Socio-economic Study of Conservation and Rehabilitation of Tropical Peatland With Agroforestry Systems in Central Kalimantan, Indonesia

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-1151609/v1

Download PDF

Research Article

Socio-economic Study of Conservation and Rehabilitation of Tropical Peatland With Agroforestry Systems in Central Kalimantan, Indonesia

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-1151609/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

Current studies on tropical peatlands in Indonesia are mostly focused on the impacts of management practices on the environment. Studies on efforts to conserve and rehabilitate the degradation of tropical peatland involving farmers through agroforestry systems have been limited. By employing the qualitative survey with semi-structured interviews and field observations to agroforestry locations in two villages of Tumbang Nusa and Kalampangan, Central Kalimantan, Indonesia aims to fill those research gaps. The results showed that the main motivation of farmers in starting agroforestry activities was the understanding that there would be limited trees in the future, and planting trees with a combination of intercrops provided adequate income. Agroforestry farmers who devote considerable time to agroforestry can meet the family's economic needs. Although further guidance is not typically provided, government intervention through tree planting programs also stimulates agroforestry activities. Intensive management of intercrops in various types can provide a good income. For intensive intercropping options, farmers follow market demand, while less intensive farmers prefer plants that do not require intensive management. Trees planted in agroforestry systems are only given fertilizer at the initial planting stage. Some farms receive fertilizer subsidies from government support programmes, but fertilizers are obtained from intercropping at the following stage. The study results imply that the community needs to get knowledge and training on agroforestry, which can be a way of conserving and rehabilitating tropical peatlands and a source of income.

agroforestry

peatland

conservation

restoration

Peatlands, which cover one-third of global wetlands (Parish et al. 2008), are important ecosystems for biodiversity conservation, climate regulation, and human well-being (Erwin 2009). Of the total area of 400 million hectares (Mha) of peat in the world (Maltby and Proctor 1996), an area of approximately 31-46Mha or about 10-12% are in tropical areas, and Indonesia contains the largest area of tropical peat (Immirzi and Maltby 1992; Rieley et al. 1996; Page et al. 2011) with an estimated area of around 20.6 Mha, spread mainly in Sumatra, Kalimantan, and Papua (Purnomo et al. 2019). In natural conditions, peatlands perform important environmental services of global importance, especially concerning climate change because of their huge carbon (C) storage capacity (Page et al. 2011). For local communities in peatland areas, this ecosystem is primarily a source of livelihood. However, poor peatland management can lead to land degradation and forest and land fires. Almost every long dry season, there are severe forest and peatland fires in Central Kalimantan, with the worst conditions occurring in 2015.

Peatland degradation generally results in losses. In Southeast Asia, land-use conversion of around 10 Mha of peatlands results in annual emissions of 132-159 million tons of C per year (MtC yr⁻¹) from peat oxidation and increased incidence of peat fires, which not only add to the burden of GHG emissions but also threaten the health and human livelihoods (Marlier et al. 2013; Miettinen et al. 2017). In addition, loss of peat through oxidation and fire results in land subsidence and an increased risk of flooding (Hooijer et al. 2012; Evans et al. 2019; Evers et al. 2016). On drained peat, subsidence may occur due to the combination of consolidation and decomposition (Wösten et al. 1997; Hooijer et al. 2010; Hooijer et al. 2012). However, tropical peat, especially in Indonesia, has experienced a lot of degradation, both by mismanagement of peatlands and forest and land fires (Purnomo, Ramdani et al. 2021). Almost every dry season, there are forest fires, and humans still influence the mainland in the environment and the inept management of peatlands. The use of tropical peatlands in Indonesia by local communities has been ongoing for a long time, especially in the thin peat areas around large rivers. However, since the 1970s, large peat areas have been opened for development in Sumatra and Kalimantan (Noor 2012). The biggest area for this development is in 1995, where a peat area of more than One Mha was opened in the Central Kalimantan region. It was stopped in 1999 since it causes a lot of environmental problems related to the drying of peat (Subagio et al. 2015). From the records of development activities in the peatlands it appears that although technically the development activities are well understood (Direktorat Rawa 1992), development in these areas does not appear to be going well. There are many negative impacts caused by the development of peatlands associated with drainage (Widyati 2011). As a consequence, prolonged dry seasons have seen increased fires in both forest and peatland, especially since 1997 (Page et al. 2009). This has caused problems at both local and global levels due to fire-related air pollution. This includes significant economic losses (Tacconi 2003), health problems, and ecosystem damage (Uda et al. 2019).

The Indonesian state has made numerous attempts to address the problems related to peatland degradation. Presidential Regulation No. 1 of 2016, established a Peatlands Restoration Agency (BRG) to conserve and restore degraded peatlands (Agustiyara et al. 2021; Purnomo, Rahmasari et al. 2021). The BRG has sought to implement an integrated approach to the conservation and restoration of degraded peatlands, which involves hydrological restoration, re-vegetation, and revitalization of livelihoods alongside more immediate fire prevention measures. Vegetation restoration is carried out by replanting endemic species in forest areas and peat swamplands. However, in general, the success rate of local species' propagation and cultivation techniques is still limited (Mishra et al. 2021). Therefore, it is necessary to study rapid propagation cultivation techniques to meet the needs for endemic tree seedlings so that the peatland restoration targets set by the Indonesian government can be met. Economic empowerment of the community involves efforts to stimulate economic activities such as new cultivation activities, fish farming, and beekeeping that encourage people to end forest encroachment activities that cause forest and peat swampland degradation and even protect forest areas. In the future, additional activities to utilize the value of environmental services from forest areas as part of tourism should be considered.

Revegetation restoration activities may be less attractive locally because they require a long period and do not provide obvious economic value to the community. Instead, agroforestry has been advanced as an alternative option for peatland restoration activities (Purnomo, Agustiyara et al. 2021). Agroforestry is a farming system that integrates trees with other crops to provide social, economic, and environmental benefits. It has been indicated that agroforestry improves soil quality, agricultural production, and sustainable forestry, closely related to income. Yuwariah (2016) states that agroforestry productivity is higher than monoculture and is more evenly distributed throughout the year and reduces risk for the failure of one crop. Others can offset losses due to market price fluctuations for one crop. Some researchers have found that agroforestry can help address the problem of poverty (Barnes et al. 1982; Foley and Barnard 1984; Jordan 1988; Gregerson 1988; Suharti 2011; Namwata et al. 2012; Cutler et al. 2014; Kholifah et al. 2017), and makes a significant contribution to environmental sustainability and biodiversity (Paembonan et al. 2018).

This research draws attention to the value of sociological and economic perspectives on farm activities, especially those related to aspects of production, distribution, exchange, consumption of goods, services and resources, and how people achieve prosperity (Elia 2019). This study aims to examine the understanding of peatland farming communities about agroforestry for conservation and rehabilitation purposes and to analyze socio-economic aspect of agroforestry at the community level.

2.1. Research Setting

The primary method in the study that examines the perspective of agroforestry community actors on topics related to understanding peatlands and the reasons they carry out agroforestry activities. The research conducts in-depth interviews with 9 (nine) informants selected using the snowball technique, which is part of purposive sampling (Bloor and Wood 2016). Informants were interviewed about the peat environment, agroforestry practices and socio-cultural value of forests/trees in people's lives by differentiating their cultural background. Semi-closed interview questionnaires were used as a guide to obtain richer answers from informants. Each interview was recorded and transcribed, then coded by summarizing the grand narrative to derive meaning from the data (Bloor and Wood 2016). In addition, observations were made by visiting the agroforestry land owned by the informant. A narrative analysis approach was carried out to capture the respondents' understanding of the agroforestry system practice in the area they owned. The focus of the analysis is to identify commonalities in the informants' experiences about peatlands and their conservation and matters related to agroforestry implementation. The responses from the informants were carefully compiled, explained, analyzed, and interpreted to obtain an in-depth description of the informants' perspectives on landscape and peat conservation and the cultivation of their agroforestry system.

The research was conducted in Kalampangan Village, Sebangau District and Tumbang Nusa Village, Jabiren Raya District, Central Kalimantan, which are included in the Kahayan-Sebangau Peat Hydrological Unit (KHG) (Figure 1).

Table 1

Description of Kalampangan and Tumbang Nusa Village
Description	Kalampangan	Tumbang Nusa
Area (Km2)	42.29	200
Area developed	1978-1980	An old village that is located on a river border and then developed into a country roadside area
Population	4548 people, in 1215 Households	962 people, in 228 Households
Population density	108 people per km²	5 people per km²
Main Livelihood	Agriculture (vegetables and fruits)	Fisherman
Land	The entire area is a peat area with a depth of 2-3 meters	The river border area is alluvial soil and part of the area is peat area
Fire history on peatlands	Most of the area is an area cleared by the government without burning, a small area affected by the last peatland fire in 2015	Most of its peat areas are affected by repeated peat fires, most recently in 2015
Drainage history	1978-1980	Opened by the community in the 1990s

Figure 1. Research location

The location selection was done purposively according to the research objectives, with the consideration that KHG Kahayan Sebangau is an area with peatlands, a large fire occurred in 2015, and is a priority area of BRG. Kalampangan village is an ex-transmigration area (from Java) which was opened in 1979 and is entirely in a deep peat area with a peat range of 2-3 meters (m). Meanwhile, Tumbang Nusa Village is a village that has long developed on the outskirts of the Kahayan River, Central Kalimantan, and then some of its people opened a new area on the left and right of the Trans Kalimantan Road connecting Palangka Raya, Central Kalimantan, and Banjarmasin South Kalimantan. The Tumbang Nusa area is a large and massive peat area that experiences fires every long dry season. As a result of the devastating fires in 2015, many high economic value natural trees began to disappear, such as: belangiran (Shorea belangiran), gelam (Melaleuca leucadendra), meranti (Shorea leprosula), gemur (Nothaphoebe coriacea Kosterm), and gerunggang (Cratoxylon arborescens) (BRG 2018).

2.2. Characteristics of informants

Nine informants participated in this study based on the knowledge of agroforestry, conservation behavior, and the role of institutions are recorded in this study. Informants' formal education level and various trainings (non-formal education) that have been attended related to agroforestry management are also considered. The characteristics of respondents at the research location are presented in Table 2.

Table 2

Characteristics of informants
No.	Village	Age of infor-mants (years)	Education	The training that was followed	Length of stay in the village (years)	ethnic group	The main job	Other job	Number of Family Member (people)
1	Kalampangan	68	Diploma 2	Never	40	Java	Retired Teacher	Farmer	4
2	Kalampangan	58	no school	Never	40	Java	Farmer	-	4
3	Tumbang Nusa	64	no graduation	Land and Forest Fire Control	64	Dayak	Farmer	-	3
4	Tumbang Nusa	59	Senior High School	Land and Forest Fire Control	59	Lampung	Farmer	Village Land and Forest Fire Control Team	2
5	Tumbang Nusa	49	did not graduate from junior high school	Land and Forest Fire Control		Dayak	Farmer	trade / shop	2
6	Tumbang Nusa	60	primary school	Never	60	Dayak	Fruit seller	Farmer	3
7	Tumbang Nusa	47	Under graduate	Never	47	Dayak	Teacher	Farmer, trade / shop	3
8	Tumbang Nusa	43	Secondary Engineering school	Never	53	Dayak	Farmer	trade / shop	4
9	Tumbang Nusa	43	Junior High School	Land and Forest Fire Control	53	Dayak	Farmer	trade / shop Motorcycle workshop	5

Table 2 shows that informants are concentrated at the primary education level, with three informants, while one informant who was illiterate, and the rest varied from junior high to tertiary education. These findings indicate that informants have mostly primary education levels. Table 2 presents the types of vocational training (non-formal education) that the informants had attended, however none of the training was related to agroforestry. The type of training that four of the informants attended was training on the prevention and control of forest and land fires provided by various government agencies including the Peatlands Restoration Agency. These findings indicate that the number of informants who attended various types of training was smaller than those who did not. As many as four informants have businesses opening food stalls because the Tumbang Nusa area includes a transit area for vehicles on the route between Palangka Raya and Banjarmasin; 2 peoples worked as teacher, 6 informants were farmers. In terms of ethnicity, most of the informants (6 peoples) were from the Dayak ethnic group, followed by the Javanese and the Lampung ethnic groups.

Concerning the informants' age, they are generally at the average age of 55 years, with an age range of 43-68 years. These findings indicate that most farmers in the study locations are classified as productive or working age, except 2 informants who have the ages of 64 and 68 respectively. The population in working-age in Indonesia ranges from 15-64 years. Based on secondary data, working age of population at Sabangau District (including Kalampangan Village) is 68%, while at Jabiren Raya District (includes Tumbang Nusa Village) is 67%. The main occupations of informants are varied. Farmers originating from Java (ex transmigrants) have a large amount of time spent on agricultural activities, around 8 hrs day⁻¹. Ideally, these productive farmers can manage agroforestry well or optimally, whereas farmers who come from local residence generally have various income sources, including food stalls and other agricultural activities. Based on the interviews, non-optimal of agroforestry management is also caused by the low income obtained from agroforestry farming activities and the absence of initial support from the government, through various facilities. Since the peat soil is undergoing problems with fertility to support plant growth, high inputs are required to improve this land to achieve better plant growth and production. Alwi and Hairani (2007) stated that peat soils have low fertility, including low pH and low nutrients, especially N, P and K elements; Cation exchange capacity (CEC) is very high, but base saturation is very low (Salampak 1999). Thus, it is necessary to add additional fertilizers to plants, as was done by Javanese ethnic informants, to provide sufficient fertilizer for plant growth. Government support was intended to assist in the form of seeds and fertilizers initially, which turned out to support the level of community participation in agroforestry as experienced by four informants.

The average number of household members is 3, ranging from 2-5 people. The number of family members will affect the distribution of income and affect farming activities. Human resources for agricultural land on low and static peatlands with limited ability, knowledge, and economy results in improper farm management. This condition causes the application of technology to be relatively limited, and farmers tend to modify technology according to their knowledge, experience, and capital capabilities and form local farming habits.

3.1. Tenure, trees, and land ownership

In general, there are two groups of tenure and land ownership. For Kalampangan Village, which is a former transmigration farmer village, transmigratory farmers control land obtained from the transmigration quota, which is 2 ha, consisting of 0.25 ha of yards and 1.75 ha of gardens, while for other farmers, it varies between 2-8 ha, with an average of the average land area of 3.42 ha. Apart from the 2 ex-transmigration farmers, other farmers obtained land by buying, especially in the area adjacent to the road, and expanding their land behind the original land they purchased. Only one farmer does not own land and cultivates and maintains other people's land without rental fees. In general, land ownership is, only marked with an SPT, except for 2 ex-transmigration farmers who have land certificates.

Table 3

Area and Land Ownership Status
No Resp	Land Area (ha)	Land ownership status	Current agricultural system practice	Planted Trees
1	2	one's own	Monoculture, Intercropping	Dyera sp. 15 years
2	5	one's own	Monoculture, Intercropping	Dyera sp. 15 years
3	1.75	one's own	Monoculture, Intercropping	Dyera sp. 3 years
4	4	one's own	Monoculture, Intercropping	Shorea belangiran 5 years
5	8	one's own	Monoculture, Intercropping	Shorea belangiran, Alstonia scholaris, Combretocarpus rotundatus, Alseodaphne sp, Mulberry, Dyera sp. (all aged approximately 5 months), previously planted Paraserianthes falcataria
6	4	Use other people's land	Monoculture	Dyera sp. 15 years
7	2	one's own	Monoculture	Rubber 2 years Rambutan
8	2	one's own	Monoculture	Dyera sp. 10 Years
9	2	one's own	Intercropping	Paraserianthes falcataria (2 years) Fruits

Several plants have been suggested for use in forestry, agroforestry, agro-food for the Indonesian climate. However, governments should study the characteristics of each plant before considering its broad application. In other words, there were significant differences between the plants. Otherwise, it is important to understand this when plants are tested or improved locally, as Tata and Susmianto (2016) noted. Table 4 presents several trees planted in an agroforestry system on peatlands in Central Kalimantan.

Table 4

Trees planted as part of agroforestry in Central Kalimantan
No.	Tree	Benefit	Advantages and disadvantages
1.	Jelutung (Dyera sp)	producer of latex, source of raw materials for chewing gum and handicrafts, raw materials for pencils and furniture	Adapting well and living in flooded swamps, the main obstacle to market availability for latex products
2.	Belangeran (Shorea belangiran)	Strong wood for building materials	It grows well in moderate inundation conditions, is relatively fire resistant and easily shoots off after a fire, has a high tolerance for various conditions of degraded peat forest, propagates by seed, natural shoots, and vegetatively from shoot cuttings. The growth rate is quite slow
3.	Gemor (Alseodaphne spp)	basic ingredients for mosquito repellent, incense and adhesives	adaptive to inundated peat swamps and has economic value
4.	Pulai (Alstonia pneumatophora)	The wood can be used for raw materials for handicrafts, pencils, blackboards, cabinets. Bark, leaves and flowers can be used as medicine	grows scattered throughout Indonesia, adaptive and grows naturally in swamps
5.	Tumih (Combretocarpus rotundatus)	good for use as frames, door panels, windows, furniture, parquet floors and stairs	Grows naturally, adaptive and suitable for peat swamp areas, relatively resistant to fires
6.	Rubber (Hevea braziliensis)	Besides latex, rubber is also a producer of wood (timber), charcoal and particleboard, gypsum and parquet boards (flooring), furniture, plywood and reconstructed wood.	Rubber cultivation is commonly done by the community although it needs development to get good production
7.	Sengon (Paraserianthes falcataria (L) Nielsen)	insulation board, cement casting, match industry, pencil manufacture, particle board, and paper pulp industry raw materials	Less adaptive and less suitable for peat swamp areas, with improvement in land quality still in the marginal category
Sources: Indartik (2009), Nugroho (2012), Nugraha et al. (2013), Tata and Susmianto (2016), (http://repository.ipb.ac.id/handle/123456789/74050).

3.2. Motivation of agroforestry farmers

Agroforestry systems have been employed for a long time in Indonesia since the shift in human livelihoods from hunting and gathering to agriculture. In Central Kalimantan, agroforestry was incorporated into shifting cultivation (swidden) systems, where people planted trees in fields that would be abandoned so that these areas continued to generate some benefit to communities and individuals. This included species such as rubber (Hevea brasiliensis), durian (Durio zibethinus), rambutan (Nephelium lappaceum), and langsat (Lansium domesticum). Communities have also traditionally planted trees as fences or markers for land boundaries in their yards.

The current agroforestry practices developed by the informants varied based on their understanding and experience. Farmers in Kalampangan Village practice intercropping, combining trees with secondary crops. In these systems, the placement of tree crops is arranged in such a way as to allow adequate sunlight to support crops planted between the trees. Unlike in Kalampangan Village, informants in Tumbang Nusa Village practice monoculture cropping patterns, intercropping between trees, namely Dyera sp. with rambutan, rubber with rambutan, and several types of tree plants such as belangiran (Shorea belangiran), pulai (Alstonia spp), tumih (Combretocarpus rotundatus (Miq.)), mulberry, jelutung (Dyera sp.), gemor (Alseodaphne sp) in rows different in one area of land. Vegetables are not intercropped with tree crops, but are planted separately using a monoculture cropping pattern. The main reason for not planting in an intercropping pattern with trees is that the trees are planted more closely to suit land conditions and mimic the spacing of trees in the forest.

Motivation that works in individuals has different strengths. Some motives are so strong that they dominate other motives. The strongest motive is the one that is the main cause of individual behavior at any given moment. Furthermore, it is said to know the relative strengths of the motives that are controlling a person in general; it can be seen through: (1) strong will to do, (2) the amount of time provided, (3) willingness to leave other obligations or duties, (4) willingness to pay for the sake of that action, (5) persistence in doing the task. The motivation of farmers in a job can also be a factor that causes the technology delivered to be accepted or rejected. Farmers who want to increase their income will work hard by spending most of their time for farming. If the motivation is caused by pressure from outside, then the farmer takes the technology seriously (Soekartawi 1988). Furthermore, motivation is important in the adoption process, but it is not easy to inspire motivation, especially for small farmers. This is due to the limitations of these farmers, such as limited land resources, knowledge, and skills.

Table 5 shows the reasons farmers gave for why they planted trees. These can be grouped into the following: ‘introduced by the Research and Development of Forestry (Dyera sp. seedlings from forestry program)', 'suitable to be developed on peatlands', 'long-term investment for posterity', 'maintaining land (ownership sign)', 'low mortality rate', 'supports family income although the results are small because prices influence it', 'it has been done since I was young as a family livelihood before being appointed as a teacher. While the reasons for planting intercrops between trees include: 'it can become a food supply (cassava plants)', and for vegetable crops, the reasons for farmers are 'according to market demand and good prices', 'easy to maintain', 'quick to produce, according to the land'. Another reason is 'following or mimicking other people'; 'according to the type of soil', 'the intercrop seedlings get help from the Banjar Baru Forestry Office’ and ‘give good results’.

Table 5

Motives for agroforestry on peatlands at Tumbang Nusa and Kalampangan Village, Central Kalimantan
No of informants	Types of trees planted	The reason for planting trees	Types of agroforestry	Reasons for planting intercrops	Advantages of agroforestry systems	The disadvantages/weaknesses of the agroforestry system
1	Dyera sp.	1. Introduced by the Forestry Research and Development 2. Suitable for development on peatlands 3. Long-term investment, both seeds, latex, and trunk/wood	1. Chili 2. Cassava 3. Corn	1. As a family food supply; 2. As a source of short-term income that is adjusted to market demand and good selling prices	1. Provide family food 2. Providing short, medium and long term income 3. provide shade, comfort and fresh air for planting trees	1. jelutong root system can interfere with the growth of intercrops, but it has been anticipated by making a trench beside the jelutong plant so that root growth can be pressed downwards / not sideways 2. The spacing and direction of planting adjusts sunlight
2	Dyera sp.	1. Introduced by forestry R&D 2. Suitable to be developed on peat land and is an endemic tree, where together with the hangkang and nyatu trees are plants that provide economic value to the Dayak community 3. Planting trees as a long-term asset, which will be enjoyed by the children and grandchildren, especially jelutong seeds	1. Pineapple 2. Goats 3. The Kelulut honey bee's (Meliponini)	1. Pineapple plants do not require intensive maintenance and give good results; however, after the jelutong plant is 5 years old, the pineapple plants will gradually run out because they do not get enough sunlight; 2. Goats are easy to maintain because they can find their own food and have an abundant supply of food 3. The kelulut honey bee is easy to care for and has available food, the price is favorable, and the marketing is easy	1. Provide short, medium and long term income 2. provide shade, comfort and fresh air for planting trees	Dyera sp. spacing is done tightly with the intention that the root system between one tree and another unites and will prevent the tree from falling. This means that tumpeng sari can no longer be planted with other plants after the tree canopy is getting bigger
3	Dyera sp.	1. Planting trees is a culture that has been taught since living in Java, that trees are a long-term savings/investment. 2. The choice of jelutong type adapts to suitable natural conditions to be developed	1. Leeks 2. Spinach 3. Mustard 4. Vanilla	The types of vegetables grown are adjusted to market demand, so they are easy to market and at a good price	1. Providing short-term (vegetables and crops), medium-term (vanilla) and long-term benefits from tree crops 2. Protect the environment, provide fresh air	On the first land (0.25 ha) jelutong is planted with a spacing of 1.5 x 4 m, so that after 3 years of age it cannot be planted again (Dyera sp. age is currently 15 years). Currently, vanilla plants will be developed, which require shade as an alternative to medium-term income. Second land (1.5 ha) planted jelutong with a wide spacing, 3 X 6 m so that several types of vegetable crops can still be planted (Dyera sp. age 3 years)
4	Belangiran Dyera sp. Fruit plants (rambutan, guava)	1. Long-term investment, because it has economic value 2. Maintenance the soil 3. Species selection because it is suitable for planting on peatlands, low mortality rates 4. Protecting the environment / avoiding land and forest fires	1. The tree nursery 2. Chickens	1. Market demand and have a good price 2. Can be developed in the village	1. Planting trees reduces land clearing, clean land reduces the potential for forest and land fires. 2. Provide fresh air	There are no disadvantages/weaknesses of the agroforestry system, even though other plants are not planted between the trees
5	Paraserianthes falcataria, Shorea belangiran, Alstonia pneumatophora, Combretocarpus rotundatus, Nothaphoebe coriacea, Mulberry, Dyera sp.	1. At the beginning of planting Paraserianthes falcataria because he was tempted to promote and a pulp factory was built in Pulang Pisau, but after 2 years it did not provide good growth 2. Planting local tree species as appropriate and also supported by Forestry Research and Development 3. Long term investment 4. Protecting the environment / avoiding forest and land fires 5. There is a plan to make a tourist spot	1. Pineapple 2. Tree nurseries 3. Vegetables 4. Fish cage (karamba)	1. Planting pineapples because they are not difficult to manage and suitable for peatlands 2. Tree nurseries because the demand for seedlings is always there every year 3. Vegetables and cages are being developed, currently the trial will continue to be developed	Agroforestry systems provide both short-term and long-term benefits	Selection of important plant types, selection of Paraserianthes falcataria trees because of the presence of a factory provides very large investment losses (seeds, fertilizers, and labor)
6	Dyera sp. Rambutan	1. Dyera sp. seed program from forestry R&D 2. Planting trees provides comfort, coolness.	Chilli	1. Suitable to the type of soil. 2. Chili has a good market and prices.	Planting trees provides comfort, coolness.	Other crops cannot be planted because they do not get sunlight.
7	Rubber Rambutan Garonggang	1. Supporting the family economy, even though it has little yield because it is influenced by price, it can be a long-term income for children and grandchildren 2. Have experience and become a commodity that was developed since young 3. Planting trees that can give repeated results, not harvesting / cutting once, namely: rubber, fruits such as rambutan. Rubber is a long-term income to meet the needs of daily life, while wood producing trees only maintain existing timber trees, considering that they do not plant.	Kelulut honey bees	provision of 10 boxes of Banjarbaru Forestry research and development is currently being developed more because it gives good results Will develop vegetable crops, both for own consumption and the market	as a short term and long term investment	There are no weaknesses and disadvantages that are felt
8	Dyera sp. Belangiran Rambutan	1. Suitable for growing on peatlands 2. Plant trees as a long-term asset, which will be enjoyed by the children and grandchildren 3. follow directions from forestry R & D 4. Long-term investment (trees); and short-term income (rambutan) although since the last 2 years rambutan has not produced 5. Free land markers (other than trenches)	1. The tree nursery 2. Vegetables	For daily / short term needs	Provide family food, in the form of vegetables, as well as savings from trees	Not yet providing results / income because the latex value has not been produced
9	1. Paraserianthes falcataria 2. Fruits	1. Planting Paraserianthes falcataria because there is a market in the form of a pulp factory in Pulang Pisaul district 2. Growing various kinds of fruit due to government support 3. Long-term investment / possible for tourism development	1. The tree nursery 2. Vegetables	Easy to implement and can give good results	1. Provide short, medium and long term income 2. provide shade, comfort and freshness for planting trees 3. Reducing the risk of fire rather than being left to scrub	There are no disadvantages / weekness of the agroforestry system

Informant 1 stated, "A guest from the Banjarbaru Forestry Research and Development Center came to me and asked if he wanted to plant trees on my land. I said it is okay to plant trees with good and profitable prospects. Then it is conveyed because the roots of the tree are pointing downwards, the sap is selling, the tree is selling." Informant 2 said, " The village community's habit is to plant rubber and rattan. When I asked the Head of KHDTK it was advisable to plant panting (or Dyera sp.). Interested in planting pantung because parents in the past planted pantung, at that time only pantung, hangkang, and nyatu were sold." Informant 3 shared "Having a tree is the same as having gold. My grandfather told me that just one piece of wood could get Rp. 20,000,000 (USD 1380.08) – Rp. 25,000,000 (USD 1725.07) per teak tree; Instead, if you plant a pantung here, so planting a pantung is natural." Informant 5 said "wanted to develop agroforestry because I saw that it was owned by someone else if other people can do it, why can't I. Planting trees causes the land to be preserved, it is sad to see the burn marks because the land above is burned up to 50 cm, and causes a puddle of water."

On average, informants stated that they devote considerable time and money to their agroforestry activities. Informant 1, for example, stated that after teaching, he carried out plant cultivation activities within the agroforestry system every day.

3.3. Income from agroforestry

Household income comes from various livelihoods carried out by the informants, both in tree planting, agriculture, livestock, and fisheries (tree nurseries, planting horticultural crops, secondary crops, raising goats, chickens, and bees, as well as fishing fishermen), as well as other sources, outside the agricultural sector (retirees, teachers, traders, garden guards).

Table 6

Income and Sources of Income of Informants at the Research Location
No.	Income per year
	Trees		Agriculture, Animal Husbandry, Fisheries		Others		Total
	USD	%	USD	%	USD	%	USD
1	1104.05	21.37	1992.46	38.56	2070.09	40.07	5166.38
2	0	0	3622.65	100.00	0	0	3622.50
3	2070.09	34.64	2663.51	44.57	1242.05	20.79	5975.40
4	0	0	2760.11	100.00	0	0	2760.00
5	0	0	2001.08	44.62	2484.10	55.38	4485.00
6	0	0	1035.04	29.41	2484.10	70.59	3519.00
7	0	0	662.43	9.09	6624.28	90.91	7286.40
8	0	0	2277.09	100.00	0	0	2277.00
9	0	0	207.01	3.70	5382.22	96.30	5589.00
average	396.77	0	1913.49	52.22	2254.09	0	4520.08
Note : 1USD=IDR 14492.15

The informants' household income ranged from USD 2277-7286.4 per year, or in the range of USD 189.75-607.2 per month with an average of USD 376.67 per month. The Biro Pusat Statistik (BPS) categorizes the income of the population into four categories based on the average income per month, namely: very high-income category with an average income of more than USD 241.51 per month; high-income category if above USD 172.51- 241.51; medium income category if more than USD 103.50-172.51; and low-income category if income is less than USD 103.50. In general, informants were in the very high-income category. Seven informants were in the very high-income category, and 2 other informants were in the high-income category. The average income per month reaches USD 376.67, exceeding the district minimum wage of Palangka Raya and Pulang Pisau Regency. The income from the agroforestry system is better than the results of the research conducted by Surati et al. (2019) on peatlands which provide an average monthly income of USD 308.26 sourced from land-based and non-land-based businesses and provide suggestions for developing agroforestry systems according to their physical conditions. All informants get income from agriculture, animal husbandry, and fisheries with different contributions to income from the smallest 3.7-100% of the income obtained from agriculture, livestock, and fisheries. Only 2 informants earned income from planting trees, namely by selling Jelutong seeds for seedlings, with 21.37% and 34.64% contributions. Meanwhile, 7 informants had not received any results from planting trees. However, all informants believe that planting trees would provide economic benefits for households in the long run, either in form of savings or long-term investment. Moreover, they provide benefits for the environment, for example an important component of many of the farmers' agroforestry systems is Jelutung rawa (Dyera polyphylla (Miq.) Steenis), a type of tree which is adapted to grow in tropical peat swamps. Based on its original growing location, the plant grows on inundated land, and is thus very suited for peat restoration agroforestry systems (Harun 2016). The wood is processed into blocks or boards, plywood, and wood pulp. In addition, the sap can be tapped and sold in blocks or sheets that can be used as an insulator for electrical cables, tires, and gum, while the resin can be used as cosmetics, varnishes, and essential oils (Tata et al. 2015). The development of Dyera sp. in an agroforestry system has a better economic viability than planting these trees in monocultures. Harun (2011) shows that Dyera sp. and rubber agroforestry systems have Net Present Value (NVP) USD 4816.36, BCR 8.68 and Internal Return of Rate (IRR) 29. Likewise Budiningsih and Effendi (2013) calculated NVP values of USD 638.10, BCR of 5.35, and IRR of 24.1 for agroforestry system.

All informants stated a belief that that the need for wood would increase in the future. Some farmers view timber, including jelutong and rubber, as savings to be used when economic conditions are difficult. By tapping rubber alone, you can meet your daily food needs.

More money is earned from selling product trees on actively cultivated land with more secure tenure and more fertile soils through better fertilizers. Older farmers manage greater tree densities, especially when the land is secure. This broad-based study shows that agroforestry implementation strategies in developing areas such as Central Kalimantan should be based on thorough knowledge of how farmers use household and field characteristics to make adoption decisions. It also suggests that agroforestry adoption studies should consider dynamic changes that occur over a long time (Bannister and Nair 2003).

3.4. Knowledge of peat and its conservation

The Kalampangan transmigratory farmer community, established in 1979-1980, took a long time to adapt and succesfully cultivate crops. For agroforestry farmers who come from Java, generally they use knowledge about plant cultivation on peatlands based on experience. In general, farming communities on peatlands, ex-transmigration farmers from Java, intend to use fertilizers. Their success in agricultural cultivation was obtained after the first ten years of their placement in peatland areas failed to cultivate crops due to the poor quality of peat soil. Inadvertently, farmers gain knowledge of peatland improvement by utilizing peat burnt ash and weeds. Peatlands can be used for agriculture with various plants, as shown in Table 3. The Dayak community traditionally uses the deep peat area as a catch fishery area. However, the perceived success of farmers on peatlands has also affected the views of the Dayak people.

In general, farmers do not realize and know that trees are an important component in peat conservation. This was known when they were asked if they knew that there was a decrease in the surface of the peatlands due to the decomposition process with the opening of the peat swamp forest. All agroforestry actors stated that they were not aware of this. The decline or loss of forest cover has resulted in a decrease in the groundwater table (Wösten et al. 2006; Uda et al., 2017; Sumargana 2016; Cooper et al., 2019), which has an impact on the characteristics of peat soils, including the decomposition process, compaction, which resulted in land subsidence (Sherwood et al., 2013, Evans et al., 2019) which was associated with an increase in bulk density (Sinclair et al., 2020). Important aspects are in the use of neglected/degraded land, such as in the Tumbang Nusa area, which is an area that experiences forest fires every dry season with various impacts, while large parts of the Kalampangan area, which is an ex-transmigration area, has never experienced forest and land fires. In this area, opened in the early 1980’s, agricultural activities were initially successful due to the use of ash from weeds and peatlands, but at present this cultivation technique has been abandoned, and the use of manure and inorganic fertilizers (artificial is becoming more prominent) has become more important. The newer part of Kalampangan village (known as the Kalampangan Misik area), has experienced substantial fires most dry seasons such as in 2015. After these fires, the area was developed into an agricultural area, especially for cultivating vegetables and fruits.

The government should direct the use of abandoned land to become a productive area but not too intensively manage its farms. This is better in the context of peat conservation, especially in preventing forest and land fires. Agroforestry and agricultural activities still cause a subsidence of 0.41-3.21 cm yr-1 (Evans et al., 2021). Peatland can be used for non-agricultural activities such as bee cultivation, fish farming and goat farming. In areas with a shallow groundwater level, an adaptive intercropping type can be developed in the form of paludiculture (Lupascu et al., 2020). All farmers and the community really want to prevent fires, whisch occur in every long dry season. After the forest and peatland fires in 2015, the prohibition of burning forests and control by security forces was very effective in reducing the number and extent of forest and peatland fires, but the ban on burning the forest reduced rice production in the area as well as income. For this reason, it is necessary to introduce and pilot land clearing and clearing without burning, with various technologies that have been developed, such as vermicompost (Jaya et al., 2020).

Restoration with local trees has shown success, including Repeat restoration area belonging to the Forest Research Agency in the Tumbang Nusa Village area and Sebangau National Park, with the main plant being the Belangiran tree (Shorea belangiran). In Tumbang Nusa village, informant 5 established a local tree seedling nursery of various types, such as Alstonia pneumatophora, Shorea belangiran, meranti (Shorea spp). Several agroforestry actors still have their own nurseries to this day. Apart from selling seeds, they also plant these tree species on their own land. Conservation issues in natural resource management and agroforestry are complex and multi-layered. Several studies have developed viable socioecological models that demonstrate a "two-way" exchange of information. The communication model regulates the concept of natural resource conservation in relation to other regional resources (Dastgerdi et al., 2020).

3.5. Knowledge of agroforestry and land management

Informants’ understanding of the term agroforestry was more general in terms of intercropping plants. Likewise, the reasons underlying choice of tree species vary. Several farmers started agroforestry activities with support from the government through the Ministry of Forestry, which included provision of seedlings and production facilities at the start of the activity. Two farmers initially tried to plant sengon (Paraserianthes falcataria L. Nielsen) trees (as many as 15,000 seeds and 8 ha) because at that time there was for sengon planting due to a factory being built in Pulang Pisau, Central Kalimantan. To encourage the success of tree planting in this agroforestry pattern, understanding the characteristics of trees that are adaptive to peatland conditions is important.

Restoring degraded peatlands requires vegetation cover as it increases humidity, lowers temperatures, and reduces fire risk. The revegetation approach depends on the level of peat degradation that occurs. In conditions where peat swamp forest remains, hydrological rehabilitation may be sufficient for the forest to regenerate naturally, provided the area is protected from logging and fires. However, if only a few trees remain then enrichment planting is necessary. If fire has occurred in most of the area, then ecological rehabilitation involving full hydrological rehabilitation in the form of full rewetting and replanting will be required. Depending on fire history, level of flooding and level of disturbance, various combinations of species are available that are included in the native peat swamp forest flora. Species adjacent to and in protected or conserved areas of ecological importance should also be included in the species mix. Revegetation programs near communities should focus on peat swamp species that can provide economic benefits. Several species such as sago, Dyera sp., gelam (Melaleuca leucadendra) and Alseodaphne sp. are well known. Revegetation in the form of trees takes a long time before production is reached (Giesen and Nurmala 2018). Uda et al. (2020), found that the best choices when growing crops were sago (Metroxylon sago), banana (Musa paradisiaca), and pineapple (Ananas comosus) followed by water spinach/kangkong (Ipomoea aquatica), macaque/edible fern (Stenochlaena palustris), ilip nuts/tengkawang (Shorea spp.), dragon fruit (Hylocereus undatus), mangosteen (Garcinia mangostana) and sweet melon (Cucumis melo). Sago trees and ilip nuts have market sustainability and scalability, while bananas, pineapples and sweet melons have market scalability and farmer acceptability.

All agroforestry farmers agree that drainage is important in crop cultivation with agroforestry patterns. Because of that, all farmers make and use drainage channels in their activities. Due to his relatively low land and crop output, only one is still experiencing a problem, so he experiences periodic flooding, especially during the rainy season. However, these farmers use polybags for seasonal crop cultivation. The main purpose of peatland drainage is to lower the water table to create aerobic conditions, at least to the depth of the roots of the cultivated plants, so that the plant's need for oxygen can be met. Another purpose of drainage on peatlands is to remove some organic acids that can poison plants. Drainage measures can also impact improving the physical properties of the soil. However, on the other side, drainage harms peat protection. In addition to the decomposition process due to low groundwater levels, drought can also make peatlands vulnerable to fire hazards.

Regarding fertilizers to increase peatland productivity, all informants understood and knew about it, both inorganic fertilizers and organic fertilizers. However, for planting trees, farmers use a limited amount and type of fertilizer at the time of planting at the start, but in the future, they think that fertilizer for trees will come from fertilizers applied to intercrops (especially for farmers who use between trees as an area for seasonal crop cultivation). In addition, all agroforestry farmers agree that crop suitability is the main criteria for tree selection, so that without intensive maintenance and fertilization, these plants can grow well.

3.6. Value of Forests / Trees in Peat Ecosystem Environment

Peatland ecosystems have important values to all informants. For the community, the ecosystem becomes life support. In general, there is a difference between the values for Javanese and non-Javanese farmers. Javanese farmers with complete activities as agroforestry farmers, who cultivate peatlands, can earn income from these activities. Meanwhile, for the non-Javanese, especially the Dayak people, the peat area is a source of vegetables and fish protein because those with a strong culture as collectors take advantage of this. People take Kelakai (Stenochlaena palustris, edible fen), young pineapple, and daffodils as a source of vegetables and catch fish as a side dish and protein source. Thus, peat and its aquatic ecosystem are very important for all people living in peat areas and must be maintained. In particular, for one of the informants, the peat area is also a source of feed for the goats they raise, especially uyah-uyah (Stemonurus secundiflorus) plants. Yuptriani et al. (2020) also states that peat areas are a source of livelihood for the community because they provide income in fishing. For the people of Tumbang Nusa, the abandoned irrigation channel in the former Mega Rice Project area is also a source of income that utilizes purun (Lepironia articulate) plants. According to the seven informants from Tumbang Nusa village, most of the community planted rubber trees in their household environment and in their area of origin in the village of Tumbang Nusa on the banks of the Kahayan River, with alluvial land, they cultivated rubber even though with less intensive management.

Trees in the agroforestry system provided comfort for all informants, including beauty, shade, and inner calm. Fresh air and comfortable temperatures impact the environment, and some have even planned to use this comfortable environment for ecotourism and have even carried out kelulut (stingless bee) farming. Informant 1 describes the benefits of planting trees: "I think the benefits of trees are realized or not, trees produce oxygen, and make the environment cool. I think plants play an important role in life on earth, making the earth habitable because of plants and trees. Planting trees alone is restoration, and the agroforestry system benefits me because it produces year-round results. Agroforestry must, because everywhere disasters, floods, and landslides due to disturbed ecology, plant trees for mitigation. For me, agroforestry gives hope in every timeframe: short-term chili, vegetables, medium-term cassava, and long-term Dyera sp. fruit. Below the ground is cassava, above the ground there are chilies and vegetables, and above there is Dyera sp. fruit." Informants 2 said, "Currently, I feel the benefits of the extraordinary results from selling pantung fruit; I have merged with the pantung tree that I planted and will not cut down the tree; only take the fruit to sell. Planting trees for a long time, as the Dayak people go abroad, they will come back and remember this tree that was planted in the past, as a marker and closer to family relationships". Informant 5 stated, "The coolness of the trees, providing a shady environment and a comfortable atmosphere, so that people will come to study, research, and travel, will ultimately provide economic benefits for us. Trees for a shady environment and a comfortable atmosphere." Meanwhile, informant 6 mentioned the benefits of planting trees: "Planting trees makes the environment fresh, shady, comfortable."

3.7. Institutional support

Assessing the role of institutions in the research location, it becomes clear that rural supporting institutions are relatively insufficient in supporting sustainable agroforestry management. The role of institutions in agroforestry management in the study locations is presented in Table 7.

Table 7

Institutional role in agroforestry management
No.	Institutional support	Less	Moderate	Good
Kalampangan Village
1.	Production (Farmers' Institutions)			X
2.	Production Facilities Provider ( Kiosk, Co-operation-KUD )		X
3.	Extension Institution		X
4.	Capital Service Institutions (Farmers' cooperatives, savings and loan groups, Joint Business Groups, Small and Medium Enterprises)		X
5.	Marketing (Village Market)		X
6.	Agricultural Mechanization Service (Tractor, huller)	X
Tumbang Nusa Village
1.	Production (Farmers' Institutions)	X
2.	Production Facilities Provider (Kiosk, Co-operation-KUD )	X
3.	Extension Institution	X
4.	Capital Service Institutions (Farmers' cooperatives, savings and loan groups, Joint Business Groups, Small and Medium Enterprises)	X
5.	Marketing (Village Market)		X
6.	Agricultural Mechanization Service (Tractor, huller)	X

There is no evidence that institutions (farmer institutions) in the research area, information technology and extension agencies, production facility providers (Kiosk, KUD) financial institutions, marketing institutions, and agricultural labor institutions are functioning so that the benefits felt by farmers are relatively low. Only at Kalampangan Village in general, institutitonal support is much better. These findings indicate that the role of institutions in the research area has not been optimal in supporting the sustainability of land productivity. Besides family consumption, the agricultural products produced will also be sold to the so-called agricultural product market. However, the performance of these economic institutions has also not been optimal in supporting agricultural productivity in the research locations. In addition to economic facilities, agricultural or livestock activities in the research location also have technical personnel who act as extension workers, but they seem to have less role in supporting agroforestry patterns and focus on agriculture, thus the carrying capacity of extension agents is not optimal to serve agro-forestry agricultural performance. Another obstacle faced is the low quality of the extension workers. Job prospects as extension workers are less promising for the future, resulting in less desirable job of extension workers. Conditions like this result in the choice of work as counseling not the main choice, but just for work.

Intensive management of agroforestry with intercropping of vegetables can provide good income. Government intervention through tree planting programs also stimulates agroforests activities. The informants' household incomes ranged from USD 2277-7286.4 per year with an average of USD 4520.08 per year. The existence of research institutions in the area has not yet functioned, so the benefits felt by farmers are relatively insufficient. Some get fertilizer facilities from government activities, but fertilizers are obtained from intercropping in the next stage, especially for intensively cultivated vegetables.

This study has several important implications for follow-up. First, it identifies more detailed research on why many farmers or communities are not implementing this agroforestry technology and introduces technology from the aspects of the adaptive and profitable tree or intercrops in peatland areas. Technology has a better chance of adoption if it is targeted at farmers producing high-value commercial crops on peatlands. Farmers who devote much time and focus to growing vegetables with good management and using fertilizers and other agricultural means are usually successful. The addition of the number of informants from other areas besides the two villages studied help to examine the reasons for farmers not implementing agroforestry as well as the availability of information related to agroforestry activities such as the agriculture agency and forestry agency will provide a comprehensive picture of the agroforestry system as a solution for conservation and rehabilitation of tropical peatlands. Second, this research provides information about the successes that farmers have carried out and the government can use this information to select tree species and intercrops for the use of agroforestry systems as a way of conserving and rehabilitating peatlands.

The success rate of peatland rehabilitation directly carried out by the community is still low, so it is necessary to emphasize efforts to conserve peatlands that are still relatively good. The agroforestry system provides income in the short term through intercropping, but technical and financial guidance and support need to be provided.

Author Contributions

AE and AJ led the study and drafted the manuscript with AJ and EUA; AJ, EUA and MO undertook data collection and analysis. All authors involved in designing the study, read, commented on and contributed to the final manuscript.

Acknowledgement

The authors gratefully thank all informants for their contribution and help for this research, and the Center for Research and Community Service at the University of Palangka Raya (LPPM-UPR) for providing access and assisting in conducting research. We also sincerely acknowledge the head of Kalampangan village and Tumbang Nusa Village for permission and help to do this work on their area. The authors would like to thank reviewers for their helpful comments and Prof. Susan E. Page of University of Leicester, UK and Dr. Patrick O’Rielly of University of Leicester, UK for their comments and input.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted without any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Agustiyara, Purnomo EP, Ramdani R (2021) Using Artificial Intelligence Technique in Estimating Fire Hotspots of Forest Fires. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 717(1), 12019. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/717/1/012019
Alwi M, Hairani A (2007) Karakteristik kimia lahan gambut dangkal dan potensinya untuk pertanaman cabai dan tomat. Jurnal Agronomi Indonesia (Indonesian Journal of Agronomy), 35(1)
Antang EU, Adi Jaya, Supriati L, Birawa C (2018) Analisis Pengembangan Usahatani Masyarakat dalam Upaya Restorasi Lahan Gambut Berbasis Agroekowisata di Kampung Misik, Kalimantan Tengah. Seminar Nasional Pembangunan Pertanian Indonesia dalam Memperkuat Lumbung Pangan Fundamental Ekonomi dan Daya Saing Global. Yogyakarta 16-17 November 2018.
Badan Restorasi Gambut (2018) Profil Desa Peduli Gambut: Desa Tumbang Nusa Kecamatan Jabiren Raya Kabupaten Pulang Pisau. Deputi Bidang Edukasi, Sosialisasi, Partisipas dan Kemitraan
Bannister ME, Nair PKR (2003) Agroforestry adoption in Haiti: the importance of household and farm characteristics. Agroforest Syst 57:149–157. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023973623247
Barnes DF, Allen TC, Ramsey W (1982) Social forestry in developing nations. Resource Discussion Paper D-73 F. Resources for the Future, Washington DC
Bloor M, Wood F (2016) Purposive Sampling. Keywords in Qualitative Methods, I(01. 24–41. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781849209403.n73
BPS Kabupaten Pulang Pisau (2020) Kecamatan Jabiren Raya Dalam Angka 2020. Pulang Pisau
BPS Kota Palangka Palangka Raya (2020) Kecamatan Sebangau Dalam Angka 2020. Palangka Raya
Budiningsih K, Effendi R (2013) Analisis Kelayakan Finansial Hutan Tanaman Jelutung (Dyera polyphylla) Di Kalimantan Tengah. Jurnal Penelitian Hutan Tanaman 10(1):17–23. https://doi.org/10.20886/jpht.2013.10.1.17-23
Cooper HV, Vane CH, Evers S, Aplin P, Girkin NT, Sjögersten S (2019) From peat swamp forest to oil palm plantations: the stability of tropical peatland carbon. Geoderma 342:109–117
Cutler D, Elchinger M, Hill G, Katz J, J Barnett (2014) Community Agroforestri in Mamuju: A Green Prosperity Model Project. National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Denver
Dastgerdi AS, Sargolini M, Pierantoni I (2019) Climate change challenges to existing cultural heritage policy. Sustainability 11(19):5227. https://doi:10.3390/su11195227
Dastgerdi AS, Sargolini M, Broussard AS, Chatrchyan A, De Luca G (2020) Climate change and sustaining heritage resources: A framework for boosting cultural and natural heritage conservation in Central Italy. Climate 8(2):26. https://doi:10.3390/cli8020026
Direktorat R (1992) Prasarana Fisik bagi Pengembangan Lahan Pasang Surut: Jaringan Reklamasi Rawa dan Bangunan Penunjang serta Operasionalisasinya. dalam Partohardjono, S. dan M. Syam (eds). Pengembangan Terpadu Pertanian Lahan Rawa Pasang Surut dan Lebak. Pusat Penelitian dan Pengembangan Tanaman Pangan, Badan Litbang Pertanian. Departemen Pertanian. Pp. 63-80
Elia A (2019) Sosiologi Ekonomi. Trussmedia Grafika, Yogyakarta, p 216
Erwin KL (2009) Wetlands and global climate change: the role of wetland restoration in a changing world. Wetlands Ecol Manage 17:71–84. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11273-008-9119-1
Evans CD, Callaghan N, Jaya A, Grinham A, Sjogersten S, Page SE, Harrison ME, Kusin K, Kho LK, Ledger M, Evers S (2021) A novel low-cost, high-resolution camera system for measuring peat subsidence and water table dynamics. Frontiers in Environmental Science 9:33. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2021.630752
Evans CD, Williamsona JM, Kacaribu F, Irawan D, Suardiwerianto Y, Fikky Hidayat MF, Laurén A, Page SE (2019) Rates and spatial variability of peat subsidence in Acacia plantation and forest landscapes in Sumatra, Indonesia. Geoderma 338:410–421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2018.12.028
Evers S, Yule CM, Padfield R, O'Reilly P, Varkkey H (2016) Keep wetlands wet: the myth of sustainable development of tropical peatlands – implications for policies and management. Glob Change Biol 23(2):534–549. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13422
Foley G, Barnard G (1984) Farm and community forestry. Earthscan Technical Report, No 3, London
Gregerson HM (1988) People, trees, and rural development: the role of social forestry. J Forest 86(10):22–30
Harun MK (2016) Agroforestri Berbasis Jelutung Rawa: Solusi Sosial, Ekonomi, dan Lingkungan Pengelolaan Lahan Gambut. Forda Press, Bogor
Harun MK (2011) Analisis pengembangan jelutung dengan sistem agroforestri untuk memulihkan lahan gambut terdegradasi di Provinsi Kalimantan Tengah. Sekolah Pascasarjana. Institut Pertanian Bogor. Bogor. Master Thesis
Hooijer A, Page SE, Canadell JG, Silvius M, Kwadijk J, Wösten H, Jauhiainen J (2010) Current and future CO₂ emissions from drained peatlands in Southeast Asia. Biogeosciences 7:1505–1514. https://doi: 10.5194/bg-7-1505-2010
Hooijer A, Page SE, Jauhiainen J, Lee WA, Lu XX, Idris A, Anshari G (2012) Subsidence and carbon loss in drained tropical peatlands. Biogeosciences 9:1053–1071. . doi: 10.5194/bg-9-1053-2012
Immirzi CP, Maltby E, Clymo RS (1992) The global status of peatlands and their role in carbon cycling. Report No. 11, Wetlands Research Group. Friends of the Earth, London, p 145
Indartik I (2009) Potensi Pasar Pulai (Alstonia Scholaris) Sebagai Sumber Bahan Baku Industri Obat Herbal: Studi Kasus Jawa Barat Dan Jawa Tengah. Jurnal Penelitian Sosial dan Ekonomi Kehutanan 6(2):159–175
Jaya A, Antang EU, Djaya AA, Gunawan H (2021) Agroforestry farming system as peatland restoration efforts in Central Kalimantan, Indonesia. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science (Vol. 694, No. 1, p. 012016). IOP Publishing
Jaya A, Lautt BS, Antang EU, Sibot S, Dohong S, Surawijaya P, Dohong S (2020) Effects of zero burning waste on the quality of liquid fertilizer and vermicompost. International Journal of Agricultural and Biological Engineering 13(4):159–165. . doi: 10.25165/j.ijabe.20201304.4814
Jordan CBK (1988) Forestry program fights rural poverty. J Forest 86(5):37–40
Kholifah UN, Wulandari C, Santoso T, Kaskoyo H (2017) Kontribusi Agroforestri terhadap Pendapatan Petani di Kelurahan Sumber Agung Kecamatan Kemiling Kota Bandar Lampung. Jurnal Sylva Lestari. 5:39–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.23960/jsl3539-47. 3
Lupascu M, Wijedasa LS (2020) Paludiculture as a sustainable land use alternative for tropical peatlands: A review. Sci Total Environ 142111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.142111
Maltby E, Proctor MCF (1996) Peatlands: their nature and role in the biosphere. International Peat Society Finland
Marlier ME, DeFries RS, Voulgarakis A, Kinney PL, Randerson JT, Shindell DT, Chen Y, Faluvegi G (2013) El Niño and health risks from landscape fire emissions in Southeast Asia. Nature Clim Change 3:131–136. https://doi:10.1038/nclimate1658
Miettinen J, Chenghua Shi C, Soo Chin Liew SC (2017) Fire Distribution in Peninsular Malaysia, Sumatra and Borneo in 2015 with Special Emphasis on Peatland Fires. Environ Manage 60:747–757. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-017-0911-7
Mishra S, Page SE, Cobb AR, Lee JSH, Sancho AJJ, Sjögersten S, Jaya A, Aswandi, Wardle DA (2021) Degradation of Southeast Asian tropical peatlands and integrated strategies for their better management and restoration. J Appl Ecol 1–18. https://doi. org/10.1111/1365-2664.13905
Najiyati S, Muslihat L, Suryadiputra INN (2005) Panduan pengelolaan lahan gambut unutuk pertanian berkelanjutan. Wetlands International, Bogor, p 231
Namwata BML, Masanyiwa ZS, Miziral OB (2012) Productivity of The Agroforestri System and Its Contribution to Household Income Among Farmer in Lushoto District, Tanzania. International Journal of Physical and Social Sciences 2(7):369–392
Noor M (2012) Sejarah pembukaan lahan gambut untuk pertanian di Indonesia. Prosiding Pengelolaan Lahan Gambut Berkelanjutan, pp 399–411
Nugraha G, Herawatiningsih R, Nugroho J (2013) Evaluasi Kesesuaian Lahan Gambut Untuk Tanaman Sengon (Paraserianthes falcataria (L) Nielsen) di Desa Kuala Dua Kecamatan Sungai Raya Kabupaten Kubu Raya. Jurnal Hutan Lestari 1(2):141–148
Nugroho PA (2012) Potensi pengembangan karet melalui pengusahaan hutan tanaman industri. Warta perkaretan 31(2):95–102
Osaki M, Nursyamsi D, Noor M, Wahyunto, Segah H (2016) Peatland in Indonesia.. In: In: Osaki M, Tsuji N (eds) Tropical Peatlands Ecosystems. Tokyo: Springer, Pp, pp 49–58
Paembonan SA, Millang S, Dassir M, Ridwan M (2018) Species Variation in Home Garden Agroforestri System in South Sulawesi, Indonesia and Its Contribution to Farmers’ Income. 10.1088/1755-1315/157/1/012004/pdf. https://iopscience.iop.org/article/
Page SE, Rieley JO, Banks CJ (2011) Global and regional importance of the tropical peatland carbon pool. Global Change Biol 17:798–818. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2010.02279.x
Page S, Hoscilo A, Langner A, Tansey K, Siegert F, Limin S, Rieley J (2009) Tropical peatland fires in Southeast Asia. Tropical Fire Ecology. 263–287. https://doi:10.1007/978-3-540-77381-8_9
Parish F, Sirin A, Charman D, Joosten H, Minaeva T, Silvius M (eds) (2008) Assessment on peat-lands, biodiversity and climate change. Global Environment Centre and Wageningen, Wetlands International, Kuala Lumpur, p 179
Prasetiawan T (2010) Masa Depan Lahan Gambut Indonesia. Pengantar Redaksi, p 257
Purnomo EP, Agustiyara A, Ramdani R, Trisnawati DW, Anand P, Fathani AT (2021) Developing the Assessment and Indicators for Local Institutions in Dealing with Forest Fire Dilemma.Journal of Security and Sustainability Issues, 10(3)
Purnomo EP, Rahmasari FV, Trisnawati DW, Agustiyara, Erviana R (2021) Observed Data of Forest Fire Hotspots effects on Respiratory Disorder by Arc-GIS in Riau Province, Indonesia. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 717(1), 12036. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/717/1/012036
Purnomo EP, Ramdani R, Agustiyara A, Tomaro QPV, Samidjo GS (2019) Land ownership transformation before and after forest fires in Indonesian palm oil plantation areas. Journal of Land Use Science 00(00):1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/1747423X.2019.1614686
Purnomo EP, Ramdani R, Agustiyara, Nurmandi A, Trisnawati DW, Fathani AT (2021) Bureaucratic inertia in dealing with annual forest fires in Indonesia. International Journal of Wildland Fire. https://doi.org/10.1071/WF20168
Rieley JO, Ahmad-Shah AA, Brady MA (1996) The extent and nature of tropical peat swamps, In Tropical Lowland Peatlands of Southeast Asia. Proceedings of a Workshop on Integrated Planning and Management of Tropical Lowland Peatlands, Cisarua, Indonesia, 3-8 July 1992, Maltby, E., Immirzi, C.P., Safford, R.J. (eds.), IUCN, Gland, Switzerland, x + 294 p
Salampak (1999) Peningkatan Produktivitas Tanah Gambut yang Disawahkan dengan Pemberian Bahan Amelioran Tanah Mineral Berkadar Besi Tinggi. Disertasi Program Pascasarjana, Institut Pertanian Bogor, Bogor
Sherwood JH, Kettridge N, Thompson DK, Morris PJ, Silins U, Waddington JM (2013) Effect of drainage and wildfire on peat hydrophysical properties. Hydrol Process 27(13):1866–1874
Sinclair AL, Graham LL, Putra EI, Saharjo BH, Applegate G, Grover SP, Cochrane MA (2020) Effects of distance from canal and degradation history on peat bulk density in a degraded tropical peatland. Science of The Total Environment, 699: p.134199
Subagio H, Noor M, Yusuf WA, Khairulah I (2015) Kebijakan Pengembangan Lahan Rawa. http://repository.pertanian.go.id/handle/123456789/7414, accessed on 3 May 2021
Suharti S (2011) Kajian Pengembangan Komoditi AUK untuk peningkatan pendapatan masyarakat sekitar hutan. Seminar Nasional Reformasi Pertanian Terintegrasi Menuju Kedaulatan Pangan
Sumarga E, Hein L, Hooijer A, Vernimmen R (2016) Hydrological and economic effects of oil palm cultivation in Indonesian peatlands. Ecol Soc 21:52
Surati S, Irawanti S, Hidayat DC, Handoyo H, Ariawan K, Kurniawan AS, Mulyadin RM (2019) Analysis of Livelihoods in Peat Land: The Case of Tanjung Jabung Barat Regency. Jurnal Penelitian Sosial dan Ekonomi Kehutanan 16(2):81–93
Tacconi L (2003) Fires in Indonesia: causes, costs and policy implications. Occasional Paper No. 38. Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor
Tata HL, Susmianto A (2016) Prospek Paludikultur Ekosistem Gambut Indonesia. Forda Press, Bogor Indonesia
Tata HL, Bastoni M, Sofiyuddin, Mulyoutami E, Perdana A, Janudianto (2015) Jelutung Rawa: Teknik Budidaya dan Prospek Ekonominya. ICRAF. Bogor
Uda SK, Hein L, Adventa A (2020) Towards better use of Indonesian peatlands with paludiculture and low-drainage food crops. Wetlands Ecol Manage 28:509–526. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11273-020-09728-x
Uda SK, Hein L, Atmoko D (2019) Assessing the health impacts of peatland fires: a case study for Central Kalimantan, Indonesia. Environ Sci Pollut Res 26(30):31315–31327. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-06264-x
Uda SK, Hein L, Sumarga E (2017) Towards sustainable management of Indonesian tropical peatlands. Wetlands Ecol Manage 25(6):683–701
Widyati E (2011) Kajian optimasi pengelolaan lahan gambut dan isu perubahan iklim. Tekno Hutan Tanaman 4(2):57–68
Wösten JHM, Ismail AB, van Wijk ALM (1997) Peat subsidence and its practical implications: a case study in Malaysia. Geoderma 78:25–36. . doi: 10.1016/S0016-7061(97)00013-X
Wösten JHM, Van Den Berg J, Van Eijk P, Gevers GJM, Giesen WBJT, Hooijer A, Idris A, Leenman PH, Rais DS, Siderius C, Silvius MJ (2006) Interrelationships between hydrology and ecology in fire degraded tropical peat swamp forests. Water Resources Development 22(1):157–174
Yuptriani SP, Rizal M, Prasetyo A, Fahlifi R, Situmorang J, Rahmadini D, Siahaan ER, Sumantri DP, Sinambela M, Aprilyani R, Rindhianto AF (2020) Pengelolaan sumberdaya perikanan rawa gambut untuk meningkatkan perekonomian masyarakat Desa Tanjung Taruna Kabupaten Pulang Pisau. In Unri Conference Series: Community Engagement (Vol. 2, pp. 372-378)
Yuwariah YAS (2016) Potensi Agroforestri Untuk Meningkatkan Pendapatan Kemandirian Bangsa, dan Perbaikan Lingkungan. Prosiding Seminar Nasional Agroforestri 2015: Inovasi Agroforestri Mendukung Kemandirian Bangsa. Balai Penelitian dan Pengembangan Teknologi Agroforestri. Bandung

Download PDF

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

Socio-economic Study of Conservation and Rehabilitation of Tropical Peatland With Agroforestry Systems in Central Kalimantan, Indonesia

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

Introduction

Methods

2.1. Research Setting

2.2. Characteristics of informants

Results And Discussion

3.1. Tenure, trees, and land ownership

3.2. Motivation of agroforestry farmers

3.3. Income from agroforestry

3.4. Knowledge of peat and its conservation

3.5. Knowledge of agroforestry and land management

3.6. Value of Forests / Trees in Peat Ecosystem Environment

3.7. Institutional support

Conclusion

Declarations

References

Status:

Version 1