44
Community Forest Ecosystem Services, Indonesia Plan Vivo Project Design Document (PDD)
Community Forest Ecosystem Services, Indonesia
Plan Vivo Project Design Document (PDD)
i
Table of Contents Table of Contents ..................................................................................................................................... i
Title of project ......................................................................................................................................... 1
Executive summary ................................................................................................................................. 1
1 Aims and objectives ......................................................................................................................... 2
2 Site information, activities, and carbon benefit ................................................................................ 2
2.1 Project location, land type, and boundaries .............................................................................. 2
2.2 Description of the project area ................................................................................................. 4
2.3 Description of the plan vivo technical specification (methodologies) ........................................ 8
2.4 Duration of project activities and crediting period .................................................................... 8
2.5 Carbon benefits of project activities ......................................................................................... 9
2.6 Process and requirements for registering plan vivos ................................................................. 9
3 Project governance and financial structure .................................................................................... 10
3.1 Project organizational structure ............................................................................................. 10
3.2 Relationship to national organisations .................................................................................... 13
3.3 Project financial structure (sharing of benefit) ........................................................................ 14
4 Community and livelihood information .......................................................................................... 16
4.1 Target communities/groups ................................................................................................... 16
4.2 Ownership of carbon benefits (land-tenure) ........................................................................... 18
4.3 Socio – economic context and anticipated impacts ................................................................. 19
4.4 Community-led design and livelihood benefits ....................................................................... 20
4.5 Capacity building and training ................................................................................................ 21
4.6 Monitoring livelihood and socio-economic impacts ................................................................ 22
5 Ecosystem impacts and monitoring ................................................................................................ 23
6 Additionality of project and project activities ................................................................................. 24
7 Monitoring, technical support, and payment plan .......................................................................... 25
7.1 Monitoring of performance indicators.................................................................................... 25
7.2 Payment plan ......................................................................................................................... 26
7.3 Technical support and review ................................................................................................. 26
8 Compliance with the law................................................................................................................ 27
9 Certification or evaluation to other standards ................................................................................ 28
Bibliography .......................................................................................................................................... 29
Annexes ................................................................................................................................................ 30
Annex 1. List of responsible staff ....................................................................................................... 30
Annex 2. Information regarding public and other sources of co-funding ............................................ 30
Annex 3. Technical specifications ....................................................................................................... 30
Annex 4. Database template .............................................................................................................. 31
Annex 5. Permits and legal documentation ........................................................................................ 32
Annex 6. Evidence of community participation e.g meeting minutes.................................................. 37
Annex 7. Annual Reports ................................................................................................................... 41
1
Title of project Community Forest Ecosystem Services, Indonesia
Executive summary This Project Design Documents provides describes the Plan Vivo Community Payments for
Ecosystem Services (PES) Pilot Project in Indonesia. The main goal of this project is to help
community forestry in Hutan Desa scheme, and potentially in other community forestry schemes
in Indonesia, to protect forest and its services by integrating payments for ecosystem services
(PES) and community forest management.
Fauna & Flora International (FFI) is the coordinator of this project. During project development
and establishment, FFI has been working with local and national NGO partners such as ASRI,
RMI, and LATIN in providing technical supports for the project. To ensure the project runs in
the right track during the project period, the technical support and review from these
organizations will continue.
The Community PES Project was piloted in the Hutan Desa (village forest) Laman Satong in
West Kalimantan Province, which has 1,070 ha area. The area within the hutan desa that will
generate plan vivo certificate or the Carbon Crediting Area (CAA) is 378.30 ha. Once this pilot
project is operating, expansion is anticipated to a number of villages in other community forests,
especially in West Kalimantan and Jambi Provinces. The project intervention is being developed
in accordance with the Plan Vivo System and Standard (Plan Vivo 2008). The objectives of this
project are conservation of natural forest and mature agro-forest, sustainable utilization of
timber, non-timber forest products (NTFPs) and ecosystem services, and improved well-being of
target communities. The methods for quantifying carbon stocks and carbon benefits and
generating Plan Vivo Certificates were developed using a Plan Vivo Community Forest
Ecosystem Services, Indonesia technical specification. Project activities undertaken in the project
area include: forest protection (e.g. community forest patrols) and restoration, sustainable forest
use management, sustainable agriculture and agroforestry, and NTFP enterprises.
This project has a crediting period of 35 years, divided into seven 5-year phases. Funding has
been secured for the first phase (2013 to 2017). For the project to continue for the next phases
2
(2018 to 2038), further funding needs to be arranged. After each successful annual monitoring
period, certificates will be issued and payments will be made. In the first phase, the carbon
benefits to be generated by the project are estimated to be 83,322.38 tCO2e.
1 Aims and objectives The main goal of this project is to help community forestry in Hutan Desa scheme, and
potentially in other community forestry schemes in Indonesia, to protect forest and its services
by integrating payments for ecosystem services (PES) and community forest management. The
intervention that will generate plan vivo certificate is avoided deforestation.
The specific objectives of the project are: 1) conservation of natural forest and mature agro-
forest; 2) sustainable utilisation of timber, non-timber forest products (NTFPs) and ecosystem
services; and 3) improved well-being of target communities
2 Site information, activities, and carbon benefit
2.1 Project location, land type, and boundaries
The project is located in Hutan Desa Laman Satong. This Hutan Desa is the pilot project area for
CFES Indonesia Project. Once this pilot project is operating, expansion is anticipated to a
number of villages in other community forests, especially in West Kalimantan and Jambi
Provinces.
Hutan Desa Laman Satong is located in Ketapang District, West Kalimantan Province. The area
of this hutan desa is 1,070 hectares. The area within the hutan desa that will generate plan vivo
certificate or the Carbon Crediting Area (CAA) is 378.30 ha. Detail steps and criteria to
determine CAA is described in technical specification.
3
Figure 1. Hutan Desa Laman Satong
4
2.2 Description of the project area Hutan Desa Laman satong lies between Gunung Palung National Park (GPNP) and Gunung
Tarak protection forest to the northwest and two palm oil plantation concessions (Golden Yolk
and Kayong Agro Lestari) to the southeast. The majority of the village administrative area
(32,600 ha in size) has been allocated for this oil palm development, with associated conflicts
over land between village inhabitants and the concessions. A plan for a bauxite mining operation
(PT Laman Mining) is also progressing. The company was awarded an exploration license that
includes the hutan desa area; no exploitation license has been approved to date and it is hoped
that the hutan desa will be excluded from any subsequent operational area.
Situated in the mineral soil in a lowland hilly area (elevation below 100m asl), the hutan desa is
part of the catchment area for the Satong and Tolak rivers flowing south to nearby peat swamp
areas and the coast. The village forest area comprises of two hills, Bukit Tatas and Bukit
Kaderon, divided by Manjau sub-village housing settlement along a gravelled road. Springs in
these forests are the main sources of running water for the villagers. Some spots in the Hutan
desa are sacred groves, where religious rituals are performed.
The land cover type in the hutan desa is dominated by secondary forest, agroforest, and scrub. In
the past the forest was either logged or cleared for upland rice fields, after which the land was
either transformed into mixed agroforest (rubber, fruit and timber trees ) or left fallow for several
years then cleared for a new cycle of upland rice cultivation. Today, under customary rules,
clearing new forest is prohibited. Tree planting and/or upland rice field cultivation of the fallow
land (bawas) is encouraged, but is often constrained by of shortage family labour and/or good
quality planting materials. Labour exchange is often performed to cope with cash and labour
shortages.
The hutan desa area falls within B1 agro – climatic zone of Oldemen et al. (1980). B1 zone has a
long-term average of at less seven, but less than nine wet months, and less than two dry months
respectively per year. WorldClim precipitation data indicates that the hutan desa area
experiences a long term average of ten ‘wet’ months, 2 ‘medium’ months (between 100 and 200
mm rainfall per month) and no dry months per year. This data has been checked and verified
against RePPProT rainfall data for the three nearest rainfall stations to the hutan desa area
(Sandai, Ketapang and Sukadana). Estimated annual rainfall is between 3,000 and 3,500mm per
5
year (WorldClim). Annual rainfall in the surrounding landscape ranges from 2,900 to 3,800mm,
peaking on the vicinity of the mountains at nearby Sukadana.
Several high conservation values are present within the hutan desa. The hutan desa provides
biodiversity support function to GPNP and Gunung Tarak Protection forest, provides clean water
and other ecosystem services for villagers, and supports cultural and religious activities of
villagers. The secondary forests and mature agroforests in the hutan desa are home to protected
Bornean species of mammal, bird, amphibians and reptiles, and tree (dipterocarps). A total of 14
mammals, 158 birds, 24 amphibians and reptiles, and 48 tree species were recorded within the
project area based on a baseline participatory biodiversity assessment conducted in 2011-2012.
Many of these are endemic and listed on the IUCN Red List, including the Endangered Bornean
white-bearded gibbon (Hylobates albibaris), and the Critically Endangered rusty brown
dipterocarp tree (Hopea ferruginea). In addition, six of eight possible hornbill species known as
forest health indicators and forest dwellers were recorded. Besides hornbills, others forest
dwellers such as the great argus (Argusianus argus), the Malayan box turtle (Cuora
amboinensis), and the Southeast Asian soft-shell turtle (Amyda cartilaginea) were recorded
within the project area.
Figure 2. Bornean white-bearded gibbon (Hylobates albibabris) (left) and Southeast Asian soft-
shell turtle, Amyda cartilaginea (right). Photographed by Andhy PS and Angga R (FFI)
6
Figure 3. Rhinoceros hornbill (Buceros rhinoceros) (left) and Wallace’s Hawk-Eagle (Spizaetus
nanus. Photographed by Andhy PS (FFI)
The main cause of deforestation and degradation in Hutan Desa Laman Satong is land
conversion. The study of land use change in Ketapang District landscape reveals an alarming rate
of conversion of lowland secondary forests, chiefly due to agricultural expansion: 50.2% has
been converted during the period 2000 (1,280,955 ha) to 2005 (637,868 ha). Land use change in
the forest area of Laman Satong village is consistent with the results of the study. Following
logging operations until the mid-2000s, the entire village territory was designated by the
Ministry of Forestry as convertible production forest (logged-over forest made available for
conversion to other/non-forestry uses). In the proposed new spatial plan, the area is no longer
designated as a forest zone, but other use land instead. In 2009 the district government issued
permits for palm oil development to private companies, followed by the physical process of
forest conversion.
7
Figure 4. The Hutan Desa Laman Satong land cover
8
2.3 Description of the plan vivo technical specification (methodologies)
This technical specification is developed for the Community Forest Ecosystem Services project,
known as the CFES Indonesia project in West Kalimantan and Jambi Provinces, Indonesia. The
approach described is likely to be suitable for forest protection and restoration with agroforestry
as an additional activity. Scaling up this technical specification to a broader landscape would
require site-specific information derived from the area itself
Table 1. Technical specification
Title Type of
activity
Objectives Brief description Target areas / groups
Community
Forest
Ecosystem
Services
(CFES),
Indonesia
Forest
protection
and
restoration
Forest
conservation
Maintain and enhance
carbon stock in hutan
desa or other
community forest
schemes
Hutan desa (village
forest) and other
community forest
schemes
2.4 Duration of project activities and crediting period The project has total crediting period for 35 years, divided into seven 5 year phases. Funding has
been secured for the first phase (2013 to 2018). Further funding for the project to continue to the
next phases (2018 to 2038) needs to be arranged. After each successful annual monitoring,
certificates will be issued and payments will be made.
For the initial 5 years period, the community has signed a contract to protect their hutan desa..
After each successful annual monitoring, certificates will be issued and payments will be made.
The crediting period is 5 years for the first phase.
Once funding for the next phases (second to seven phases) has been arranged, the communities
may renew their contract to protect the hutan desa for each phase. Similar with the first phase,
certificates and payments will be made following successful monitoring each year. The crediting
period will be an additional 5 years for each phase. At the end of 35 years, the baseline will be
reset.
9
2.5 Carbon benefits of project activities The changes in carbon stocks expected under the baseline and project scenarios as well are the
project carbon benefits for the Hutan Desa Laman Satong are described in Table 2.
Table 2. Summary of baseline and project carbon uptake or emissions reductions per hectare over
crediting period.
Site Title of
technical
spec
1. Baseline
carbon
uptake/
emissions
(t CO2e / ha)
2. Carbon
uptake/
emissions
reductions
with
project
(t CO2e /
ha)
3. Expected
losses
from
leakage
(t CO2e /
ha)
4. Deduction
of risk buffer
(t CO2e / ha)
Net
carbon
benefit
(t CO2e /
ha)
= 2 –
(1+3 +4)
Laman Satong CFES
Indonesia
110.50 215.14 0 54.13 50.51
2.6 Process and requirements for registering plan vivos In this case, plan vivos is the hutan desa management plan registered with the government of
Indonesia in provincial level. Registering the hutan desa management plan with the government,
establishes long-term user right to forest resources (including carbon) for the hutan desa Laman
Satong under MoF decree P.49/2008 on Hutan Desa.
Significant effort went into updating the hutan desa management plan so that they incorporate
the communities’ interest in maintaining forest cover and receiving benefit from standing forest.
The hutan desa management plan divides the forest into sectors and outlines management
activities that will be used to reduce the impact on forest resources. Additionally, FFI and local
NGO partners have facilitated the hutan desa management plan with community participant to
ensure that they meet technical requirements, livelihood needs, and will not endanger food
security or displace other land-uses. The hutan desa management plan will be made available to
the Plan Vivo Foundation and the validator.
10
Before additional communities in the area may enter the project, additional funding must be
obtained. For a new community to enter the project, they will first demonstrate land use rights by
registering their Community Forest to MoF.
3 Project governance and financial structure
3.1 Project organizational structure
Fauna & Flora International (FFI) act as focal point for project coordination, representing the site
and providing the linkage with the Plan Vivo Foundation. A number of additional organizations
involved as project partners, including local-standing NGO partner ASRI (experienced in
agroforestry/reforestation and community conservation). RMI and LATIN (national NGOs)
provided discrete external technical services to the project, supporting in-depth socialization of
REDD+ and the Plan Vivo System, participatory project design and PDD development. None of
the partners have a commercial interest in the project.
In order to adapt to the local context of existing partner relationships and distribution of skills
and expertise, certain project co-ordinator responsibilities will be led or co-implemented by the
partners above.
Table 3. Project participants
Key Function Organisation/
group(s)
involved
Type of group/
organisation and legal
status
Brief description of
activities
Project
Administration
FFI, PV
management
facility
Non – Governmental
Organization registered
in the United Kingdom
Project developer,
management, and
administration,
Project
Technical
Operations
FFI and local
partners
Non – Governmental
Organization registered
in the United Kingdom
Providing technical
aspects, community
engagement and support
Community Laman Satong Community forest legal Management of activity
11
Engagement/
Participation
Village Forest
Institution/Lemba
ga Pengelola
Hutan Desa
(LPHD)
entity implementation
Fauna & Flora International (FFI)
FFI champions the conservation of biodiversity, to secure a healthy future for our planet where
people, wildlife and wild places coexist. The organization works to build the capacity of local
partners to conserve endangered species like the Sumatran tiger, or threatened ecosystems such
as the fruit and nut forests of Central Asia. Lasting local partnerships have been at the heart of
the organisation’s conservation activities for more than one hundred years, and its work now
spans the globe with more than 140 projects in over 40 countries.
The FFI Indonesia Programme was established in 1996. Today the programme works to conserve
a diverse range of threatened species and ecosystems throughout the archipelago, and has a
particularly strong focus on empowering forest-edge communities to conserve and benefit from
high conservation value forest landscapes. The project team has developed substantial expertise
in climate change and the development of REDD+ activities in the Indonesian context. In this
project FFI has been involved in initiation, development, and implementation processes.
Alam Sehat Lestari (ASRI)
Asri is an innovative non-profit organization that dovetails environmental & human health in
rural Indonesia. The organization works to protect Gunung Palung National Park (West
Kalimantan) and the communities of about 60,000 people on its border, and aims to stop the
poverty-poor health-deforestation cycle, turning local loggers into forest guardians. The
organization has five main projects, health care, reforestation, organic gardening, goats for
widows, and conservation outreach and education. In this project, the organization involved in
providing technical supports in agroforestry and restoration activities.
Rimbawan Muda Indonesia (RMI)
12
RMI is an independent, nonprofit organization works for natural resources and environmental
issues, especially forest resource related. It is legally constituted as foundation on September 18,
1992 in Bogor, West Java. RMI has experiences in developing some studies and field action
programs related to protection, preservation, and utilization of natural resources for the
prosperity of the communities, especially indigenous and local communities. The organization
has five main programs, Community Based Forest Management (CBFM) for better life, CBFM
and tenurial system, climate change mitigation, adaptation, and landscape management, and
gender and local leadership. In this project, the organization involved in supporting in-depth
socialization of REDD+ and the Plan Vivo System, participatory project design and PDD
development.
Lembaga Alam Tropika Indonesai (LATIN)
LATIN is a national, nonprofit organization that was established on 5 October 1989. The
organization was focused on natural resources management. In the mid-1990s, the organization
started to focus more on community forestry. LATIN has experience in facilitating and
developing REDD + project in Meru Betiri National Park in East Java. The role of LATIN in this
project is similar with RMI’s role.
13
Figure 5. Project organizational structure
3.2 Relationship to national organisations MoF representatives and District Forestry Department in Ketapang District have been informed
of the proposed project, its activities and participants through presentation on the progress of
FFI’s wider REDD+ program in Indonesia to the MoF REDD+ Working Group, and informal
discussion directly with the Chairperson of the REDD+ Working Group. Local government staff
participated in Plan Vivo training in Merangin, Ketapang and Bogor in June 2012.
The project team is currently completing estimates of potential avoided GHG emissions from all
hutan desa,that are supported by FFI in Merangin and Ketapang Districts. The results will be
used to engage in more depth with the MoF REDD+ Working Group and the Presidential
REDD+ Task Force.
Project Coordinator, management, and
technical and administrative supports
(Report to Plan Vivo Foundation)
FFI
Project implementer
Laman Satong LPHD
Community Activity
Groups Laman Satong
Social benefit groups
Laman Satong
14
3.3 Project financial structure (sharing of benefit)
Financial Structure
To facilitate transfer of payments from buyers of Plan Vivo certificates to producers in the target
communities, a dedicated Indonesia-registered administrative facility will be established for the
sole purpose of managing and monitoring certificate sales and PES payments. This will be
established by agreed partners as an independent structure, with clear and transparent
governance; and will ensure all financial management is managed efficiently and in accordance
with national legislation. Henceforth this facility is referred to as the PV management facility.
PES funds are held in a bank account administrated by FFI as project coordinator. These funds
will be released on annual basis once the Plan Vivo Foundation has approved the annual
monitoring report submitted. The funds are released to a dedicated PES account administered by
PV management facility. PV management facility then makes payments directly to the Laman
Satong LPHD bank accounts. The schematic diagram of this financial structure mechanism is
shown in Figure 6.
Figure 6. Division of PES Funds
PES (REDD+) funds
PV management facility
dedicated account: Indonesia
Plan Vivo
foundation
Laman Satong Village
Forest Institution
(LPHD)
15
Benefit sharing
Laman Satong village has three sub-vilages, Manjau, Kepayang, and Nek doyan. The community
has been made an agreement regarding the benefit sharing on November 2012. This agreement
states that only community in Manjau sub – village will receive the benefit sharing from PES
funds, since the whole hutan desa area is located in Manjau sub – village administrative area.
Participatory assessments on benefit-sharing mechanism have been conducted from different
stakeholders, community, NGO, and government. All stakeholders agree that most benefit goes
to the local community. From the community perspective, the government and NGO will each
receive 10% of PES funds, and the rest 80 % of PES funds will goes to community. In the
agreement on November 2012, the community of Manjau sub – village has been determined the
benefit sharing mechanism within them. Figure 7 shows the diagram of benefit sharing
mechanism in Manjau sub – village.
In order to ensure that fairness in benefit-sharing is continued after the project development,
ground-rules were established with the community and integrated into the benefit-sharing
contracts. These rules were established for all the community groups, including: the management
group (the legal entity representing the Community Forest); the activity groups (livelihood
activities); and the social benefit groups (groups identified as vulnerable by community
members). Everyone in the community has the opportunity to join any group they wish.
16
Figure 7. Manjau sub – village benefit sharing mechanism.
4 Community and livelihood information
4.1 Target communities/groups
Target groups involved in this project are the community members of the villages of Laman
Satong. This village consists of three sub – villages, Manjau, Kepayang, and Nek Doyan.
Description of cultural and socioeconomic context
The village community is predominantly indigenous Dayak Kalay people with 80 – 100% of
residents in each sub-village (dusun). Others ethnic in the village are Melayu, Javanese, Chinese
and Bugis. A census in 2009 estimates the population of Laman Satong Village to be 2,368
inhabitants with 1,284 male and 1,084 female. Just under 50% of village community is resident
Laman Satong LPHD
Community Activity
Groups
Social Benefit
Groups
Customary
Institution Village forest
land owner
Village
Government
Elderly
group
Orphan
group
Disabled person
group
Scholarship
Health fund
Forest patrolling
and monitoring
group
Agroforestry
group
NTFPs
group
Restoration
group
Infrastructure
17
in Manjau sub-village, where the hutan desa is located. Customary leaders play an important role
in village social affairs, including forest protection and utilization. The 1,070-hectare approved
village forest area is customary protected forest.
Up to the end of 1960s, the villagers lived in traditional communal longhouses (betang), but were
later instructed to live in individual houses. Besides government agencies, since 1970s church
organizations have been active in implementing various community development projects in the
village. Tree planting, provision of running water, mains electricity and infrastructure (roads,
bridges) have been the main development aid items.
The village has four elementary schools and one primary school. Each sub – villages (dusun) has
an elementary school, except Manjau sub – village which has two elementary schools. With
regard to medical facilities, this village has two medical centers which are located in Manjau and
Kepayang sub – villages, and each sub – village has traditional midwifes and healers. The village
also has source for clean water supply.
Main sources of income
Rubber-based agroforestry and upland and rain-fed rice farming are the main agricultural
systems in Laman Satong Village. The village produces commercial fruits such as durian, langsat
and rambutan. With a road connecting the village with Ketapang city, marketing is relatively
easy. A large portion of the village population worked in the logging industry in the past, but
more recently earn wages from working on palm oil plantations. Other economic activities in the
village include boar hunting, vegetable planting, handicraft production, livestock production and
artisanal gravel mining. A significant portion of the village inhabitants are recipients of
government’s ‘rice for the poor’ (beras miskin [raskin]) program.
Relevant local governance structures
The administrative village was formed in 1986 through the merging of three major settlements
(laman), namely Manjau, Kepayang and Nek Doyan. The village is the lowest level government
administrative structure, led by a democratically elected head and appointed secretary. Both
receive a nominal salary from the district government budget. The village head reports to the
18
democratically elected district head, but is directly supervised by a government-appointed
subdistrict head. The village has a village-level legislative body (BPD) that supervises the
performance of the village head and staff, and village customary insitution (lembaga adat),
whose leader is also democratically elected and is usually a village elder as the person occupying
this role must understand traditional customs.
4.2 Ownership of carbon benefits (land-tenure) The project area is inside the government-designated state forest zone and falls under the
jurisdiction of the Ministry of Forestry (MoF), which has authority to award forest area and
management rights either to the private sector or local communities. Forest management and
commercial utilization plans are subject to MoF approval (although some of the MoF’s authority
has been devolved to local government as a result of a decentralization process started in the late
1990s). Results of periodic compliance monitoring determine whether management rights/
licenses are revoked or continued.
In the project area the hutan desa area license has already been awarded for 35 years by the
MoF, and approval of the community forest management license from the provincial governor is
a priority activity of this project during 2012. This hutan desa management right will be
evaluated every 5 years by MoF to determine whether it is revoked or continued. Similar to
biomass (wood), carbon is considered government ‘property’, and commercial utilization of this
‘commodity’ by the private sector and community requires government approval, which will be
secured as part of project activities. Approval for its dis/continuation is contingent on the results
of monitoring. Government regulations on benefit-sharing must also be followed, as payment of
government levies (‘vertical’ benefit-sharing) is regulated.
At the local level, while agricultural fields and secondary forest/fallow areas are individually
owned, forest is considered as either common property or as an open access area. Since the state
forest gazettement process overlapped with village administrative areas, and often included
agroforestry and agricultural fields, disputes over the forest zone boundary feature almost
anywhere in the country, including in the project area. Supporting the target communities to
secure legal recognition of their customary forest areas as hutan desa helps to reduce this
tension.
19
4.3 Socio – economic context and anticipated impacts The community of Laman Satong depends on their hutan desa (community forest) for
provisioning their basic needs, especially clean water. In addition, the hutan desa provides other
important ecosystem services for the community. Socioeconomic characteristic of community in
Laman Satong is described in Table 4.
Table 4. Socioeconomic characteristics of community in Laman Satong
Laman Satong
Population 2,368
Ethnic groups Dayak
Melayu
Javanese
Bugis
Chinese
Maduranese
Literacy Most of residents have completed
elementary school.
Distance to closest town 59 Km to Ketapang
Date of signing of Community
Forest agreement
2012
Community Forest area 1,070 ha
Status of Community Forest Customary forest. Previously, there
were small-scale timber extraction
and land conversion into rubber agro-
forest by community.
Secondary forest and mature agro-
forest. Presence of high-value species
such as Kelempiau (Hylobates
albibabris)
Main livelihood activities Rice field and Rubber agroforestry
farmer
Oil palm labour
Merchant
Wellbeing indicators selected by
community
(1) House made from concrete with
zing or tile roofs
20
(2) Motor vehicle
(3) Rubber and fruits agroforestry
(4) Providing basic needs
independently
Impacts of project activities
Project activities are designed to protect forest, encourage sustainable forest use management, to
introduce sustainable agricultural and agroforestry practices, and NTFP practices. Over time,
wellbeing indicators will be monitored to measure the impacts of project activities (Table 4).
4.4 Community-led design and livelihood benefits Participation of the target community in project design and implementation has and will continue
to be central to project delivery. FFI and local NGO partner Yayasan Palung have been
intensively assisting communities in the formation of Lembaga Pengelola Hutan Desa (LPHD)
or village forest institution, and village planning in relation to hutan desa management planning
(mapping, hutan desa zoning, and preparation of village laws pertaining to hutan desa and
drafting of hutan desa management plan documents). RMI has initiated Free Prior and Informed
Consent (FPIC) consultation and introduction of basic REDD+ principles, and ASRI has been
implementing a community-based reforestation project in Ketapang District, West Kalimantan.
In keeping with Plan Vivo criteria and guidelines, participatory approaches will be used at every
stage of project development to ensure community participation in all activities, such as
mapping, baseline forest and social data collection, land use and management planning, risk
analysis, project design and monitoring. Project facilitators will encourage the widest possible
participation of target community members in project development to help ensure the views of
all sectors of the community are represented and that there are equitable opportunities for
individual community members both to participate in project activities, and to feel their benefits.
Particular effort will be made to facilitate inclusion of vulnerable or potentially marginalized
people, such as poorer members of the community and women, particularly female-headed
households.
21
RMI will remain involved to support Plan Vivo REDD+ project design, with additional support
from LATIN in community participatory design of project activities, benefit-sharing structures
and monitoring protocols for forest and biodiversity conservation and socio-economic impacts.
FFI and local partners will continue to provide permanent on-site community facilitation,
mentoring and capacity building.
4.5 Capacity building and training The project has conducted several training activities to improve community capacity and ability
in forest management, and institutional governance. These trainings include:
1. A series of forest inventory and monitoring training including High Conservation Value
and biodiversity assessments, carbon stock measurement, threats identification to forest
area, and phenology observation. From these trainings, the community obtained new
knowledge and skills, such as methods for biodiversity assessment, use and application of
monitoring data collection sheets and GPS units, conducting biomass inventories.
2. REDD+ and Plan Vivo standard trainings. These trainings provided knowledge on
REDD+ and Plan Vivo standard for the community, thus they have better understanding
on these subjects.
3. Training in drafting village regulation, establishing village forest institution, and creating
village planning related to the hutan desa management plan (mapping, zonation,
utilization, etc).
4. Training in the use of participatory methods to assess livelihood and wellbeing change, to
assimilate results, and to facilitate meetings and focus groups.
5. Training in the technical aspects of livelihood activities
Besides those trainings, capacity of community has been increased through regular village forest
institution (LPHD) forum meeting, which discuss issues related to their hutan desa. In addition,
continual meetings and engagement on subjects such as sustainable forest management, lands
use planning, and participatory mapping, has contributed to the improvement of community
capacity in forest management and institution governance.
Community forest patrol in continued hutan desa monitoring will increase the capacity of
community to conduct the monitoring independently. This activity is part of a transfer of
responsibility to patrol team of Laman Satong village forest institution (LPHD). However, to
22
avoid falsification of results, it will always be necessary to have a verifier who can check the
data collected by this community forest patrol. In addition, the village forest institution (LPHD)
has responsibility to monitor and to support community group’s activities in planning of
activities, and decision making regarding management of hutan desa.
4.6 Monitoring livelihood and socio-economic impacts The assessment and monitoring of project impacts on livelihoods is the heart of this project.
Several activities have been conducted to understand the socioeconomic context of the village
and determine livelihood baseline from which changes in livelihood conditions in the village can
be measured. The main activities taken are described below.
Village census
The village census was conducted to collect information from every household and individual in
the community included: age; level of education; principal reported occupation; gender; ethnic
group. Data on visitors and family members living outside of the village were also collected.
Prior to the census a locally appropriate household definition was generated (Riddell et al. 2010)
which represents a unit of production and sharing of resources, rather than purely living
arrangements.
Participatory Wellbeing Assessment (PWA)
The PWA was completed in November 2012. A focus group was used to select wellbeing
indicators. The focus group contained both men and women, elderly and youth, and aimed to
facilitate discussion about local meanings of wellbeing. These discussions led to the generation
of wellbeing indicators in both communities (Table 5), and the categorization of all households
in the village based on these indicators. Categorization was based purely on the number of
indicators (as suggested by participants), rather than relative importance of each indicator.
Household and asset income survey
Household and asset income survey were conducted in November 2012. The survey used 12-
month recall of major income sources (with income including all forms of production) and
gathered data on household assets listed as important during the PWA.
23
Annual group discussions
Annual group discussions will be held to discuss local perceptions of the socioeconomic impacts
of the project. These group discussions will be used to understand the changes occurring in the
community, peoples’ interpretations of the reasons behind these changes, and solutions to any
negative project impacts. Participatory techniques including impact-mapping and H-forms will
also be used to structure discussions about certain project activities.
Socioeconomic indicators are measured using a participatory wellbeing assessment (PWA) and
census every five years, a household and asset income survey every four years, and annual group
discussions to understand change (Table 5).
Table 5. Socioeconomic monitoring plan
PWA Income and asset survey
Census Group discussions
Indicator Locally defined
wellbeing
Income and assets Community
demographics
Sample Mixed focus groups
to define indicators;
all households
(complete sample)
Households and
income asset survey
Complete sample Community Activity
Groups and legal
entity
Data output Classification of all
households into
wellbeing categories
+ indicators of wellbeing for each
household
Income and assets/
household
Village population
and composition
Qualitative, emic
understanding of
change
Year 0 – 2012 √ √
Year 1 – 2013 √
Year 2 – 2014 √
Year 3 – 2015 √
Year 4 – 2016 √
Year 5 – 2017 √ √ √ √
5 Ecosystem impacts and monitoring The objective of avoiding deforestation is to maintain forest cover, and thereby maintain carbon
stocks, biodiversity and the capacity of forests to provide products, protect watersheds, and
prevent soil erosion (Table 6). Forest cover will be monitored as a proxy for biodiversity, water,
and soil ecosystem services.
24
Table 6. Summary of expected impacts of project activities on key environmental services
Title of
technical
specification
Biodiversity
impacts
Water
availability/watershed
impacts
Soil
productivity/conservation
impacts
Community
Forest
Ecosystem
Services
(CFES),
Indonesia
Protection
of
biodiversity
habitat
Protection of
watersheds
Prevention of soil erosion
6 Additionality of project and project activities The study of land use change in Ketapang District landscape reveals an alarming rate of
conversion of lowland secondary forests, chiefly due to agricultural expansion: 50.2% has been
converted during the period 2000 (1,280,955 ha) to 2005 (637,868 ha)1.
Land use change in the forest area of Laman Satong village is consistent with the results of the
study. Following logging operations, which ceased in the mid 2000s, the entire village territory
was designated by the MoF as convertible production forest (logged-over forest made available
for conversion to other/non-forestry uses). In the proposed new spatial plan, the area is no longer
designated as a forest zone, but other use land instead.
In 2009 the district government issued permits for palm oil development in areas bordering the
project area, which was followed by the physical process of forest conversion. The proposed
revision of the spatial plan recommended that all forest in the village territory be re-designated as
‘other use land’, which has no restrictions on forest conversion.
However, support from FFI to initiate the community forestry REDD+ initiative led to approval
of the HD area license in 2011. As there is now an active (HD) forest area license over the
project area, it will not be possible for its status to be converted to ‘other use land’ or for
extension of oil palm permits into the area – thus the project is ensuring that the baseline
25
scenario of planned conversion to oil palm is avoided. Unplanned deforestation and degradation
drivers are also a threat to the HD area, including forest fire, agricultural expansion and
illegal/unsustainable logging.
The VCS Additionality Tool (VT0001) was applied to test assumptions about the additionality of
activities proposed under the Plan Vivo REDD+ project activities in West Kalimantan. The
process concluded that project intervention to achieve the with-project scenario of Hutan Desa -
REDD+ is additional and the alternative landuse scenario with the lowest barriers (the baseline
scenario) was conversion to oil palm plantation. The results are summarized in the table below:
7 Monitoring, technical support, and payment plan
7.1 Monitoring of performance indicators
Forest cover will be used as an indicator to monitor impact of project interventions on the project
area and extent of deforestation and forest degradation. This monitoring will be conducted on an
No Barrier Type Barrier Detail Hutan Desa Oil Palm Notes
1 Investment Barriers If there is no investment from carbon financing, then the
project cannot be implemented. Thus, other alternative land
use scenario will be implemented because they have no
investment barriers
Barrier (3) No barrier High upfront project
development costs not available
without REDD+ project
development finance
2 Institutional barriers The procedures to obtain the Hutan Desa permit is difficult if
not imposible for communities without considerable
experternal support (technical and financial). Moreover, the
management plan time limit is only two years, or the permit
will be revoke
Barrier (3) No barrier Very weak law enforcement.
Enforcement action is
uncommon. If enforcement does
occur it is either unsuccessful or
impact is short
3 Technological barriers Technical expertise to implement activity No barrier No barrier
4 Local tradition Local wisdom, traditional equipment and technology No barrier Barrier (2)
5 Prevailing practice "first of kind" Barrier (3) No barier Verified community-based
REDD+ currently has no
precedent in Indonesia
6 Ecological conditions Degraded soil, cathasthropic events, etc Barrier (3) Barrier (1) Fire, droughts,and unfavorable
course of ecological succession
are common happened
7 Social conditions Social conflict, lack of skilled labor force, etc Barrier (3) No barrier Illegal encroachment, logging,
forest clearance are active
threats. Local capacity for
sustainable forest management
limited
8 Lack of organization of local communities Barrier (3) No barrier Community governance systems
inadequate to ensure sustainable
forest management
9 Land Tenure, ownership, inheritance, and
property rights
Communal land ownership, lack of suitable land tenure
legislation and regulations, absence of clearly deined and
regulated property rights, etc
Barrier (3) No barrier Natural resource management
rights and carbon propoerty
rights require additional licensing
procedures. Uncertain market
price for carbon makes
prediction of retures from
carbon financing challenging
*Scale: 0 = No Barrier; 1 = Barrier, low; 2 = Barrier, medium; 3 = Barrier, high
26
annual basis. Deforestation will be measured by the area of new fields opened. Forest
degradation will be measured by the number of trees felled.
Community forest patrol team will conduct regular patrols to identify the location of newly
opened fields and trees felled in the hutan desa. On a monthly basis this team gathers waypoints
using handheld GPS units around the perimeter of each new field and on top of stumps of felled
trees. Additional observations (e.g. type of tool used for deforestation, type of crops used etc.)
will be recorded, and a photo taken of the site.
On a quarterly basis the head of village forest institution (LPHD) will summarize the GPS,
observation, and photo data and submit a quarterly monitoring report to FFI. Annually, the
quarterly monitoring results are aggregated and formally submitted by FFI to the Plan Vivo
Foundation.
7.2 Payment plan The payment plans use a traffic light system to link payments with monitoring results: green for
full payment where 80 – 100 % of CCA is protected, amber for partial payment where 60 – 80 %
of CCA is protected, red for zero payment where less than 60 % of CCA is protected. The
schedule of PES payments to be made over the first phase (5 years) is shown in Table 7.
Table 7. Reporting and payment schedule
Year Date monitoring report approved Date of payment (conditional on monitoring) 1 (2013) November 2013 February 2014
2 (2014) November 2014 February 2015
3 (2015) November 2015 February 2016
4 (2016) November 2016 February 2017
5 (2017) November 2017 February 2018
7.3 Technical support and review FFI personnel that involved in this project will provide technical support for the project,
especially in the activities that related to forest inventory, patrolling, and monitoring, and
sustainable forest management. Local NGO partner ASRI will provide technical support on
restoration and agroforestry groups including nursery activities. Also, there will be technical
support from other organizations in aspects that could not covered by FFI and ASRI. Regular
field visit on a quarterly basis will be conducted to review and monitor the activities.
27
8 Compliance with the law The project will comply with all relevant national and international regulations. Indonesian
regulations pertinent to project design and implementation are as follows:
Hutan Desa Regulation
The hutan desa tenure arrangement was introduced as a formal community forestry scheme in
Indonesia by the issuance of MoF decree P. 49/2008 on hutan desa. The purpose of hutan desa is
to give access to local communities, through village institutions, to legally recognized,
sustainable utilisation of forest resources. Improving local community well-being and sustainable
management of the forest estate are the main objectives. The two main steps to establishing
hutan desa are obtaining 1) a MoF license for the forest area and 2) a provincial governor license
for forest management. Both steps involve stringent formal verifications. Failure to secure the
forest management license from the governor revokes the MoF area license.
The hutan desa license is non-transferable, valid for 35 years, renewable, and monitored at least
once every five years. The LPHD is responsible for hutan desa boundary demarcation,
formulation of the hutan desa management plan, forest protection, rehabilitation, and
restoration/enrichment. There is a timber harvest quota for non-commercial purposes (housing
and infrastructure construction in the village) of 50 m3 per annum. Commercial wood and non-
wood products utilizations (up to 20 tons per annum), and environmental service payment
schemes (including payments for carbon sink and sequestration) are allowed, but require separate
approval. The project will facilitate target communities to secure the necessary permit for
carbon sequestration and trading. A framework for legal timber certification exists, but
guidelines for commercial timber utilization from community-managed state forests are still in
the formulation stage.
REDD+ Regulation
National legislative frameworks for carbon sink and sequestration are already promulgated. MoF
decrees P.36/2009 and, most recently, P.12/2012 regulate forest carbon/REDD+ projects.
Eligibility of HD management license holders as forest carbon managers is specified in
P.36/2009 and in P.20/2012.
28
Entities (government, private sector, local community) with forest management rights must
register their projects with the MoF. In forest zones with no competing license, REDD+ project
proponents need to apply for a carbon sink and sequestration business permit. International
systems and standards for project development and marketing (CCBA, VCS, Carbon Fix, and
Plan Vivo) are recognized in P.36/2009. The decree also stipulates vertical distribution/sharing
of revenue from the sale of carbon credits, which is currently subject to review. A clause in
P.12/2012 states that to meet the national emissions reduction commitment, foreign country
buyers will be permitted to purchase a maximum of 49% of the carbon emission reductions.
The MoF has developed national standards for land cover classification (SNI 7645:2010), carbon
stock measurement and accounting (SNI 7724:2011), and formulation of allometric equations
(SNI 7725:2011).
9 Certification or evaluation to other standards This project is on process to obtain certification from Plan Vivo Standard. It is not certified or
evaluated under any other standards.
29
Bibliography Soetarto, E., Sitorus, MTF., and Napir, MY. 2001. Decentralisation of administration, policy
making, and forest management in Ketapang district, West Kalimantan. Center for
International Forestry Research, Bogor, Indonesia.
Yasmi, Y., Gusti, ZA., Syarief, A., Tri, B., Ngusmanto, Erdi, A., Heru, K., Sian, M., Zulkifli,
Afifudin. 2005. The complexities of managing forest resources in post-
decentralization Indonesia: a case study from Sintang district, West Kalimantan.
Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor, Indonesia.
Afif et al. 2011. Kajian sosial dan kelembagaan terkait dengan pengelolaan hutan dalam skema
REDD di Kabupaten Ketapang, Provinsi Kalimantan Barat (Social and institutional
assessment regarding Village Forest management within a REDD framework in
Ketapang District, West Kalimantan Province – FFI translation). Pusat Kajian
Antropologi, FISIP, Universitas Indonesia.
Sunderlin, W. D., A. M. Larson, A. Duchelle, E. O. Sills, C. Luttrell, P. Jagger, S. Pattanayak, P.
Cronkleton, and A. D. Ekaputri. 2010. Technical guidelines for research on REDD+
project sites. CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia.
Jagger P., Sills E.O., Lawlor, K. and Sunderlin, W.D. 2010 A guide to learning about livelihood
impacts of REDD+ projects. Occasional paper 56. CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia.
Adhikerana and Sugardjito. 2010. Characterising forest reduction in Ketapang District, West
Kalimantan, Indonesia. Biodiveristas 11(1):46-54.
30
Annexes
Annex 1. List of responsible staff
Name Role Expertize
A. Kusworo Community Forest,
Climate and
Livelihoods Advisor
Community-based natural resource management
(CBNRM) & governance, national REDD+
regulations, land-use conflict
Andjar
Rafiastanto
Forest & Biodiversity
Advisor
Forest & wildlife ecology – surveying,
monitoring, species & ecosystem conservation,
community forest use, High Conservation Value
Forest (HCVF) assessment
Joseph
Adiguna-
Hutabarat
Biodiversity & Forest
Carbon Specialist
Forest carbon assessment & avoided emissions
modelling, remote sensing techniques
Angga
Rachmansah
Biodiversity Specialist Forest & wildlife ecology – HCVF assessment
(surveying, data analysis, monitoring), species &
ecosystem conservation
Sugeng
Raharjo
Governance & Land
Use Advisor
Spatial planning, landscape-level forest
governance, social baseline assessment &
monitoring
Happy
Hendrawan
Project Leader,
Ketapang District
CBNRM, community facilitation, government &
partner liaison, project management, NTFPs
Ema /
Rahmawati
Field Assistant,
Ketapang District
Community facilitation, participatory
methodologies, livelihoods/NTFPs
Zoë Cullen /
Anna Lyons
Environmental Markets
/ Business &
Biodiversity
Project development and marketing
Annex 2. Information regarding public and other sources of co-funding
FFI has secured funds from various sources for community forestry and REDD+ development in
West Kalimantan and Jambi Provinces. These funding sources include Packard/CLUA, EU,
USAID, ICAP, Darwin Initiative, UK-FCO, and BACP.
Annex 3. Technical specifications The technical specification for this project is Community Forest Ecosystem Services, Indonesia
(CFES Indonesia) with avoiding deforestation and degradation as an intervention activity, has
been provided as an attached document.
31
Annex 4. Database template Each year, the project will submit monitoring results to the Plan Vivo Foundation before
certificate issuance. The information will be presented according to the Plan Vivo reporting
guidelines:
Plan Vivo Annual Report – Template Requirements 2011
32
Annex 5. Permits and legal documentation MoF decree on Hutan Desa Laman Satong management right
33
34
35
36
37
Annex 6. Evidence of community participation e.g meeting minutes List of attendance in benefit sharing mechanism meeting.
38
List of attendance in Plan Vivo standard workshop in Bogor
39
40
41
Annex 7. Annual Reports Annual reports will follow the Plan Vivo reporting guidelines.
