Hydrological and economic effects of oil palm cultivation in Indonesian peatlands

Oil palm has increasingly been established on peatlands throughout Indonesia. One of the concerns is that the drainage required for cultivating oil palm in peatlands leads to soil subsidence, potentially increasing future flood risks. This study analyzes the hydrological and economic effects of oil palm production in a peat landscape in Central Kalimantan. We examine two land use scenarios, one involving conversion of the complete landscape including a large peat area to oil palm plantations, and another involving mixed land use including oil palm plantations, jelutung (jungle rubber; (Dyera spp.) plantations, and natural forest. The hydrological effect was analyzed through flood risk modeling using a high-resolution digital elevation model. For the economic analysis, we analyzed four ecosystem services: oil palm production, jelutung production, carbon sequestration, and orangutan habitat. This study shows that after 100 years, in the oil palm scenario, about 67% of peat in the study area will be subject to regular flooding. The flood-prone area will be unsuitable for oil palm and other crops requiring drained soils. The oil palm scenario is the most profitable only in the short term and when the externalities of oil palm production, i.e., the costs of CO2 emissions, are not considered. In the examined scenarios, the social costs of carbon emissions exceed the private benefits from oil palm plantations in peat. Depending upon the local hydrology, income from jelutung, which can sustainably be grown in undrained conditions and does not lead to soil subsidence, outweighs that from oil palm after several decades. These findings illustrate the trade-offs faced at present in Indonesian peatland management and point to economic advantages of an approach that involves expansion of oil palm on mineral lands while conserving natural peat forests and using degraded peat for crops that do not require drainage.

It is just not fair: the Endangered Species Act in the United States and Ontario

The United States and the Canadian province of Ontario have enacted endangered species laws that regulate private land. The rationale for this is that the vast majority of endangered species in the two countries rely on private lands for survival. However, from a landowner perspective the law is deemed unfair. This paper presents analysis from 141 interviews with landowners in three U.S. states and Ontario. In recognition of distributive justice claims, both the U.S. government and the Ontario government have enacted programs aimed at increasing financial incentives for participation and compliance with the law. However, the law is still perceived as unfair. The central argument of this paper is that future amendments and new policies for endangered species should confront two other forms of environmental justice: procedural justice and justice-as-recognition. Landowners in both countries expressed not only concerns about compensation, but also a deep desire to be included in the protection and recovery process, as well as to be recognized by government and society as good stewards of the land. The paper concludes by stating that future policy amendments need to address justice-as-recognition if endangered species conservation on private lands is to be considered fair by landowners.