estimates from the Global Fire Emissions Database version 4s
(GFED4s; van der Werf et al., 2017) with 1‐km
2
MODerate resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer
(MODIS) Collection 6 fire radiative power (FRP) observations from the Aqua and Terra satellites (Giglio
et al., 2016). The Collection 6 algorithm retrieves FRP with a radiance‐based approach, which decreases
FRP in all but the most intense fires and helps to capture large fires potentially hidden by smoke and clouds
(Giglio et al., 2016). As the original 0.25° × 0.25° fire emissions are too coarse, the downscaled 1‐km
2
emis-
sions are used to estimate the contribution of individual LULC transitions to monthly emissions while also
retaining meteorological variability from 2005 to 2009.
To produce future fire emissions estimates for the BAU scenario over 2010–2029, we first calculated scaling
factors, or emissions rates, based on observed monthly fire emissions for each LULC transition type over
2005–2009 for each 0.25° grid cell. Our results are likely somewhat conservative as fire emissions in this per-
iod were slightly lower than the 20‐year average (1.3 Tg OC + BC for 2005–2009 versus 1.6 Tg OC + BC for
1997–2016 in Indonesia, for example; van der Werf et al., 2017). In addition, the 2006 El Niño was not as
severe as other El Niño events such as 1997 or 2015 (Koplitz et al., 2016; Marlier et al., 2013).
We also accounted for grid cells with nonzero GFEDv4s emissions and no FRP observations by distributing
emissions according to the ratio of area for each LULC transition type. We then multiplied individual LULC
transition types by the associated monthly emissions per unit area. Fires may occur repeatedly at the same
location, for example, burning associated with agricultural maintenance activities or in degraded areas that
are susceptible to fires during drought conditions. In these cases, we apply the average associated emissions.
We also matched the different fire types from our 1‐km
2
estimates according to GFED4 categories and
applied associated emissions factors for OC and BC (Akagi et al., 2011; van der Werf et al., 2017).
10.1029/2019GH000191
GeoHealth
MARLIER ET AL. 181

2.4. GEOS‐Chem Adjoint Model
Following Kim et al. (2015) and Koplitz et al. (2016), we used the adjoint of the GEOS‐Chem chemical trans-
port model v8‐02‐01 (www.geos‐chem.org; Bey et al., 2001; Henze et al., 2007) to calculate the sensitivities of
population‐weighted PM
2.5
concentrations in three countries (Singapore, Malaysia, and Indonesia) to regio-
nal fire emissions and their spatiotemporal distributions (hereafter referred to as adjoint sensitivities).
GEOS‐Chem is driven by GEOS‐5 assimilated meteorology from the NASA Global Modeling and
Assimilation Office. Our simulations were conducted at 0.5° × 0.67° horizontal resolution over the nested
East Asia domain (70°–150°E, 11°S–55°N; Chen et al., 2009). We focused on OC and BC, the primary con-
stituents of smoke aerosol; the GEOS‐Chem OC/BC simulation is described in detail in Wang et al.
(2011). A forward simulation for the high fire period of July–November 2006 using modified GFED3 emis-
sions reproduced PM
10
observations in the Malaysian Peninsula and Borneo with a spatial correlation coef-
ficient r= 0.84 (50 sites) and a mean bias of −27% (Kim et al., 2015). Multiplication of the adjoint sensitivities
by the emissions enables us to immediately infer the smoke exposure in the receptor regions for any fire
emissions scenario, since the relationship between emissions at the source and smoke exposure at the recep-
tor is assumed to be linear.
For this work, we calculated the adjoint sensitivities given meteorological conditions for the years 2005–
2009, yielding a set of monthly mean sensitivity maps spanning these five years. While meteorology is linked
to droughts and the incidence of fires, this approach also allowed us to capture some of the interannual var-
iation in the meteorological processes, such as winds and precipitation, which affect smoke transport to the
receptors. This ensemble of years included the 2006 El Niño, characterized by strong drought conditions in
equatorial Asia. By assuming that the future interannual variability in transport is similar to that in
2005–2009, we can then multiply the sequence of 2005–2009 sensitivities by the future BAU emissions
scenario, repeating the sequence every 5 years. In this manner, we derive future exposure to surface PM
2.5
at the receptors from fire emissions. Validation of modeled PM
2.5
concentrations is described in the
supporting information.
2.5. Health Impact Modeling
Population data for 2005 was from the UN‐adjusted GPW data set (CIESIN, 2016). Country‐level popula-
tion age structure was back‐calculated from the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) project to subset the
gridded population data set to adults 25 years of age and older (Global Burden of Disease Collaborative
Network, 2017). We then used background mortality rates for these countries from the GBD project
(Global Burden of Disease Collaborative Network, 2017) to produce a gridded data set with population
25 years of age and older and background mortality estimates. Our population data do not reflect changes
over time as this information was not available at the needed spatial resolution. This likely makes our
estimates somewhat conservative due to expected population increases and demographic shifts, but hold-
ing other factors constant over time, the error is directly proportionate to the change in population within
the age group at risk.
To calculate the excess mortality due to exposure to air pollution from fires occurring mainly in the year fol-
lowing exposure, we used the model‐calculated contribution of fire emissions to PM
2.5
. To represent the rela-
tionship between PM
2.5
exposure and mortality risk in adults, we used a function with a slope of 1.03%
increase in annual all‐cause mortality per 1‐μg/m
3
increase in annual average PM
2.5
concentrations (95%
CI: 0.97–1.11%), from Vodonos et al. (2018), a 53‐study meta‐analysis of mortality risk and long‐term
PM
2.5
exposures. This study used a multivariate linear random effects model and fit a nonlinear parametric
function to estimate the slope of the relationship between PM
2.5
exposure and mortality risk. While our
model framework does require the use of a linear function, this function represents a linear approximation
of an underlying nonlinear concentration response function that best fits the modeled exposures in this
region. For each scenario, the population‐weighted PM
2.5
concentrations were matched to this curve to find
the percentage increase in mortality risk, and then this percentage increase in mortality risk was multiplied
by background mortality rate and the total adult population for each receptor country. This method yielded
the PM
2.5
attributable mortality with and without fires, while incorporating nonlinearity at high concentra-
tions. To find the mortality attributable to the fires, we calculated the difference between the two
PM
2.5
estimates.
10.1029/2019GH000191
GeoHealth
MARLIER ET AL. 182

To calculate the health burden in children, we used a method similar that used for adults. We used total
population data from GPW (CIESIN, 2016) and back‐calculated the proportion of children that were under
5 years of age from the GBD (Global Burden of Disease Collaborative Network, 2017). To calculate excess
deaths in children under 5, we applied results of a meta‐analysis showing an association between PM
2.5
exposure and acute lower respiratory infection (ALRI) in children under 5 (Mehta et al., 2011). This analysis
indicated a 12% increase in risk of ALRI (95% CI: 3–30%) per 10‐μg/m
3
increase in annual average ambient
PM
2.5
exposure. We produced a concentration‐response function with a linear 1.2% increase in mortality per
1‐μg/m
3
increase in annual average ambient PM
2.5
between 0 and 50 μg/m
3
, and log‐linear at exposure levels
above 50 μg/m
3
, consistent with the concentration response function (CRF) from the GBD at annual ambi-
ent air pollution levels ≥50 μg/m
3
.
2.6. Decision‐Support Tool
The steps above were integrated into an online software tool to support land management decision‐making.
The tool quantifies the impact of blocking fire activity in targeted areas—such as peatlands, industrial con-
cessions, protected areas, and planned restoration activities by BRG—on air quality and public health
impacts. The online tool also incorporates the flexibility for the user to choose from past fire emissions years
(2005 to present) and future fire emissions (until 2029), variable meteorology (2005 to 2009), and receptor
regions (Indonesia, Malaysia, and Singapore). Users can also design custom scenarios by exploring fire
reduction strategies in individual provinces.
3. Results
3.1. Development of Future Business‐As‐Usual Scenario
We first estimated monthly observed emissions for 2005–2010, matching the temporal (5 years) and spatial
(1‐km
2
) resolution of the LULC maps (Figure 2). When aggregated to the island or country scale, the largest
proportion of emissions contributions was from stable (nontransitioning) LULC classes, especially the com-
bined tree plantations and secondary forest LULC class, followed by nonforested areas, rather than from
direct deforestation (Figure S4). Fires in peatlands contributed more to total emissions despite having rela-
tively small total areas, for both aggregated (Figure 2) and individual LULC classes (Figure S4). Finally, most
emissions occurred during the months of July to October, and the highest fire years were during 2006 and
2009 El Niño conditions, although Sumatra exhibits a small spring burning season as well (Figure S5).
Our BAU scenario of 2010–2030 LULC projected declines in intact forests and an expansion of the tree plan-
tation and secondary forest class, as well as nonforest (Figure S3). In Sumatra, total forest cover declines
from 31% to 24% from 2010 to 2030 and forest cover within peatlands declines from 33% to 8%. BAU trends
in Kalimantan predict a decline in intact forest cover from 54% to 49% and 45% to 28% in peatland intact for-
ests. Much of this forest clearance on peatlands is due to expansion of both nonforested areas (13 to 29%) and
plantations and secondary forests (54 to 62%) in Sumatra, and nonforested areas in Kalimantan (11 to 27%).
For the analysis of fire emissions and health outcomes associated with the BAU LULC scenario, we focused
on the upcoming decade from January 2020 to December 2029. The cumulative emissions over this 10‐year
period associated with BAU are 12.7‐Tg OC + BC (Table 1). Across the three receptor regions, this produces
July to October PM
2.5
average population‐weighted exposures of 6.6 μg/m
3
in Indonesia, 5.5 μg/m
3
in
Malaysia, and 6.0 μg/m
3
in Singapore and an average of 36,000 excess adult all‐cause deaths every year
for the 2020–2029 period. Of these deaths, 92% occur in Indonesia, 7% in Malaysia, and 1% in Singapore.
Total regional mortality varies largely with meteorological conditions, ranging from <100 to 80,000 annual
deaths depending on the year. This exposure is also associated with 1,100 deaths per year for children under
the age of 5 due to ALRI, with 99% of cases in Indonesia (Table S1). While we have projected for the decade
from 2020 to 2030, sociodemographic trends suggest that these numbers are likely to be conservative esti-
mates of health effects for the ensuing several decades.
3.2. Fire Reduction Strategies
Different land management strategies can alter the spatial location and magnitude of fire emissions. The
adjoint modeling framework applied here examines where fire activity has a disproportionate impact on
air quality on selected receptors downwind (Figure 3). Blocking fires in all peatland areas would reduce
July to October OC + BC emissions by 65% relative to BAU and average smoke PM
2.5
exposure by 61% in
10.1029/2019GH000191
GeoHealth
MARLIER ET AL. 183

Indonesia, 71% in Malaysia, and 68% in Singapore (Figure 4). The reduction in average annual adult all‐
cause mortality is broadly similar, reducing deaths by 65% in Indonesia, 73% in Malaysia, and 70% in
Singapore, relative to BAU (Table 1).
We explored the impact of blocking fires in all industrial oil palm, wood pulp, and logging concessions,
which are examples of the options available in the online decision support tool. Blocking such fires reduced
July to October OC + BC emissions by 39% and average smoke PM
2.5
exposures by 38% in Indonesia, 60% in
Malaysia, and 47% in Singapore. We also blocked fires in existing conservation areas, which reduced emis-
sions by 24%. Unlike the other scenarios, this scenario reduced PM
2.5
exposure more in Indonesia (17%) than
in Malaysia or Singapore (9% and 15%, respectively), with a similar distribution for associated mortality.
While the scenarios above are focused on average smoke exposures and health responses over the course of a
decade, there is also substantial interannual variability. This is largely due to the interplay between meteor-
ological variability and fire activity, such as higher fire activity occurring during a drought year. For our
baseline BAU case, our individual annual exposure estimates were calculated by repeating 2005 to 2009
meteorology sequentially in two 5‐year periods for 2020–2029. We find wide variation in smoke exposure
Figure 2. (a) Total emissions estimates (Tg DM) and (b) area (km
2
) for Sumatra, Kalimantan, and all of Indonesia, over
2005–2009. Emissions and area are proportioned into peatlands and nonpeatlands that were stable over the time period or
transitioned to a new land use or land cover category. Percentages above the stacked bars represent the contribution of
peatlands (stable and transitions) to total emissions or area and indicate the disproportionate influence of peatlands on
total emissions.
Table 1
Cumulative July–October Indonesian fire emissions (Tg OC + BC), average July–October smoke exposure (μg/m
3
PM
2.5
), and estimated annual average future mor-
tality for Indonesia, Malaysia, and Singapore, from January 2020 to December 2029
Scenario
Jul–Oct total
emissions
(Tg OC + BC)
Jul–Oct mean smoke
exposure (μg/m
3
)
Annual adult
all‐cause mortality
Indonesia Malaysia Singapore Indonesia Malaysia Singapore
BAU 12.7 6.6 5.5 6 33,000 (31,000–36,000) 2,400 (2,200–2,600) 360 (340–380)
Remove
Fires from:
Peatlands 4.4 2.6 1.6 1.9 12,000 (11,000–13,000) 630 (590–680) 110 (100–110)
Concessions 7.7 4.1 2.2 3.2 19,000 (18,000–20,000) 900 (850–980) 180 (170–200)
Conservation areas 9.6 5.5 5 5.1 29,000 (27,000–31,000) 2,100 (2,000–2,300) 300 (290–330)
BRG sites 7.7 4.1 4.2 3.2 22,000 (21,000–24,000) 1,800 (1,700–2,000) 190 (180–210)
Note. First row provides estimates for Business‐As‐Usual (BAU) scenario, and the remaining rows give reductions in emissions, exposure, and health impacts
associated with blocking fire emissions in peatlands, industrial concessions, conservation areas, and BRG sites. Ranges in mortality reflect uncertainties in
the concentration response function.
10.1029/2019GH000191
GeoHealth
MARLIER ET AL. 184

in different years. For example, Singapore experiences 20.1 μg/m
3
in a dry year (such as the 2006 El Niño)
but only 0.35 μg/m
3
in a low‐fire year.
3.3. Priority Conservation Areas
Indonesia's BRG has proposed priority peatland restoration locations in eastern Sumatra and southern
Kalimantan. These restoration activities aim to restore peatland hydrology to a more natural state. Since
the benefit that each individual site could have on reduced fire incidence is highly site specific and variable
(Konecny et al., 2016), we explored how our modeling framework could be used to determine which sites
would have the most beneficial impact on public health for downwind populations considering a suite of
restoration efforts across the a 0.25° grid cell (Table 1). The model prioritizes different restoration efforts
for reducing PM
2.5
concentrations, selecting sites in eastern Sumatra for all receptors, but with a more south-
ern Sumatra focus for the Indonesia receptor. An example of the online tool output is shown in Figure S6. On
average, blocking fires in BRG sites would reduce adult mortality by 34% in Indonesia, 22% in Malaysia, and
46% in Singapore. The tool also calculates the top five priority locations of all BRG sites that are most ben-
eficial to public health in terms of reducing PM
2.5
concentrations for the receptor of interest.
Figure 3. GEOS‐Chem adjoint sensitivities [(μg/m
3
) / (g/m
2
/s)] of the three population‐weighted receptor regions (a
Singapore, b Indonesia, and c Malaysia) to the contribution of particulate matter emissions in each grid cell. These
examples are for July to October of the 2006 meteorological year. We note that there is an error in the units presented in
similar plots of adjoint sensitivities in Kim et al. (2015); Figure 5) and Koplitz et al. (2016); Figure S3).
10.1029/2019GH000191
GeoHealth
MARLIER ET AL. 185

4. Discussion
We present a novel approach, based on integration of land use science, atmospheric modeling, and public
health, for evaluating the implications of different land management scenarios in Indonesia on regional pub-
lic health outcomes over the coming decade. This end‐to‐end framework is also relevant to other fire‐prone
regions around the world. We found that the effectiveness of different strategies for improving public health
outcomes depends on the spatial relationship between the location of fires and population centers and the
atmospheric transport patterns that carry emissions from regions experiencing fire to population centers.
Science‐based decisions about allocation of scarce restoration and fire reduction strategies require informa-
tion that is not necessarily intuitive. The online software tool allows decision‐makers to readily assess the
public health outcomes associated with land use decisions.
We used a BAU case to explore how alternative land management scenarios could reduce fire emissions, pol-
lution exposure, and public health outcomes in adults and children. Protecting peatlands from fire would
reduce July to October total fire emissions by 65% and average smoke exposure by 61% in Indonesia, 71%
in Malaysia, and 68% in Singapore. Overall, we calculate that peatland protection could prevent on average
22,000, 1,700, and 250 average excess deaths per year in Indonesia, Malaysia, and Singapore, respectively,
into the foreseeable future. If all BRG sites in peatlands are restored, the estimated benefit would be reduc-
tions of 11,000, 520, and 160 average deaths per year, respectively.
There are several limitations to this work, but we are primarily focused on the relative changes between a
BAU scenario and other fire reduction strategies, an approach which likely helps to reduce the impact of
Figure 4. Contribution of PM
2.5
(μg/m
3
) from fires in individual grid cells to three population‐weighted receptor regions:
Indonesia, Malaysia, and Singapore. Example shows how the contribution shifts under the (a, c, and e) Business‐As‐Usual
scenario, compared with (c, d, and f) protecting peatlands from fires. These examples show the 2006 meteorological
year and 2020 emissions. Mean July–October smoke PM
2.5
exposure is shown inset.
10.1029/2019GH000191
GeoHealth
MARLIER ET AL. 186

these uncertainties. First, we used LULC maps from 2005 and 2010, as these were based on a consistent
methodology to analyze changes over time; newer LULC maps are not always compatible because of chan-
ging data sets and methodology (Miettinen et al., 2016). Second, the GFED4s fire emissions inventory and
MODIS fire detections may miss fires during peak burning times, which would make our estimates conser-
vative. GFED4s currently uses MODIS C5.1 MCD64A1 burned area (van der Werf et al., 2017), which under-
estimates the contribution from small fires relative to C6 (Giglio, 2016) and therefore implies lower‐than‐
expected fire emissions. There are also improvements in previously unclassified grid cells and omission
error. Third, emissions factors of OC and BC from tropical peatland burning are uncertain. Information from
new field campaigns suggests that our results may be conservative (Roulston et al., 2018; Wooster et al.,
2018). Fourth, there is uncertainty in the health impacts, with our estimates based on studies in the U.S.
and Europe. As these estimates are based on epidemiology done on developed countries, they reflect emis-
sions sources, particle constituents, and size distributions, and health care infrastructure of developed coun-
tries. Further, these health impacts do not consider the likelihood of increased baseline risk of
cardiovascular disease caused by future demographic shifts. Our approach is standard for air pollution
health impact assessments, since doing primary epidemiology would involve recruiting a cohort, collecting
data on air pollution exposures and relevant confounders, and following them over long periods of time.
Unless the entire population is being followed individually and all appropriate confounders are controlled
for, an epidemiological approach will not provide a full accounting of impact. Population‐level data are
not sufficient since it cannot account for confounders and other population‐level changes. Incorporating
newly available data on health outcomes (as well as other input data sets) is a future extension of this work.
Finally, although climate changes could alter relationships between fire and atmospheric transport, we do
not explore these relationships in the online tool as we are focused on near‐term changes. The influence
of climate is an area of future work.
The online tool is publicly available at https://smokepolicytool.users.earthengine.app/view/smoke‐policy‐
tool. While we focused on the maximum benefits of blocking fires in peatlands, industrial concessions,
and protected areas, users can also define their own fire reduction strategies in individual provinces and
evaluate the benefits for air quality and public health outcomes. For example, we used the tool to rank pro-
posed peatland conservation sites from BRG.
5. Conclusion
In this study, we present a novel approach that integrates information on the drivers of fire emissions in
Indonesia, the transport of smoke to downwind regional population centers, and the resulting population
exposure to air pollution. As a result, this approach quantifies health impacts of different land management
scenarios today and into the future. Using this framework, we evaluate the health impact of future fires
under different land management scenarios and find that a BAU scenario is likely to lead to an average of
36,000 excess deaths annually into the foreseeable future. However, approximately 66% of this excess mor-
tality could be averted through aggressive peatland restoration efforts. We anticipate that similar integrated
approaches might be effective in developing optimal policy approaches to reducing health impacts from bio-
mass burning in other parts of the world.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest relevant to this study.
References
Abood, S. A., Lee, J. S. H., Burivalova, Z., Garcia‐Ulloa, J., & Koh, L. P. (2015). Relative contributions of the logging, fiber, oil palm, and
mining industries to forest loss in Indonesia. Conservation Letters,8(1), 58–67. http://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12103
Akagi, S. K., Yokelson, R. J., Wiedinmyer, C., Alvarado, M. J., Reid, J. S., Karl, T., et al. (2011). Emission factors for open and domestic
biomass burning for use in atmospheric models. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics,11(9), 4039–4072. http://doi.org/10.5194/acp‐11‐
4039‐2011
Bey, I., Jacob, D. J., Yantosca, R. M., Logan, J. A., Field, B. D., Fiore, A. M., et al. (2001). Global modeling of tropospheric chemistry with
assimilated meteorology: Model description and evaluation. Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres,106(D19), 23,073–23,095.
https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JD000807
Carmenta, R., Zabala, A., Daeli, W., & Phelps, J. (2017). Perceptions across scales of governance and the Indonesian peatland fires. Global
Environmental Change,46,50–59. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2017.08.001
10.1029/2019GH000191
GeoHealth
MARLIER ET AL. 187
Acknowledgments
This work was funded by the
Rockefeller Foundation and the
Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation
through the Health & Ecosystems:
Analysis of Linkages (HEAL) program.
We also acknowledge the Winslow
Foundation for their support.
Development of the adjoint tool was
funded by the Harvard Dean's
Competitive Program for Promising
Scholarship. We thank the Nick Clinton
and the Google Earth Engine team for
their assistance. We thank Montira
Pongsiri for helpful discussions. All
data sets are publicly available at
https://smokepolicytool.users.
earthengine.app/view/smoke‐policy‐
tool, and codes are available upon
request.

Chen, D., Wang, Y., McElroy, M. B., He, K., Yantosca, R. M., & Le Sager, P. (2009). Regional CO pollution and export in China simulated by
the high‐resolution nested‐grid GEOS‐Chem model. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics,9(11), 3825–3839. http://doi.org/10.5194/acp‐9‐
3825‐2009
CIESIN (2013). Global Roads Open Access Data Set, Version 1 (gROADSv1). Palisades, NY: NASA Socioeconomic Data and Applications
Center (SEDAC). https://doi.org/10.7927/H4VD6WCT
CIESIN (2016). Gridded Population of the World, Version 4 (GPWv4): Population density adjusted to match 2015 revision UN WPP country
totals. Palisades, NY: NASA Socioeconomic Data and Applications Center (SEDAC). https://doi.org/10.7927/H4HX19NJ
Crippa, P., Castruccio, S., Archer‐Nicholls, S., Lebron, G. B., Kuwata, M., Thota, A., et al. (2016). Population exposure to hazardous air
quality due to the 2015 fires in equatorial Asia. Scientific Reports,6(1), 1–9. http://doi.org/10.1038/srep37074
FAO, IIASA, ISRIC, ISSACAS, JRC. (2012). Harmonized World Soil Database (version 1.2). FAO, Rome, Italy and IIASA, Laxenburg,
Austria.
Field, R. D., van der Werf, G. R., Fanin, T., Fetzer, E. J., Fuller, R., Jethva, H., et al. (2016). Indonesian fire activity and smoke pollution in
2015 show persistent nonlinear sensitivity to El Niño‐induced drought. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,113(33),
9204–9209. http://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1524888113
Field, R. D., van der Werf, G. R., & Shen, S. S. P. (2009). Human amp lification of drought‐induced biomass burning in Indonesia since 1960.
Nature Geoscience,2(3), 185–188. https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo443
Gaveau, D. L. A., Salim, M. A., Hergoualc'h, K., Locatelli, B., Sloan, S., Wooster, M., et al. (2014). Major atmospheric emissions from peat
fires in Southeast Asia during non‐drought years: Evidence from the 2013 Sumatran fires. Scientific Reports,4(1). http://doi.org/10.1038/
srep06112
Giglio, L. (2016). Collection 6 MODIS burned area product users guide version 1.0, 1–26.
Giglio, L., Schroeder, W., & Justice, C. O. (2016). The collection 6 MODIS active fire detection algorithm and fire products. Remote Sensing
of Environment,178,31–41. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2016.02.054
Global Burden of Disease Collaborative Network (2017). Global Burden of Disease Study 2016 (GBD 2016) Results. Seattle, WA: Institute for
Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME). Retrieved from. http://ghdx.healthdata.org/gbd‐results‐tool
Hansen, M. C., Potapov, P. V., Moore, R., Hancher, M., Turubanova, S. A., Tyukavina, A., et al. (2013). High‐resolution global maps of 21st ‐
century forest cover change. Science,342(6160), 850–853. http://doi.org/10.1126/science.1244693
Henze, D. K., Hakami, A., & Seinfeld, J. H. (2007). Development of the adjoint of GEOS‐Chem. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics,7(9),
2413–2433. https://doi.org/10.5194/acp‐7‐2413‐2007
Jarvis, A., Reuter, H. I., & Nelson, E. (2008). Hole‐filled seamless SRTM data v4, International Centre for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT).
Retrieved from http://srtm.csi.cgiar.org
Johnston, F. H., Henderson, S. B., Chen, Y., Randerson, J. T., Marlier, M., DeFries, R. S., et al. (2012). Estimated global mortality attribu-
table to smoke from landscape fires. Environmental Health Perspectives,120(5), 695–701. http://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1104422
Kim, P. S., Jacob, D. J., Mickley, L. J., Koplitz, S. N., Marlier, M. E., DeFries, R. S., et al. (2015). Sensitivity of population smoke exposure to
fire locations in equatorial Asia. Atmospheric Environment,102,11–17. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2014.09.045
Konecny, K., Ballhorn, U., Navratil, P., Jubanski, J., Page, S. E., Tansey, K., et al. (2016). Variable carbon losses from recurrent fires in
drained tropical peatlands. Global Change Biology,22(4), 1469–1480. http://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13186
Koplitz, S. N., Mickley, L. J., Jacob, D. J., Marlier, M. E., DeFries, R. S., Gaveau, D. L. A., et al. (2018). Role of the Madden‐Julian Oscillation
in the transport of smoke from Sumatra to the Malay Peninsula during severe non‐El Nino haze events. Journal of Geophysical Research:
Atmospheres,123, 6282–6294. http://doi.org/10.1029/2018JD028533
Koplitz, S. N., Mickley, L. J., Marlier, M. E., Buonocore, J. J., Kim, P. S., Liu, T., et al. (2016). Public health impacts of the severe haze in
equatorial Asia in September–October 2015: Demonstration of a new framework for informing fire management strategies to reduce
downwind smoke exposure. Environmental Research Letters,11(9), 094023. http://doi.org/10.1088/1748‐9326/11/9/094023
Lee, J. S. H., Jaafar, Z., Tan, A. K. J., Carrasco, L. R., Ewing, J. J., Bickford, D. P., et al. (2016). Toward clearer skies: Challenges in regulating
transboundary haze in Southeast Asia. Environmental Science and Policy,55,87–95. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2015.09.008
Margono, B. A., Potapov, P. V., Turubanova, S., Stolle, F., & Hansen, M. C. (2014). Primary forest cover loss in Indonesia over 2000–2012.
Nature Climate Change,4(8), 730–735. http://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2277
Marlier, M. E., DeFries, R., Pennington, D., Nelson, E., Ordway, E. M., Lewis, J., et al. (2015). Future fire emissions associated with pro-
jected land use change in Sumatra. Global Change Biology,21(1), 345–362. http://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12691
Marlier, M. E., DeFries, R. S., Kim, P. S., Gaveau, D. L. A., Koplitz, S. N., Jacob, D. J., et al. (2015). Regional air quality impacts of future fire
emissions in Sumatra and Kalimantan. Environmental Research Letters,10(5), 054010. http://doi.org/10.1088/1748‐9326/10/5/054010
Marlier, M. E., DeFries, R. S., Kim, P. S., Koplitz, S. N., Jacob, D. J., Mickley, L. J., & Myers, S. S. (2015). Fire emissions and regional air
quality impacts from fires in oil palm, timber, and logging concessions in Indonesia. Environmental Research Letters,10(8), 085005.
http://doi.org/10.1088/1748‐9326/10/8/085005
Marlier, M. E., DeFries, R. S., Voulgarakis, A., Kinney, P. L., Randerson, J. T., Shindell, D. T., et al. (2013). El Niño and health risks from
landscape fire emissions in Southeast Asia. Nature Climate Change,3(2), 131–136. http://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1658
Mehta, S., Shin, H., Burnett, R., North, T., & Cohen, A. J. (2011). Ambient particulate air pollution and acute lowe r respiratory infections: A
systematic review and implications for estimating the global burden of disease. Air Quality, Atmosphere & Health,6(1), 69–83. http://doi.
org/10.1007/s11869‐011‐0146‐3
Miettinen, J., Hooijer, A., Wang, J., Shi, C., & Liew, S. C. (2012). Peatland degradation and conversion sequences and interrelations in
Sumatra. Regional Environmental Change,12(4), 729–737. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10113‐012‐0290‐9
Miettinen, J., Shi, C., & Liew, S. C. (2016). 2015 Land cover map of Southeast Asia at 250 m spatial resolution. Remote Sensing Letters,7(7),
701–710. http://doi.org/10.1080/2150704X.2016.1182659
Ministry of Agriculture. (2015). Indonesia peat lands. Retrieved March 2017, from www.globalforestwatch.org
Page, S. E., Rieley, J. O., & Banks, C. J. (2011). Global and regional importance of the tropical peatland carbon pool. Global Change Biology,
17, 798–818. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365‐2486.2010.02279.x
Ramakreshnan, L., Aghamohammadi, N., Fong, C. S., Bulgiba, A., Zaki, R. A., Wong, L. P., & Sulaiman, N. M. (2018). Haze and health
impacts in ASEAN countries: A systematic review. Environmental Science and Pollution Research,25,2096
–2111. http://doi.org/10.1007/
s11356‐017‐0860‐y
Reddington, C. L., Yoshioka, M., Balasubramanian, R., Ridley, D., Toh, Y. Y., Arnold, S. R., & Spracklen, D. V. (2014). Contribution of
vegetation and peat fires to particulate air pollution in Southeast Asia. Environmental Research Letters,9, 094006. http://doi.org/ 10.1088/
1748‐9326/9/9/094006
Rees, N. (2016). Clear the air for children: The impact of air pollution on children, (pp. 1–100). New York: UNICEF.
10.1029/2019GH000191
GeoHealth
MARLIER ET AL. 188

Reid, C. E., Brauer, M., Johnston, F. H., Jerrett, M., Balmes, J. R., & Elliott, C. T. (2016). Critical review of health impacts of wildfire smoke
exposure. Environmental Health Perspectives,124(9), 1334–1343. http://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1409277
Roulston, C., Paton‐Walsh, C., Smith, T. E. L., Guérette, É. A., Evers, S., Yule, C. M., et al. (2018). Fine particle emissions from tropical peat
fires decrease rapidly with time since ignition. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres,123, 5607–5617. http://doi.org/10.1029/
2017JD027827
Soares‐Filho, B. S., Rodrigues, H. O., & Costa, W. L. (2009). Modeling environmental dynamics with Dinamic EGO. Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Retrieved from: Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. http://www.csr.ufmg.br/dinamica
Tan, A. (2015). The “haze”crisis in Southeast Asia: Assessing Singapore's Transboundary Haze Pollution Act 2014. NUS Law Working
Paper Series, Working Paper 2015/002. Retrieved from http://law.nus.edu.sg/wps/
van der Werf, G. R., Dempewolf, J., Trigg, S. N., Randerson, J. T., Kasibhatla, P. S., Giglio, L., et al. (2008). Climate regulation of fire
emissions and deforestation in equatorial Asia. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,105(51), 20,350–20,355. https://doi.org/
10.1073/pnas.0803375105
van der Werf, G. R., Randerson, J. T., Giglio, L., van Leeuwen, T. T., Chen, Y., Rogers, B. M., et al. (2017). Global fire emissions estimates
during 1997–2016. Earth System Science Data,9(2), 697–720. http://doi.org/10.5194/essd‐9‐697‐2017
Vodonos, A., Awad, Y. A., & Schwartz, J. (2018). The concentration‐response between long‐term PM2.5 exposure and mortality: A meta‐
regression approach. Environmental Research,166, 677–689. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2018.06.021
Wang, Q., Jacob, D. J., Fisher, J. A., Mao, J., Leibensperger, E. M., Carouge, C. C., et al. (2011). Sources of carbonaceous aerosols and
deposited black carbon in the Arctic in winter‐spring: Implications for radiative forcing. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics,11(23),
12,453–12,473. http://doi.org/10.5194/acp‐11‐12453‐2011
Wooster, M., Gaveau, D., Salim, M., Zhang, T., Xu, W., Green , D., et al. (2018). New tropical peatland gas and particulate emissions factors
indicate 2015 Indonesian fires released far more particulate matter (but less methane) than current inventories imply. Remote Sensing,
10(4), 495–431. http://doi.org/10.3390/rs10040495
World Bank Group. (2016). The cost of fire: An economic analysis of Indonesia's 2015 fire crisis. Indonesia Sustainable Landscapes
Knowledge Note, 1–12.
World Resources Institute. (2017a). Conservation areas. Retrieved March 2017, from www.globalforestwatch.org
World Resources Institute. (2017b). Indonesia logging concessions. Retrieved March 2017, from www.globalforestwatch.org
World Resources Institute. (2017c). Indonesia oil palm concessions. Retrieved March 2017, from www.globalforestwatch.org
World Resources Institute. (2017d). Palm oil mills. Retrieved March 2017, from www.globalforestwatch.org
World Resources Institute. (2017e). Wood fiber. Retrieved 2017, from www.globalforestwatch.org
Wösten, J. H. M., Clymans, E., Page, S. E., Rieley, J. O., & Limin, S. H. (2008). Peat–water interrelationshi ps in a tropical peatland ecosystem
in Southeast Asia. Catena,73, 212–224. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2007.07.010
10.1029/2019GH000191
GeoHealth
MARLIER ET AL. 189