Process of Deforestation and Agricultural Expansion in Gunung Palung National Park, West Kalimantan, Indonesiaインドネシア西カリマンタン州のグヌンパルン国立公園における森林減少および農地拡大の過程

　筑波大学、環境科学研究科University of Tsukuba 　

Master’s Program in Environmental SciencesMasuda LaboratoryFranky Zamzani

gBackgroundDeforestation in Indonesia: 0.8 million ha/year (1993)

1.8 million ha/year (2000-2005)

(Revilla, 1993; FAO, 2006)

Causes of deforestation :

Proximate causes logging, agricultural expansion, infra-structure extension, etc.

Underlying causesdemographic, socio-economic, technology, policy, cultural factors

(Geist and Lambin, 2002)

Forest

Non forest

Land-use changes

Deforestation also occurred in national park

Island

Forest Cover (ha)Forest Change

(ha) Annual Change Rate

(%)1985 1997 1985-1997

Sumatra 22,938,825 16,430,300 -6,508,525 -2.15

Java 1,274,600 1,869,675 595,075 3.60

Bali 96,450 76,700 -19,750 -1.50

Nusa Tenggara

686,775 450,450 -236,325 -2.60

East Timor 374,400 9,850 -364,550 -7.46

Kalimantan 39,644,02

5 29,637,47

5 -10,006,550 -1.92

Sulawesi 11,192,950 7,950,900 -3,242,050 -2.23

Maluku 5,790,800 5,820,975 30,175 0.07

Irian Jaya 35,192,725 33,382,475 -1,810,250 -0.38

Total 117,191,55

0 95,628,800 -21,562,750 -1.38

Source: FWI/GFW, 2002

Forest Cover Changes in Indonesia (1985-1997)

yObjectives and study area

Study site:

Gunung Palung National Park (GPNP) West Kalimantan Established in 1990 90.000 ha (in the document)

Source: MoF, 2002

Kalimantan Island

Objectives:To identify proximate and underlying causes of deforestation inside a national park

Indonesia

• Gunung Palung National Park (GPNP) is one of 50 national parks in Indonesia located in West Kalimantan. Established in 1990.

• GPNP is the habitat of Orangutan (Pongo pygmaeus), Proboscis monkey (Nasalis larvatus), 236 birds species (Laman et al., 1996), and 73 mammals (Blundell, 1996).

• Comprises large variety of ecosystem, from coastal area to hilly mountain forest.

• The ecosystem has been threatened particularly after the economic crisis.

Photo by: Tim Laman and GPNP Collection

Previous studies on GPNP

Proximate causes of deforestation Illegal logging Agricultural expansion Forest fires

Underlying causes of deforestation Legality of the boundary No implementation of zoning Lack of community supports High dependency of local people on the

resources inside the park

(Soekmadi, 2002; European Union, 2005)

Deforestation

Spatial analysis (time series)

Landsat TM, ETM (1992, 1999)

SPOT5 (2004)

Land use changes

Household survey: Type of land use Family size Education Monthly income

Discussion

1. To examine land cover changes2. To identify the driving forces of farmers that

related to the agricultural expansion inside the national park

Identify the underlying driving

causes

Socio-economic

characteristics

Land cover map Identify the

main proximate cause

Agricultural expansion

Methods

MethodsTime series analysis remotely-sensed imagery Household survey

- Aerial Survey- Field-base knowledge

Supervised Classification

- Geometric correction- Normalize/ radiometric- Subset to boundary

Select training area

Landsat 1992, 1999,SPOT5

2004

Pre-processing

Processing

Forest cover map

Landsat 1992, 1999,corrected

P Village Sd Village

S Village

Villages surroundin

g GPNP (17)

S Village (397)

With encroachment(160)

Without encroachment

(237)

Purposively selected, in the sense of encroachment

Randomly selected

Respondents(41)

T Village

Randomly selected

Interviews Key informants Group

discussion

Study site

Source: MoF, 2002

Study site

yLocation of household survey

GPNP

Source: SPOT5 imagery, 2004

gLand cover changes

ForestIllegal logging areaGrass/shrubMix garden/bushOpen landSettlementNo Data

1992 1999

2004

gLand cover changes

Class1992 1999 2004

ha % ha % ha %

Forest 93,979 94.1 90,293 90.5 81,145 81.3

Illegal logging area 0.0 0.0 1,063 1.1 3,781 3.8

Mix garden/bush 2,636 2.6 4,557 4.6 9,040 9.1

Open land 847 0.8 722 0.7 804 0.8

Grass/shrub 2,358 2.4 3,185 3.2 4,132 4.1

Settlement 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 47 0.0

No data 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 871 0.9

Total 99,820 100.0 99,820 100.0 99,820 100.0

Agricultural expansion

gLand cover changes

Forest

Illegal logging area

Mix garden/bush

Open land

Grass/shrub

Settlement

No Data

20 40 60 80 100 (X 1,000 ha)

1992

1999

2004

Deforestation in GPNP, 1992-2004

ForestNon Forest

Deforestation

1992-1999 = 0.6% per year

1999-2004 = 2.0% per year

Deforestation in GPNP, 1992-2004

-12.0

-10.0

-8.0

-6.0

-4.0

-2.0

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

Fores

t

Illega

l logg

ing a

rea

Mix

Garde

n/Bus

h

Open

Fallo

w

Grass

/Shr

ub

Settle

men

t

No Dat

a1992-1999

1999-2004

1992-1999 1999-2004

Forest -3.9 -10.1

Illegal logging area 1.1 3.0

Mix Garden/Bush 2.0 5

Open Fallow -0.1 0

Grass/Shrub 0.9 1

Settlement 0 0

No Data 0 1

Rate of class change

g

Forest

Open Land

Mix Garden/Bush

Grass/Shrub

989 ha

0 ha 0 ha

0 h

a

1,05

1 ha

1,430 ha

205

ha

139 ha

259 ha23

7 ha

675 ha

118 ha

Pattern of land cover changes, 1992-1999

g

Forest

Open Land

Mix Garden/Bush

Grass/ Shrub

1,235 ha

0 ha 0 ha

0 h

a

213

ha

4,501 ha

198

ha

264 ha

225 ha25

5 ha

428 ha

1,191 ha

Pattern of land cover changes, 1999-2004

Socio-economic characteristic of encroachersLand-use type and allocation

TypeArea

ha %

Wet-rice 22.4 21

Dry-rice 29.8 28

Rubber garden

54.0 51

Total 106.2

100

Land encroached: 83.8 ha

Average: 2.0 ha/HH

Source: Field survey, 2007. n=41.

wet-rice

1rubber

dry-rice

10 1

4

0

2

14

0

Source: Field survey, 2007 (August 3, 2007).

Family size

y = 0.5233x - 0.1017

R2 = 0.3922

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Famiy Size

Lan

d e

ncr

oac

h (

ha)

Socio-economic characteristic of encroachers

Source: Field survey, 2007. n=41

Category: small (1-3 persons) = 13 HHs, middle (4-6) = 27 HHs large (>6) = 1 HH

Average family size = 4 persons/HH

Socio-economic characteristic of encroachers

Most of households opened new land by own labor. When a household had insufficient labor force to open larger area, “cooperative effort” (jejurukan) could be employed. This is a reciprocal exchange of labor force among households, which can be assumed as one of the reasons behind no correlation between labor force and the area of land encroached.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Labor force in household

Land

Enc

roac

hed

(ha)

Labor forces in a household

Source: Field survey, 2007. n=41

y = 0.0005x + 1.4677

R2 = 0.1081

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

- 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000

Gross Monthly Income (Rp. X 1000)

Land

Enc

roac

hed

(ha)

Monthly income

Socio-economic characteristic of encroachers

Average income: Rp.1,252,700/month (=15,700 円 /month)

Rubber is 79% from the total source income

Dry-rice productivity: 400 kg/ha/year

Rubber: 500 trees/ha, productivity: 6-8 kg/day on average

1 kg rice = Rp.3,500/kg

(= 43 円 /kg)

1 kg rubber = Rp.6,000/kg

(= 75 円 /kg)

(1 円 = Rp.80)

Source: Field survey, 2007. n=41

Discussions Illegal logging and agricultural expansion increased after economic crisis and decentralization which started in 1999.

Rubber gardens have been increased inside the park. The objective to plant rubber was to leave property to descendants. Their decision to plant rubber inside the park was related to the soil condition.

Zoning system of GPNP by clear demarcation (participatory mapping and communal agreement) is recommended.

Alternative income sources also should be created by the government for the farmers to diminish their dependencies to the NP.