Synthesis Report: Building a Resilient Tropical Rainforest Heritage of Sumatra for Climate Change Mitigation and Biodiversity Conservation

Transcription

1 Synthesis Report: Building a Resilient Tropical Rainforest Heritage of Sumatra for Climate Change Mitigation and Biodiversity Conservation Synthesis Report: Building a Resilient Tropical Rainforest Heritage of Sumatra for Climate Change Mitigation and Biodiversity Conservation 1

2

3 Synthesis Report: Building a Resilient Tropical Rainforest Heritage of Sumatra for Climate Change Mitigation and Biodiversity Conservation 1.0 Introduction The Tropical Rainforest Heritage of Sumatra (TRHS) was designated as a World Heritage (WH) site in 2004, and consists of three National Parks (NPs) in Sumatra: Gunung Leuser, Kerinci Seblat, and Bukit Barisan Selatan. Under the WH Committee s Decision 35 COM 7B.16, TRHS was inscribed on the list of WH in Danger in 2011, mainly due to the continuous threat of road development plans and encroachment within the area. The threats represent both a potential and ascertained danger to its Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) in line with paragraph 180 of the Operational Guidelines of the World Heritage Convention. There is a growing awareness that road development in the conservation area has major environmental impacts, such as damage to the ecosystems, resettlement opportunity for people, key-species habitat fragmentation, and demographic change. In the case of TRHS, as identified by the three monitoring missions carried out by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and WH Centre since 2006, road construction within and around the property boundaries will affect the integrity of the tropical forest ecosystem and contribute to the fragmenting of the landscape and degradation of the ecosystem services. Roads crossing inside the property will facilitate and increase the access of encroachers and the frequency of illegal activities. Also, such construction will not be in accordance with the conclusions of the Tiger Summit, which declared that TRHS is considered as a world priority area for wild tiger conservation and survival, as stated by the National Tiger Recovery Program adopted in November 2012 in St Petersburg, Russia. As stated under Decision 34COM 7B.14, the WH Committee requested the Government of Indonesia (GoI) to immediately halt all road construction plans within Kerinci Seblat National Park (KSNP), and to take the necessary steps to ensure that no roads shall be built through the parks comprising the WH site, as well as to close all existing illegal roads, and develop appropriate regulations and infrastructure on existing legal public roads to reduce the negative impacts of traffic on wildlife and to ensure ecological connectivity. Under the decision 35 COM 7B.16, the WH Committee further requested the GoI to conduct a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) of the cumulative adverse effects of all road development plans in the Bukit Barisan mountain range area, where TRHS is located, in order to identify transport options for the region that do not adversely impact the property s OUV, including improved maintenance of existing legal roads. The SEA should provide recommendations on improving access and communication among local communities in the adjacent area of TRHS without degrading its environmental quality. The key stakeholder of this project is the GoI, represented by the Indonesian Coordination Team for Conservation and Management of Cultural and Natural Heritage, previously known as the Indonesian World Heritage Task Force (Pokja Warisan Dunia), and its members, as well as NPs authorities and local governments. As per the Coordinating Minister of Human Development and Cultural Affairs Decree No. 20 of 2016, the Coordination Team is led by the Coordinating Ministry for Human Development and Cultural Affairs, supported by the Ministry of Education and Culture, National Development Planning Agency (BAPPENAS), Ministry of Environment and Forestry, Ministry of Agricultural, Ministry of Marine and Fisheries, Ministry of Home Affairs, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ministry of Public Works and Public Housing, Ministry of Tourism, Ministry of Communication and Information, Ministry of Agrarian and Spatial Planning and Ministry of Social Affairs. The overall goal of this project is to enhance the integrity of the TRHS and protect it from further threats by identifying transportation options for the area through an SEA. Through this project, UNESCO is supporting and facilitating the GoI in conducting the SEA. The SEA aims to identify opportunities to improve and maintain the existing legal roads, and propose transport alternatives that will not negatively impact the integrity nor the OUV of TRHS. 3

4 2.0 Objectives of the Project The overall goal of this project is to enhance the integrity of the TRHS and protect it from further threats by identifying transportation options for the area through an SEA. Through this project, UNESCO is supporting and facilitating the GoI in conducting the SEA. The SEA aims to identify opportunities to improve and maintain the existing legal roads, and propose transport alternatives that will not negatively impact the integrity nor the OUV of TRHS. UNESCO Jakarta coordinated the development of studies regarding the effects and impacts of road development plans to the OUV of TRHS, as follows: Stage 1 Baseline studies:»» Ecological impacts of road development in TRHS, study conducted by PT Remark Asia»» Socio-economic impacts of road development in TRHS, study conducted by the Research Centre for Climate Change University of Indonesia (RCCC-UI)»» Legal status of the TRHS, study conducted by the Faculty of Law, University of North Sumatra (USU) Stage 2 Strategic Environmental Assessment At this stage, data and information provided by the baseline studies were compiled and further elaborated for the later development of a fully comprehensive SEA of the cumulative effects of road development plans in TRHS by PT DHI Water and Environment (DHI). The implementing partners who conducted the studies were selected through a competitive bidding process. The process of selection included review of their technical approach and methodology, financial proposal, as well as face-to-face interview. 2.1 Stage 1 Baseline Studies Socio-economic study The study, entitled A social-economic impact assessment of road development plans in the Tropical Rainforest Heritage of Sumatra: the case of Kerinci Seblat National Park, was conducted by RCCC-UI. This study aimed to strengthen understanding and promote evidence-based policy-making discussion with regards to the socio-economic impacts of road development. The study was conducted in KSNP since the total area of this NP is the largest among the three forming the TRHS. In addition, there is increased pressure and demand for road construction in KSNP, which if implemented, has the potential to impact the integrity of the whole WH property. KSNP is Indonesia s second largest terrestrial protected area and one of the last and largest remnants of tropical rainforest in the world. Its territory comprises four provincial jurisdictions, namely Jambi, Bengkulu, West Sumatra and South Sumatra. There is a variety of social and economic utilization of services that KSNP ecosystems support, provide and regulate, for example, direct human land use activities such as agriculture, logging or water supply inside the national park and in the surrounding areas. This study adopted an empirical approach, applying statistical analyses to the relationship between socio-economic variables and road related variables. The four socio-economic variables included: (1) economic diversity, (2) economic evenness, (3) the number of cooperatives, and (4) the presence of small-scale loans; these variables were chosen to represent different socio-economic aspects of local livelihoods. All of these variables used data from villages located in and surrounding KSNP, and the analysis employed data from 1,325 villages in three provinces (Jambi, Bengkulu and West Sumatra). 4

5 Synthesis Report: Building a Resilient Tropical Rainforest Heritage of Sumatra for Climate Change Mitigation and Biodiversity Conservation A public consultation was held in July 2015 involving more than 40 stakeholders from local communities, civil society organizations, local government, central government, NGOs, as well as other related parties such as private sector firms and universities, from three districts (Bungo, Merangin and Kerinci). The deliberation process applied a Harvard Case Method (HCM) into four sessions: mapping the actors, social and economic impacts of road plans in KSNP, policy options for each road plan in KSNP, and resources mobilization. Figure 1. Mapping actors related to road development in KSNP by their orientation towards social-economic development and nature conservation Actors exhibited different perceptions concerning the impacts of road development. Some considered a road would likely provide access to the market for local agriculture products, while others believed that it would facilitate inward migration from other areas, leading to land occupation and illegal settlements, among other issues. Another example relates to the perception that a road would provide access to outside crop price information, while at the same time it would bring cultural differences that may trigger social conflicts between cultural values of local communities and those introduced by new settlers. The public consultation identified that strong socio-economic orientation and strong conservation orientation were the first two discourses acknowledged among the stakeholders. These factors may be similar in each NP, although the order and degree of their significance would depend on characteristics of each area and its actors, road history, potential effects of road plans in local resources as perceived by actors, and local needs for roads. However during the deliberation process, it was shown that actors could change their position: for most stakeholders after discussion the desirable option was to build paved roads with eco-constructions to allow the movement of wildlife. Stakeholders considered the importance of nature conservation, thus did not choose the strongest only socio-economic development option, which would disregard the legitimate concerns related to protecting the integrity of the TRHS. 5

6 Discussion and knowledge sharing led to numerous stakeholders changing their perception on the advantages and disadvantages of roads development versus forest conservation. This confirmed the importance of raising awareness, and discursive and deliberative public consultations with the local communities, in this case in terms of protection and management of WH properties.the socio-economic study found that at the NP level, there are varying socio-economic impacts of road development on actors or decision makers in the region. While some of the impacts are obvious, some others may be counter-intuitive. Such different socio-economic impacts are also expected at the TRHS level. In relation to economic impacts, the assessment found that roads may increase village economic diversity when the village is connected to a particular land use (e.g. plantation), however, economic diversity decreases the further away a village is to the park. In addition, the economic impacts also related to road-connections and the elevation of the villages. Finding that the farther a village is located from the NP, the lower the economic diversity of that village, underpins the important role for local economies of protecting the integrity of NPs under the TRHS. A plausible reason for why economic diversity is increased when villages are nearer to the NP is the presence of multiple streams of forest ecosystem-dependent incomes in local livelihoods. This implies the need to examine various benefits, both direct and indirect, that ecosystems in NPs provide for local household economies, and defining the social-economic impact of roads to those benefits Ecological study This study, entitled Ecological Value and Environmental Assessment of Road Development in the Tropical Rainforest Heritage of Sumatra, was undertaken by Remark Asia, focusing in KSNP due to the increase in road proposals in the districts around the area, and with desk research in Gunung Leuser National Park (GLNP) and Bukit Barisan Selatan National Park (BBSNP). Field observation, conducted in KSNP, included interviews with stakeholders, focus group discussion, public consultation and site visits to the proposed road locations. The vegetation in the three NPs is fragmented in several areas due to land use change. Despite the decreasing size of forest cover, the majority of the area is still covered by forest vegetation, with more than 50% of steep areas. The core zones in each NP were intact with no significance disturbance, and considered as old-growth forests. The vegetation is characterized by numerous large old trees with diameters in excess of 1.5 m and an understory assemblage of plant species typical for undisturbed areas of tropical forest. The majority of the habitat for native animal species is contained within patches of native forest vegetation. The areas with the least disturbance are typically characterized by high levels of diversity, and these are usually the largest patches. Due to the highly disturbed nature of much of the Bukit Barisan mountain range, the patches of forest that remain are very important to native fauna as they form refuges. These areas often record high levels of diversity, perhaps because they are the last strongholds of several sub-populations. High level of animal species diversity is found in TRHS. Diversity of key species include Sumatran tiger (Panthera tigris ssp sumatrae, with a population of only individuals), Sumatran elephant (Elephas maximus ssp. sumatranus), Sumatran rhinoceros (Dicerorhinus sumatrensis) and Sumatran orangutan (Pongo abelii). Other species found include mammals including primate species, birds including hornbill species, herpetofauna, insects, molluscs, crustaceans and fish. TRHS also supports a very high diversity of plant species, despite widespread disturbance, and complete forest vegetation distribution, varying from coastal/swamp forest and lowland forest to highland forest and montane forest vegetation. Sumatran landscape is home to Rafflesia species, tree and understorey species from various families such as Dipterocarpaceae, Lauraceae, Myrtaceae, Fagaceae, Annonaceae, Rosaceae, Zingiberaceae and others, in addition to orchid, rattan, liana and bamboo species. 6

7 Synthesis Report: Building a Resilient Tropical Rainforest Heritage of Sumatra for Climate Change Mitigation and Biodiversity Conservation A public consultation was organized in Sungai Penuh, Jambi Province, Sumatra, in August The public consultation aimed to gather data from local stakeholders on the environmental changes affecting the park, the presence of key wildlife species and their conflicts with the population, and the general interaction between the local communities living in the NP and its environment. Some 80 participants attended, representing KSNP authorities, local government, local communities and NGOs. The main challenge of the consultation was that the local stakeholders, including local communities, support the development of the roads inside the NP, arguing it will be beneficial for the development of the region. It was very important to explain that legally no road or other infrastructure development is allowed inside the core zone of the WH site, since it may affect the integrity and OUV of a WH property. Other alternatives for transport and evacuation were clearly presented to them, explaining that the socioeconomic development of the region can only be ensured along with the protection and conservation of their environment.the ecological study identified seven road corridor plans inside the KSNP area. This would entail deforestation of significant habitats of key species such as the elephant, tiger, rhinoceros, orangutan and rafflesia. The study of the impacts to key species was developed based on the logistic regression deforestation model Maximum Entropy (MAXENT) s variant and covariant analysis. It was applied to Sumatran elephant, Sumatran tiger, tapir and Rafflesia habitats. Sumatran rhinoceros and Sumatran orangutan were not considered in the evaluation as the rhino is already subject to local extinction in KSNP and the orangutan is only found in GLNP. The impacts to key species that were found were primarily indirect, caused by deforestation, habitat fragmentation, reduction of habitat, major land use change, and construction activities. A significant finding from the survey is that the planned road construction will entail a deforested area of 14, hectares as well as forest fragmentation; hence decreasing the habitats of elephant, tiger, tapir and Rafflesia. The significant factors evaluated for the deforestation analysis are terrain variation (RGI), elevation and proximity with roads. Based on the results, tapir habitat in KSNP will suffer the greatest loss, followed by rafflesia, tiger and elephant. The analysis also identified that road development would lead to further deforestation and loss of habitat in areas surrounding the road development. Figure 2. Predicted Deforestation in KSNP 7

8 Figure 3. Loss of wildlife habitats per road in KSNP In addition, road development would result in increased potential of human and wildlife conflict, especially with elephant and tiger. Other direct impacts of road development will include disturbance to water flow systems, traffic related mortality, and poaching of vulnerable species such as the rhino and orangutan. Therefore, the scale and magnitude of these impacts will depend on the actual footprint from the transportation and other associated developments. The ecological study concluded with a series of recommendations to mitigate the ecological impacts of road development in TRHS: Halt new road development and improve already existing roads. Plan alternative routes outside the WH property, with special construction design to minimize ecological impacts. Monitor the property, both for biodiversity and for illegal activities. Restore areas of degraded forest. Raise awareness among local communities. Improve community participation in the management and maintenance of the site. Promote ecotourism Legal study The Faculty of Law from the University of North Sumatra (Universitas Sumatera Utara - USU) conducted the study, relating to the legal aspects of road development plans in TRHS. This study aimed to identify overlap and gaps in the law and regulations specifically affecting TRHS, including national and international laws, in order to analyse the legal status of the three NPs of the TRHS. The study referred to the main legal reference of NPs in Indonesia, i.e. the Law No. 5/1990 on the conservation of Natural Resources and Ecosystems. Specifically, chapter 1, article 1(14) states that a National Park shall be a nature conservation area which possesses native ecosystems, and which is managed through a zoning system utilized to facilitate research, science, education, breeding enhancement, recreation and tourism purposes. The function of a nature conservation area is the protection of life support systems, preservation of species diversity and sustainable utilization of living resources and their ecosystems. It is also stated, in article 30, that any and all persons are prohibited to carry out activities which may modify the natural integrity of the NP s core zone and are inconsistent with the function of utilization in other zones of a NP. The study suggested that legal roads were present within TRHS before the inscription of TRHS as WH property in 2004, therefore, any new roads developed after the year of inscription are considered as illegal roads. 8

9 Synthesis Report: Building a Resilient Tropical Rainforest Heritage of Sumatra for Climate Change Mitigation and Biodiversity Conservation There is a need to strengthen the laws and regulatory framework for TRHS, as well as its enforcement, to protect the property s OUV and integrity. There are gaps within the existing regulations for TRHS that may lead to legal loopholes. Other findings from the study include the lack of commitment and coordination among government institutions at the national, provincial and local levels with regards to the protection and management of TRHS. 2.2 Stage 2 Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) The SEA of the cumulative effects of road development plans in TRHS was developed by DHI. The draft SEA report has been submitted and shared with the GoI during a technical workshop in January 2017 in Jakarta. The SEA focuses on determining strategic environmental impacts associated with the proposed road developments, and offering corresponding mitigation and management recommendations. The execution of this assessment was subject to the provision of the socio-economic and ecological baseline studies that have been conducted by RCCC UI and Remark Asia. However, the studies and coordinated public participations were only available to the study focused on the KSNP due to the intensive road development planning within this area. Therefore, the SEA directed the majority of its analyses on road upgrade plans within and surrounding the KSNP. However, the SEA also provided the raw examination of strategic impacts and risks related to planned roads in GLNP and BBSNP using risk based analysis and other secondary sources of geo-referenced information. The SEA was developed using the approach and evaluation framework taken from the IUCN s World Heritage Advice Note: Environmental Assessment (2013). Based on the advice note, any level of environmental assessment at a WH property must uncover threats or impacts to a WH sites attributes which form the basis of the core components or the pillars of the OUV. These pillars include Criteria, Integrity and Protection and Management. Criteria in relation to natural World Heritage sites, includes four criteria which are all, or in part, met at a particular natural WH site. These criteria are: Criterion vii: Contains superlative natural phenomena or areas of exceptional natural beauty and aesthetic importance. Criterion viii: To be outstanding examples representing major stages of earth s history, including the record of life, significant on-going geological processes in the development of landforms, or significant geomorphic or physiographic features. Criterion ix: To be outstanding examples representing significant on-going ecological and biological processes in the evolution and development of terrestrial, fresh water, coastal and marine ecosystems and communities of plants and animals. Criterion x: Contains the most important and significant natural habitats for in-situ conservation of biological diversity, including those containing threatened species of OUV from the point of view of science or conservation. The threats to the OUV of TRHS presented in the SEA ranged significantly in terms of depth and scope, inclusive of:»» threats to watersheds,»» damage to geographical landscape features,»» ecological threats related to habitat loss,»» loss of biodiversity,»» degradation of ecosystem functionality and natural evolutionary forces, and»» identifying where impacts would affect management approached or resources applied. 9

10 The SEA components included a series of execution phases, including inception, baseline analysis and scoping, stakeholder consultation and feedback, as well as SEA evaluation with further analysis. The further analysis phase of the SEA focused on verifying or disapproving the environmental and social issues, and risks identified in the scoping phase. The methodologies used include case study review, detailed GIS mapping and extrapolation technique dedicated expert analysis, and referencing current scientific journals and relevant articles. For the purpose of this SEA of TRHS, the analysis was determined based on the attributes of scale of impact, cumulative impact and interaction of impacts. Road plan details were gathered from various sources, including reviewed Indonesian land-use plans and associated documents and correspondence with local planning agencies. All roads considered are currently dirt paths or roads that have been identified for future widening and upgrade Summary of SEA results In relation to ecological functionality and biodiversity, key aspects of Criteria and Integrity components of TRHS OUVs, it was strategically assessed that the direct road development footprint, as well as potential Road Effect Zone impacts and risk, would unacceptably conflict with several populations of threatened species e.g. the Sumatran elephant, rhinoceros, tiger and orangutan and lead to unacceptable loss of habitat in many areas of KSNP and BBSNP. It was assessed that risks to the Integrity of the TRHS OUV were highest in these areas, but prevalent throughout the TRHS. Strategic ecological analysis also revealed that the planned road upgrades, particularly in KSNP, would create physical barriers within habitats that block interaction between animal populations that could eventually result in the alteration of population genetics and population viability. This widespread effect clearly indicated an unacceptable level of negative impact to both Criteria and Integrity attributes of the TRHS. When examining the geographical landscape features of the TRHS s Criteria OUV attributes, analysis identified that road upgrades and the threat of roadside development could lead to a visual horizon disturbance to KSNP mountainous backdrops or physical damage from encroachment - to a selection of lakes, waterfalls and caves, and swamps. The aforementioned ecological impacts would also impact wildlife experiences at important locales. In relation to socio-economic aspects, the SEA acknowledged that upgrading the existing roads could bring positive impacts to both people s safety and connectivity for economic development. However, it was also recognized that the induced impacts of upgrading the roads would undeniably affect the outputs from potential economic activities related to the WH value, such as ecotourism, for the local communities. 10

11 Synthesis Report: Building a Resilient Tropical Rainforest Heritage of Sumatra for Climate Change Mitigation and Biodiversity Conservation 11

12 12

13 Synthesis Report: Building a Resilient Tropical Rainforest Heritage of Sumatra for Climate Change Mitigation and Biodiversity Conservation 13

14 2.2.2 Recommended Alternatives As per IUCN World Heritage Environmental Assessment Advice, the first alternative established for analysis was the No Project Alternative, which would simply entail no KSNP road upgrade land use plans or subsequent execution of individual road upgrade projects. It would therefore entail the continuation of baseline trends for pertinent environmental variables. However, As per Principle 4 of World Heritage Impact Assessment Principles, environmental assessment in a World Heritage site should identify and assess reasonable alternatives to the base proposal in order to recommend the most reasonable sustainable decision in relation to OUVs. Proposed alternatives should not only be sustainable in relation to OUV s, they should aim to meet reasonable levels of transportation effectiveness as those offered by the original proposed KSNP road upgrade land use plans. Drawing on the final viability variable, it follows that sustainable transportation alternatives must also be economically feasible. To comparatively illustrate the comparative viability of the alternatives in relation to each criterion, the following ranking symbols are applied: Table 1 Viability Ranking of Transportation Options Alternatives Criterion Maintaining OUV Impact People & Freight: Interior to Exterior Outcome to Transportation Needs Freight: Through Park to Ports Evacuation Transport Cost No New Roads Public (bus) Transportation with current road network Air Transportation Rail Transportation Road Tunneling with ecological pathways Mitigated Road Upgrade Planning & Execution N ( ) ( ) ( ) n/a ( ) (+) ( ) (+) M ( ) (+) ( ) ( ) H ( ) (+) (+) ( ) H (+) (+) (+) (+) H (+) (+) (+) (+) H N = no impact to the OUV ( ) = generally negative outcome (+) = Generally positive outcome n/a = not applicable to the criteria M = moderate cost H = high cost n/a = not applicable Note: Cost estimate for road tunneling: 1.56 Billion to 2.60 Billion USD (for approx. 40% of total road development plan length). Approximate cost of ecological pass way / Wildlife Bridge: 3.5 to 8 million USD. 14

15 Synthesis Report: Building a Resilient Tropical Rainforest Heritage of Sumatra for Climate Change Mitigation and Biodiversity Conservation Evacuation Road This SEA recommends that planners involved in emergency planning first consider emergency evacuation routes located sufficiently outside the boundaries of KSNP (i.e. in consideration of recommended buffer zones) that can be regularized, widened, rerouted (e.g. around urban areas) and upgraded to achieve the same, or better, levels of effective and rapid transfer of people out of danger zones. It is not the role of this SEA to dictate which existing roads outside Park boundaries could be used as alternative evacuation routes; it is, however, clear there are a number in each Analysis Unit that could serve this function. Second, where stipulated further studies reveal that are no other feasible emergency transportation alternatives outside the KSNP boundaries, planners could revert back to certain existing evacuation routes (i.e. with World Heritage Committee approval upon review of the executed analyses) where strict restrictions on evacuation road design and execution would be applicable. In this regard, the following evacuation routes are considered the least impacting: Evacuation Road 3 Evacuation Road 1 Connectivity and Economic Road It should be stressed that the recommended road plan amendments are not intended to represent the most advantageous transportation routes. They rather indicate the least impacting road upgrade routes, i.e. with the highest chance of no-net-loss mitigation and conservation management success, which could allow for transportation improvements. There are two roads that are singled out for possible development, namely Road 1 (Muara Labuh - Kambang) and Road 5 (Lempur Sungai Ipuh). Mitigation analyses showed that these proposed road upgrades would occur in areas with lower levels of direct impact and contagious land use footprint risks. Despite Road 5 s apparent overlap with a tiger conservation programme monitoring area it was reasoned that these roads could more readily fall in line with, or successfully apply, no-net-loss mitigation principles. These roads, along with the westward rerouted Road 8, form the basis for several potentially sustainable road development options that could still allow for improved economic connectivity to the area Mitigation Measures Project Implementation measures for reasonable alternative road upgrades, including: Possible least impact Road Upgrade Alternative land use planning Ecological monitoring and surveys for sensitive planning / engineering Incorporation of wildlife corridor structures into detailed planning or early engineering Minimum Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)) execution specification Road construction management and monitoring requirements Potential operational management measures to prevent illegal Contagious roadside land use and Edge Effects. During the execution of a Tsunami and Volcanic Eruption Evacuation Infrastructure Planning, the following evacuation road design should be considered: Evacuation roads must be constructed, as much as possible, away from ecological sensitive areas (i.e. animal migration routes, salt licks, watersheds). Evacuation roads must not be more than 4m in width, including roadside structures such as ditches and fences. 15

16 Vegetation clearing must be kept at a minimum to prevent soil erosion and minimize, as far as possible, excessive gaps in the canopy. Where this is not possible and there is evidence of canopy migration, wildlife canopy bridges or passes should be installed. Evacuation roads should not be paved, but to allow for a stable road surfacing, stabilizing gravels or road crush can be used along with small scale drainage structures. The roads must be closed at all times, i.e. via locked robust gates on either end, and should only be open in time of emergency. Evacuation roads gates should be checked by park officials on a regular basis, and period patrols should be carried out along the roads themselves. Evacuation should also be subject to separate EIA approval where it is sufficiently demonstrated that the above criteria and other typical project implementation environmental mitigation measures are met. While for that have been identified for upgrade works, the following step-wise implementation measures should be executed: Dedicated baseline surveys and monitoring. Specific Ecological / Biodiversity Design Features including wildlife crossing structures, fencing, design speed and warning signs. Standard road design features. Road EIAs. Construction phase mitigation measures. Road operation mitigation measures including ecological monitoring, road related patrols and entry posts Conclusions Due to the aforementioned environmental impacts and risks, it was concluded that no road developments were preferable from an OUV maintenance or sustainability perspective. However, when considering a reasonable option for KSNP (i.e. the least impacting, most economically viable, with reasonable transportation efficiency), a Mitigated Road Upgrade Planning and Execution alternative was put forward. These alternative planning options illustrate a clear preference for development of roads external to the NP. They further suggest that one road be rerouted well outside the KSNP and all except two proposed KSNP Economic and Connectivity road upgrades be put forward for cautious alternative planning consideration. Proposed KSNP evacuation road upgrades were also not advised. Here, it was recommended they only be permitted if it could be proven that improvements to roads external to the park could not present an equal level of emergency readiness. If not, only two potential roads, themselves with restrictive conditions, were recommended for further planning consideration. To complete downward mitigation linkages to potential individual road upgrade execution (e.g. to project level decision-making), a wide selection of project implementation measures e.g. through use of wildlife crossing structures and other measures - were proposed for the detailed planning and project development cycle. These requirements were then further assessed in relation to their demands on existing Protection and Management resources of KSNP. This illustrated that the management attributes of the NP would have to be significantly reinforced to deal with the proposed road developments. 16

17 Synthesis Report: Building a Resilient Tropical Rainforest Heritage of Sumatra for Climate Change Mitigation and Biodiversity Conservation Coupled together, the proposed planning and project implementation mitigation recommendations, allowed residual strategic impacts and risks to be lowered to acceptable levels in all except two road analysis units, where minor levels were assessed. To bridge the gap in the Desired State of Conservation for the Removal (DSOCR) requirement to incur no-net-impact to TRHS OUVs, it was further recommended that additional restorative compensation measures be implemented to achieve continued overall improvements to protection and conservation initiatives in the TRHS. 3.0 Project Outputs The results generated during the project are summarized as follows: 1. Socio-economic study has been conducted and reports in both English and Indonesian have been distributed to GoI. 2. Ecological study has been conducted and reports in both English and Indonesian have been distributed to the GoI. 3. Legal study has been conducted and reports in both English and Indonesian have been distributed to the GoI. 4. Integrated SEA has been developed and the report has been presented and submitted to the GoI. The three baseline studies have fed into the development of the SEA in terms of data, analysis and public consultations. The specific results and recommendations of the SEA are stated in part 2.2 above. The SEA is contributing to the identification of opportunities to improve and maintain the existing legal roads in TRHS, and how to avoid building new roads that will negatively impact the integrity of the OUV of TRHS. The recommendations provided within this assessment will be key tools for management of this WH property and for its removal from the list of World Heritage In Danger. Overall, this project contributes to raising awareness with regards to the impacts of road construction and habitat fragmentation amongst local government and local communities, and to improve the capacity of decision-makers in order to protect TRHS and its OUV from further threats Public Consultations In the development of the SEA, a series of public consultations were undertaken between 2014 to the present day with participation of key stakeholders, in the form of socialization meetings. The public consultations of the project undertaken by UNESCO and its partners are detailed within table below. Table 2 List of Consultations Date Location Stakeholder Involved Issues Covered September 2014 Medan Consultation with a total of 111 participants, including: Coordinating Minister for the People s Welfare Sector Ministry of Foreign Affairs Ministry of Forestry Coordinating Minister for the People s Welfare Sector Ministry of Foreign Affairs Ministry of Forestry Inception meeting on the proposed road development to: increase awareness of the socio-economic impacts of road construction amongst local government, local communities and other concerned parties increase awareness of the ecological impacts of road construction and fragmentation amongst local government, local communities and other concerned parties 17

18 Date Location Stakeholder Involved Issues Covered 9 March 2015 Ministry of Public Works Head of KSNP Head of BBSNP Head of GLNP Natural Resource Conservation Agencies in Sumatera Region Environmental Agencies in Sumatera Region Forestry Agencies in Sumatera Region Planning Agencies in Sumatera Region Public Works Agencies in Sumatera Regions Local governments in Sumatera Region Universities in Sumatera Regions Private companies Indonesian National Commission for UNESCO Indonesian Institute of Sciences (LIPI) University of North Sumatra DHI IUCN Danida Media Jakarta Consultation with a total of 42 participants, including: Coordinating Minister for the People s Welfare Sector Ministry of Foreign Affairs Ministry of Forestry Ministry of Public Works Head of KSNP Head of BBSNP Head of GLNP Indonesian Institute of Sciences (LIPI) Universities Indonesian Centre for Environmental Law (ICEL) NGOs clarify of the legal status of the planned operations to all parties of the National Parks that constitute the TRHS present goals and methodology of the SEA and to explain why an objective assessment is in the interest of all parties concerned engage stakeholders involved on the road development and to share their concerns Public consultation on ecological values and socio-economic impact 31 August 2015 Sungai Penuh Regency, Jambi Province Consultation with a total of 80 participants, including: KSNP Officer Public Works Agency, Kerinci District Planning Agency, Kerinci District Disaster Management Agency (BPBD), Kerinci Region Head of Gunung Raya Sub-district Head of GunungTujuh Sub-district Head of Siulak Mukai Sub-district Custom community of Lekuk 50 Tumbi Lempur Head of Lempur Village Head of Mago Village Head of Renah Pemetik Village Head of Sungai Kuning Village Head of PauhTinggi Village Fauna and Flora Indonesia (FFI) Jambi Akar Network (Local NGO in Jambi) Public consultation on ecological study: Community perception and their interaction with KSNP Changes in ecological phenomena around the national park Information on key species in the planned road corridor construction sites Information on potential conflict between community and key animal species 18

19 Synthesis Report: Building a Resilient Tropical Rainforest Heritage of Sumatra for Climate Change Mitigation and Biodiversity Conservation Date Location Stakeholder Involved Issues Covered July 2015 Bungo Regency, Jambi Province Public deliberation with a total of 43 participants, including: District Planning and Development Agency District Public Works Office National Agency for Disaster Management Forestry Office KSNP Authority Local Environment Management Agency Conservationists group Customary communities Local communities Public deliberation on socioeconomic study: Social mapping Social and economic impacts of road plans in KSNP Policy options for each road plan in KSNP Resources mobilization 28 January 2016 Jakarta Meeting with a total of 28 participants, including: Indonesian National Commission for UNESCO, Ministry of Education and Culture Coordinating Ministry for Human Development and Cultural Affairs Ministry of Environment and Forestry, Directorate General of Natural Resources and Ecosystem Conservation Ministry of National Planning, Directorate General of Maritime Affairs and Natural Resources Ministry of Home Affairs, Directorate General Regional Development Remark Asia RCCC-UI DHI SEA kick off meeting to introduce the SEA (including the results of the baseline ecological and socioeconomic studies) 11 November 2016 Medan, North Sumatra Province Workshop with a total of 32 participants, including: Coordination Ministry for Human Development and Cultural Affairs Ministry of Foreign Affairs Ministry of Environment and Forestry Head of KSNP Head of BBSNP Head of GLNP Indonesian National Commission for UNESCO University of North Sumatra DHI PDAM Tirtanadi Workshop to discuss the progress of the legal study and develop strategy to incorporate the legal results into the SEA report. 24 January 2017 Jakarta Technical workshop with a total of 35 participants, including: Coordination Ministry for Human Development and Cultural Affairs Ministry of Foreign Affairs Ministry of Environment and Forestry Ministry of Public Works and Housing Head of KSNP Head of BBSNP Head of GLNP Indonesian National Commission for UNESCO University of North Sumatra DHI IUCN Workshop to present the results of the SEA and discuss how to improve the SEA report and its recommendations on transport alternatives which will not affect the OUV of the TRHS 19

20 3.1.2 Final Dissemination of Results A final dissemination workshop will be held in Jakarta in May 2017, gathering all the key parties involved in the development of the SEA. The workshop aims to widely socialize the results of SEA to main stakeholders concerned with the planned road construction, as well as to facilitate discussion on how to improve local transport without disrupting the OUV of the TRHS. The workshop will also be a forum for stakeholders to voice their concerns, needs, and ideas on the approach to assist TRHS protection. The specific objectives of the workshop are as follows: 1. To disseminate the results and recommendation of the SEA in TRHS to the wide audience of stakeholders. 2. To increase awareness of an integrated ecosystem approach to the sustainable development and conservation of a World Heritage property. 3. To receive inputs from main stakeholders on alternative options contributing to the sustainable developments of local communities Participants to be invited include: local and national governments, heads of NPs, NGOs, universities, and project implementation partners. 4.0 Where to Next? This Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) presents the cumulative effects of road development plans in Bukit Barisan Mountain Range focused on determining strategic impacts from the network of proposed road upgrades in and around KSNP mainly, but also the GLNP and BBSNP. Close communication and coordination between stakeholders has been key for the effective implementation of this project, and is indeed key for the long term sustainability of its outputs The GoI has been fully involved in the project since the beginning and has attended all the meetings and workshops throughout the implementation phase. Notably the institutional backup provided by the Coordinating Ministry for Human Development and Cultural Affairs and the Ministry of Environment and Forestry is highly appreciated. The submission of the SEA to the World Heritage Center by the GOI will be an important step in implementing the corrective measures towards the removal of TRHS from the In Danger list, however, there are still other corrective measures to be implemented by the Government as stated in their DSOCR. The Ministry of Environment and Forestry as the national focal point for the natural WH, and the Indonesian National Commission for UNESCO as UNESCO focal point will assist in ensuring the implementation of the recommendations and agreements generated under this project. The recommendations resulting from the SEA are expected to be translated into local legislation, which will protect the integrity of the TRHS and its OUV. The SEA recommendations can be adopted to support the improvement of decision-making capacities at regional, provincial and national level on road development measures that maximize the ecological integrity of the TRHS landscape while addressing the local development needs. The next step to be taken by decision-makers is expected to give example on how to confront the recurrent problem of improving access and communication for local communities without disrupting key conditions of ecosystems, species survival or having to go against the law. This will be a part of the efforts to reconcile development needs with the protection of World Heritage properties and other internationally designated protection 20

21 Synthesis Report: Building a Resilient Tropical Rainforest Heritage of Sumatra for Climate Change Mitigation and Biodiversity Conservation areas. The case study of TRHS can be introduced as lessons learnt and replicated as best practices in other World Heritage sites facing similar challenges. It may serve in the future as a reference for the assessment of interventions in protected areas. Still, scope exists for new activities in order to address the protection of TRHS in the long run. It is evident that the impact of this project could be sustained for a protracted timeframe and enhanced by further initiatives if funding could be sought appropriately from different sources at the national and international levels 21

22

23

24 UNESCO Office, Jakarta Jl. Galuh II No. 5 Kebayoran Baru Jakarta Indonesia Tel : (62-21) Fax: (62-21) jakarta@unesco.org