in Indonesia

Comments invited on Indonesia’s Draft National REDD+ Strategy

Comments invited on Indonesia's Draft National REDD+ Strategy

Over the past few weeks, a series of regional consultations have taken place on Indonesia’s National REDD+ Strategy. Meetings have taken place in Java, Lombok, Aceh, and Central Sulawesi. A meeting is currently taking place in Papua. A series of drafts of the National REDD+ Strategy have been made available in Indonesian and English. On 24 September 2010, Draft 1 Revised was released and comments can be made until 25 October 2010.

When the second draft is completed, UN-REDD and the National Development Planning Agency (BAPPENAS) will hold a “national consultation workshop in order to get additional inputs and approach a national consensus”. This workshop and a separate international consultation workshop will take place in Jakarta.

The Indonesian version of most recent Draft of the National REDD+ Strategy is available here, and the English version is available here.

The most recent Draft National REDD+ Strategy outlines the main causes of deforestation and forest degradation, as follows:

  • Weak Spatial Planning
  • Problem with Tenure
  • Ineffective Forest Management
  • Weak Governance
  • Weak Law Enforcement and Basis

While it’s true that these factors contribute to the destruction of Indonesia’s forests, what’s missing from the list is the impact of two industries: the oil palm industry and the pulp and paper industry. Addressing the expansion of industrial monoculture plantations to provide raw material to feed these two industries has been, and remains, a key issue to addressing deforestation in Indonesia.

However, the Draft Strategy does recommend the “perfection of the agriculture planning, which avoids the extension at the areas with average to good forest cover as well as the protection of areas with high conservation values in the plantation area.” In theory, at least, this could perhaps prevent further destruction of Indonesia’s forests – particularly if associated with addressing the problems of tenure, ineffective forest management, weak governance and weak law enforcement.

Under a sub-heading “The cause of deforestation and forest degradation,” the Draft Strategy states that “Indigenous Communities have no Rights.” Clearly this is not true. Indonesia has even signed the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The statement should be re-written to state that indigenous peoples have rights but these are not recognised in Indonesia. While the recognition of this problem is to be welcomed, the solution to the problem, ensuring that indigenous peoples’ rights are recognised and respected, is not currently prioritised in the Draft Strategy.

Meanwhile, on 13 October 2010, UN-REDD announced that it was starting its provincial activities with a formal launch in Palu, Central Sulawesi. Central Sulawesi is the pilot province for the UN-REDD Indonesia programme.

UN-REDD states that,

On a provincial level, UN-REDD Indonesia will test methodologies related to Measurement, Reporting and Verification (MRV), such as forestry inventory and satellite monitoring, establish a regional Reference Emissions Level (REL) and work on payment mechanisms and multiple benefits, which includes biodiversity, poverty alleviation and maximizing of carbon benefits.

So UN-REDD is going ahead before the National REDD+ Strategy is formulated – as are several other REDD initiatives and projects in Indonesia. The US$1 billion deal between Indonesia and Norway is mentioned only once in the Draft Strategy:

The signing of the Letter of Intent between the Government of the Republic of Indonesia and the Government of Norway was an important momentum in the framework of formulating an inclusive national strategy.

How these various REDD projects are to be coordinated is not clear from the Draft Strategy. Neither is there much mention of the complexities of the carbon markets or the implications that trading the carbon stored in Indonesia’s forests and peatlands might have. The issue of who owns the carbon stored above ground in the trees and below ground in the soil or peat is crucially important for any country implementing REDD. Yet the phrase “carbon rights” does not appear in the Draft Strategy.

Below is a recent announcement from BAPPENAS and UN-REDD about the consultation process for the National REDD+ Strategy:

Indonesia Calls for Inputs into their REDD+ Strategy

18 October 2010

UN-REDD Indonesia is collaborating with the National Development Planning Agency (BAPPENAS) to conduct an inclusive multi-stakeholder consultation process that will produce Indonesia’s first National REDD+ Strategy. Bappenas and the UN-REDD Indonesia programme now invite international multi-stakeholders to give their inputs to the draft, before 25 October.

After a series of consultations for the initial drafts of the Strategy, a series of Regional Consultations is currently being held in order to ensure multi-stakeholder participation from all regions in Indonesia. After this, international multi-stakeholders can give their inputs before Bappenas and UN-REDD conduct a National Consultation workshop in order to approach a national consensus. A final document is expected to be ready by mid November. The final draft will be a ‘living’ document, meaning that new insights and inputs may be incorporated into the document as REDD+ evolves. The document will function as a guideline for the development of Sub-National REDD+ Action Plans and will be mainstreamed into the development processes. Lessons learned will be shared with other countries.

More information about the process and drafts of the Strategy are publicly available in Indonesian and in English on UN-REDD Indonesia’s website: Comments and inputs to the National REDD+ Strategy can be sent to and

Leave a Reply

  1. Chris, does the Indonesian Government know that you live in Indonesia living on the income of your wife who is working on a REDD project funded by the Germans????

    In effect your wife and defacto the German Government are funding this website. Interesting factoid caught in the middle of your deceitful misinformation campaign on REDD!!!

  2. @Redd Observer – Yes, my wife works for GTZ. We have (as you can probably imagine) some differences of opinion on REDD. She plays no part whatsoever in the content of REDD-Monitor. Neither does she fund it. The views expressed on REDD-Monitor do not reflect the positions of any organisations or individuals, except when this is clearly stated.

    The German Government funds no part of REDD-Monitor. I’m sure the Indonesian government has worked out that I live in Indonesia, since I’ve mentioned it several times on the website.

    Perhaps “Redd Observer”, you would like to explain who you are, and what your interest in REDD is. Thanks. I look forward to hearing from you.

  3. @Chris

    I and no doubt many others do not come on to this site to be confronted with the obscenities, insults, slurs and innuendo peddled by ‘Redd Observer’. Why don’t you just ban them from this site – they anyway have nothing whatsoever to offer but sheer ignorance.


  4. Back to the revised strategy draft.
    From the revised draft: Transparency, Participation and Accountability

    The absence of transparency and participation of stakeholders also result in the minimum knowledge of the society, especially those living in the forest area, to be involved in the decision making process… This results in not only the unavailability of more reliable data during the decision making process, but also misuse of authority by the decision makers…

    True, but should a good strategy paper and even a draft not include clear plans to address this problem. What about more details towards information programs, capacity building and shareholder participation.

    For any successful REDD strategy it is essential to assure a broad shareholder participation as early in the design and planning process as possible. I can only hope the platforms and organisations for indigenous rights and forest people are involved in the drafting and strategy planning processe.

    My Question, if we are talking about transperancy and participation, when, how and to what extend have local and indigenous views been included in the strategy planning? Or is the next step to do this? Where can we find out where, when and how this is been undertaken. Where is the plan for it?

    While the recognition of this problem is to be welcomed, the solution to the problem, ensuring that indigenous peoples’ rights are recognised and respected, is not currently prioritised in the Draft Strategy.

    So far it is not prioritised, it is not addressed properly at all for being one of the essential issues to make REDD work on a long term basis.

  5. Dear Janes,

    Yes, we committed to encourage the local community to participate in arrangement of this National Strategy. We have held regional consultation around our country that was involved all stakeholders including local government, NGO, civil society, local community/indegenous people etc. We discuss in depth about land tenure, local right, spatial planning etc.

    We are welcome to receive input from every elements who actively develop REDD+ mechanism. FYI, we also discuss and consult your input on international expert meeting that we will held on 1 – 3 Nov 2010 in Nusa Dua, Bali. So If anyone has input to our document, please send to us before we will discuss it.


    Pungky Widiaryanto
    Bappenas – Indonesia

  6. @Pungky Widiaryanto – Thanks for your comment. You’re right (obviously) that there has been a regional consultation process, that will continue with a meeting in Nusa Dua, Bali. Unfortunately, REDD-Monitor will not be able to attend the meeting in Nusa Dua.

    My concern is that this meeting will attempt to discuss an 84-page document – a document that does not make clear what the priorities are, or a clear strategy for implementing these priorities. For that reason, I think it’s useful to compare the Draft National REDD+ Strategy with the Common Platform on Saving Indonesia’s Forests, released on 14 October 2010, by 12 NGOs. The Common Platform includes a clear statement on the importance of the rights of indigenous peoples:

    As such, any REDD agreement must also abide by the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. It must fully respect their land, resources needs and ownership rights, and ensure they are directly engaged in the further development of the agreement and its implementation.

    There is no such clear statement in the Draft National REDD+ Strategy about the importance of indigenous peoples’ rights. Without the recognition of indigenous peoples’ and local communities rights, REDD will not work in Indonesia (or anywhere else).

  7. Hi,
    pity the english version is deadlink, could you re-check it?
    thanks, Tom