Strengthening the Climate Change Agenda and Indonesia's Commitment to Protect Forest

Transcription

1 Briefing Paper Strengthening the Climate Change Agenda and Indonesia's Commitment to Protect Forest On the 21 st of January 2015, President Joko Widodo signed the Presidential Decree No. 16 Year 2015 regarding the Ministry of Environment and Forestry (KLHK). This presidential decree merges the Ministry of Environment with the Ministry of Forestry as well as dissolve the two ministerial levels of the REDD+ Agency and the National Council on Climate Change (DNPI) to form part of the Directorate General of Climate Change Controlling beneath the newlyformed ministry. We, the Coalition of Civil Society for Saving of Indonesian Forests and Global Climate, values the good intention of the President to improve the efficiency of bureaucracy with the merging of various bodies with similar authority and functions. This merger is inline with improved governance which will encourage coordination functions and the institutional mandate in order to perform more quickly and efficiently. Accordingly, the Coalition needs to express our views and recommendations as follows. A. The main characteristics of climate change. Related with the character of issue of climate change, we need to give some important notes which needs to be considered by the Joko widodo Government before the Presidential Decree No. 16 Year 2015 has any laws that implement the policy, relating to specific and formal structures and tasks within the KLHK. 1. Climate Change is Accumulative Climate change is a cumulative impact of unsustainable development practices and has been discussed as an international agenda since the establishment of the Convention on Climate Change in 1992 in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. The main roots of the problem must be reviewed, such as patterns of production and consumption which is only concerned with economic benefits through highly exploitative utilization of natural resources, coupled with insensitivity of economic system to the problems of injustice regarding the control of natural resources and development in general. Without a change in the pattern of development, climate conditions will continue to deteriorate. 2. Urgent and Timely Limited The impact of global climate change affects the level of national resilience. In a report published by the Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change (IPCC), it was explained that an increase in global temperature of 2 C would bring environmental impacts that are dangerous to the survival of mankind. This impact is already evident in Indonesia. Floods, landslides, droughts, and wildfires have seems to be a compulsory menu every year. Critical land in the forest area has reached more than 27 million hectares. 1 The condition of coastal communities and small islands are also threatened by rising sea levels. The biodiversity 1 From the coordination meetings welcome Forestry Conservation Forest Rehabilitation Cooperation with the MoU between the military and MoF and PT Garuda Indonesia, February 7, P a g e 1 8

2 that forms Indonesia's wealth is now in a vulnerable condition. Meanwhile, the size of the fish in the sea is shrinking due to reduced oxygen levels in the ocean because of the global warming. 3. Multi-sectorial The functions of the Directorate General of Climate Change Controlling mentioned in Presidential Decree 16/2015 (Article 28) include "mitigation, adaptation, reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, reduction and elimination of ozone depleting substances, mobilization of resources, greenhouse gas inventory, monitoring, reporting and verification climate change and the control of land and forest fires." These functions are multi-sectorial functions with respect to the mandate of other agencies and Local Government. In practice, the climate change agenda often clashes with the government's development agenda that prioritizes growth (pro-growth) in various sectors and is therefore often defeated. This is unfortunate because the rate of climate change has a significant impact on the success of long-term development. Adaptation to climate change is also very closely related to other sectors outside the KLHK. The preconditions for managing exploitative development, among others include; One Map Policy, participatory mapping, the moratorium on licensing, conflict resolution and recognition of rights of customary and local peoples, as well as acceleration of gazettement of forest areas which complies with Constitutional Court Ruling No. 45/PUU-IX / 2011 which are cross-sectorial agendas that must be coordinated by a ministry/institution whose mandate is cross-sectorial. These agendas must be carried out with the principle of inclusiveness, participation, and encouragement the public concern as a major rights holders. The relation between the climate change agenda and relevant institutional function spans to at least 6 (six) groups of ministries/institutions, as illustrated in the diagram below. P a g e 2 8

3 Relevant Ministries/Institutions: Presidential Office State Secretariat Cabinet Secretariat National Development Planning Ministry for Economic Affairs Forestry and Environment Land and Spatial Planning Ministry for Maritime Affairs Marine and Fisheries Energy and Mineral Resources Ministry for Human Development and Culture Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs Non- Ministerial Government Agencies/Non- Structural Institution Social Affairs Home Affairs Agency for Meteorology, Climatology and Geophysics Research, Technology and High Education Finance Transportation Village, Disadvantaged Regions and Transmigration Public Works & Public Housing Industry Trade Agriculture Tourism Foreign Affairs Defense Law & Human Right Investment Board Commission on Human Rights Geospatial Information Agency National Board for Disaster Management P a g e 3 8

4 As a note, while these preconditions have been met, the main objective of the climate change agenda is not possible without a consistent law enforcement by all levels of government in accordance with the principles of the rule of law and human rights. 4. Forestry Policy has already contributed to the release of emissions. Most of Indonesia's emissions come from destructions of forest and peat lands. According to the DNPI (2009), 87% of emissions produced by Indonesia comes from the use of peat land and forest destruction. Indonesia's deforestation rate which has always been greater than the 1 million hectares over the last two decades cannot be separated from the existing policies set by Forestry Ministry which are highly exploitative, which includes, inter alia, the granted forest concessions and relinquishment of forest area as well as the weak supervision of forest areas. Forest Watch Indonesia (2014) found that the loss of natural forest cover was at its greatest number between and was based on the function of the State Forest Area and Other Land Uses (APL) which in order of size are Production Forest with 1.28 million hectares of deforestation rates, APL up to 1.12 million hectares, Convertible Production Forest 0.78 million hectares, Limited Production Forest areas to 0.7 million hectares of forest, Protection Forest 0.48 million hectares and 0.23 million hectares of the Conservation Area. The total amount of deforestation is 2.3 million hectares which is significantly contributed by large scale license holders through HPH, HTI, Plantation, and Mining. In addition, the lack of government oversight resulted in the illegal clearing of forests and peat lands and therefore resulting in deforestation of 2.2 million hectares. 5. The large contribution of fossil fuels. National energy policy has been oriented towards the use of fossil fuels which is a cause of carbon emissions that are partly derived from mining practices that have high destructive power. The level of dependence on fossil fuels is very high while the proportion of renewable energy is very small. National energy policy has been highly centralized and has been dedicated to the business world rather than the availability of sufficient energy for the majority of peoples. In 2014, coal production reached 435 million tons with exports amounting to 359 million tons while the Domestic Market Obligation (DMO) has reached 76 million tons. This year, coal remains the cornerstone of production with a target of 420 million tons. The government is also encouraging increased use of coal in the state, with the construction of several coal electricity plants in Indonesia. Indonesia will be further from its commitment to reduce green house gas emissions by 26% by 2020 due to Land Use Land Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF) and the use of dirty energy without a fundamental change in national energy policy. The plans to encourage the use of renewable energy based on land requirements would also not be in line with the emission reduction commitments. 6. No Backsliding Indonesia, since the beginning of President's administration, has expressed its commitment to national emission reductions by 26% as domestic efforts and with foreign support of above 41% in Most of these commitments will be implemented through REDD + given the major source of Indonesia's emissions from forests and land peat. This commitment has been widely exposed and is regarded as a step forward by almost every country, recorded in the institution of Climate Change Convention, recorded by various P a g e 4 8

5 NGOs and recorded in the reports of international and national media. To achieve these targets, the Government of Indonesia has undertaken initiatives which are driven by various levels of civil society participation, such as the Joint Memorandum of Understanding (NKB) regarding the 12 Ministers of Acceleration Region Conservation Forest, review of licensing, transparency map, moratorium and customary law community, the licensing system information. It would be prudent for Indonesia to be consistent with the commitments and positive initiatives that have been in place and appreciate the global agreement to not do any backsliding in handling climate change as outlined in the RPJMN of to recommitting 26% emission reductions in B. Positive Milestones In connection with the characteristics of the climate change issue discussed above, the initiatives of the Joko Widodo Government which brings together the two Ministries and two institution at the Ministry, at least has two positive foundations that need to be a milestone in the preparation of more detailed structure. 1. Efficiency of the bureaucracy Until now, there is uncertainty about the state agencies that administer the issue of climate change, including the responsibility for coordination and evaluation of emissions reduction. The establishment of the Directorate General of Climate Change Control under KLHK simplifies the lines of accountability and streamlines the planning, implementation and evaluation. This structure is expected to create a good coordination system, making efforts to encourage mitigation and adaptation to climate change will be integrated. Additionally, the public input channel to deliver improved handling of climate change is also becoming clearer at the institutional level. 2. Strengthening the Role of the Environment Institute at a Local Level Before it merged with the Ministry of Forestry, the Ministry of Environment was working on environmental issues including climate change and it often encountered difficulties in terms of ensuring its agenda was implemented at the regional level. This matter is related to the classification of government affairs in the Law 39 of 2008 on The State Ministry of Environment in which states that the institution is formed for the "sharpening, coordination, and synchronization of government programs" (Article 4 paragraph (2) c). This nature of KLH had legal administrative consequence that instead of having directorate general which has executing authority to the regional level, it only had deputy which does not has the same authority at regional level. By combining the two ministries, the Ministry of Living authority becomes equal with the Ministry of Forestry and are included in the scope of government affairs in 1945 (Article 4 (2) b) which has authority among others for the "Implementation of technical guidance and supervision over the conduct of the affairs ministry in area." The ability and leadership which is better than the government before it, the expected environmental agenda, including climate change, will more easily coordinated with the Regional Government. C. Potential Risks However, we noted some risks that need to be considered in determining the structure of the Jokowi Government's KLHK such as: 1. Unable to accomodate cross sectorial authority. P a g e 5 8

6 Reflections on the performance of the cabinet which almost always appear in the previous regimes, is the difficulty of inter-ministerial coordination. Even the REDD + agency and NCCC which were formed to accelerate the coordination of climate change and forestry issues have not been able to carry out their duties properly. Coordination function will not work if the coordinating authority only laid the Directorate General level institutions. Therefore, the government needs to find a way out for better coordination for the issue of climate change. 2. The transition institutions are not prepared The merger of the Ministry of Environment and Forestry Ministry does not take into account the environmental and institutional readiness, which until now has often contradicted to teach other. Likewise, the regional governments do not have the capacity to immediately respond to rapid institutional change at the central level. The position of environmental issues historically has often been treated as a minor issue and institutionally inferior when facing off with extractive natural resources sectors. Therefore, strengthening the function of the environment functions does not automatically strengthen the function of environment institutions at the regional level. 3. The corrective function which is difficult to undertake. One of the major roles that should be played by the institutions that deal with climate change is to correct the system of forest governance and overall development model. The agenda of the moratorium on forest and peat land permits as well as the refining of forest governance are one step towards correction which is driven by civil society, and assessed as opening opportunities to review and correction of the forestry policies over the years. From the perspective of good governance, the function of the review should be conducted by institutions that are not involved in the formation and implementation of policies that have destroyed the forests and the environment. This is necessary to ensure the objectivity of the results of the review where there is distance between the assessing institution and the institution being assessed. 4. Limited space for public participation In the process of development of climate change policy until now, there has already been several initiatives provide space and public input in policy formulation. The tradition of institutionalization of public input had not been visible as part of the performance of the Ministry of Forestry (before it merged). Many policies of the release of forest lands and granting of forest licenses were done without considering input from public, moreover their rejections. 5. Budget policies are incompatible with the character of climate change The budget allocation for urgent matters related to the issue of climate change so far has not been adequate or sustainable. Even if there were additional funds from developed countries that were responsible for the impacts of climate change in developing countries, it will be redundant if the budget system continues to follow the current pattern. This is because the structure and mechanism of the state budget based on current mechanism of the State Budget (APBN), is not suited to address environmental issues, forestry, and climate change which is (by nature) has long-term and cumulative impact whose results cannot be seen. P a g e 6 8

7 D. Recommendations Taking into account the opportunities and challenges mentioned above, we recommend some important points that should be the reference of the new government performance in controlling and addressing the impacts of climate change. Some points are also associated with the arrangement of the internal structure of the Ministry, namely: 1. Climate Change Response Strategy a. KLHK should encourage the adaptation agenda to be as strong as mitigation mechanisms. Therefore, areas which are categorized as vulnerable (such as small islands) on the adaptation map need to be supported with mitigation and likewise, mitigation efforts should be combined with adaptation agenda. In addition, the overall development plan should stop new pressures on vulnerable areas by restricting the granting of exploitative permits and prioritize programs that assist adaptation. b. KLHK along with associated ministries/institutions shall continue and accelerate the implementation of the agenda, which is a prerequisite of effective control of climate change, namely: 1) The One Map Policy. 2 The government should immediately issue a government regulation on the implementation of the One Map Policy, by ordering all related sectors to completed the synchronization of the map with the Geospatial Information Agency in no later than 1 (one) year. The regulation should expressly stipulate that all forms of licensing refer to the One Map. Given the importance of this agenda insustainable development, we propose the implementation is carried out by an independent team directly responsible to the President. 2) Participatory Mapping and Forest Boundaries Governing. 3 The government should strengthen public participation in the governance of forest boundaries by accommodating participatory mapping instruments as a basis for forest boundaries governance. 3) The Permit Moratorium on Forest Area and Peatland, noting the need to be refined again to rescue the remaining natural forests; 4 4) Acceleration of Forest Area Gazettement. 5 Affirmation of forest areas should at least refer to the two Constitutional Court Ruling namely Ruling No 45 / PUU-IX / 2011 and the Constitutional Court Ruling No. 35 / PUU-X / ) Conflict resolution and recognition of rights of customary peoples and local peoples. 6 The government must provide a stronger legal framework to resolve forestry conflicts which are of cross sectorial nature, given the reality on the 2 Based on the mandate of Law No.4 of 2011 on Geospatial Information, Presidential Decree No. 27 of 2014 on the National Geospatial Information Network, and RPJMN Under Law No. 4 of 2011 on Geospatial Information, Law 26 of 2007 on Spatial and Law regarding Villages 4 Based on the mandate of Presidential Instruction No. 6 of 2013 on New Permit Delays And Improving Governance Primary Forest and Peat land. 5 Based on the Memorandum of Understanding with 12 K / L on the Acceleration of Indonesian Forest Area Conservation 6 Based on TAP MPR No. IX year 2001 and RPJMN P a g e 7 8

8 ground in forest-related issues as well with non-forestry issues such as mining, infrastructure development, plantation. c. KLHK must support fundamental changes in national energy policy to gradually abandon the dependence on fossil fuels and to prioritize the fulfillment of the domestic needs evenly rather than global markets. 2. Institutional Strategy a. Function coordination, monitoring, and evaluation carried out by the Ministry for the Economy. Given the impact of climate change is unsustainable development, the solution must target the improvement of the pattern of development as the root of the problem. It requires coordination between the 6 ministries/organizations K / L whose authority is controlled by the Ministry of Coordination. This can bridge the multi-sectorial coordination deadlock and also ensure the relevant sectors to achieve the target of climate change mitigation and adaptation. b. KLHK must make the Law 32 of 2009 on the Protection and Management of the Environment a basis in determining the structure and programs, given the environmental issues is greater and wider than forestry alone. This will be realized by the completion of the drafting of the Environmental Protection and Management Plan (RPPLH) and Strategic Environmental Assessment (KLHS). Therefore, forestry area planning must refer to the RPPLH. Similarly, the utilization of forest area in the form of licensing or plans to change the status and functions should be based on environmental standards contained within the KLHS. This should be realized in the structure of the directorate general to promote the strengthening of the environment rather than the exploitation of the forest. c. The Directorate General of Climate Change Control is to set standards and environmental audit systems that is tighten the release of emissions as well as play an active role in encouraging making the RPPLH and KHLS to be effective in mainstreaming sustainable development. d. The need for reform of state budgeting system that can accommodate the interests of environmental protection, forestry, and the fact that climate change impact is long-term (multi-years) and accumulative as well as invisible and immeasurable. This includes considering models of climate change funding that have been there. Trust fund mechanism being applied we deem sufficient to accommodate the climate change agenda. However, this mechanism should be regarded as a form of transition towards a new state budget system that meets the principles of public accountability. P a g e 8 8