Connecting science, policy and communities for resilient Southeast Asian peatlands
|
Connecting science, policy and communities for resilient Southeast Asian peatlands
|
Connecting science, policy and communities for resilient Southeast Asian peatlands
|
Connecting science, policy and communities for resilient Southeast Asian peatlands
|
Connecting science, policy and communities for resilient Southeast Asian peatlands
|
Connecting science, policy and communities for resilient Southeast Asian peatlands
|
Connecting science, policy and communities for resilient Southeast Asian peatlands
|
Connecting science, policy and communities for resilient Southeast Asian peatlands
|
Connecting science, policy and communities for resilient Southeast Asian peatlands
|
Connecting science, policy and communities for resilient Southeast Asian peatlands
For communities

Community toolkit

Practical guidance, community experiences and a checklist to help peatland communities make informed decisions about carbon projects.

Case study

Katingan: an imperfect early example of a private peatland carbon project

Peatlands are wetlands where plant matter has built up over thousands of years. They store large amounts of carbon, which is released into the air when people drain or cut down the land. The Katingan project in Central Kalimantan, Indonesia, is a company-run effort to protect one of these forests. The company, PT Rimba Makmur Utama, wanted to stop drainage and tree-cutting across a whole peat area. It planned to earn money by selling “carbon credits” to buyers who want to offset their emissions. The project planned to share some of that money with nearby villages. It is often mentioned as one of Indonesia’s first private projects of this kind. Its story shows both what these projects can offer and the difficulties they face.

What was planned
  • Protecting the peat forest from drainage and tree-cutting
  • Sharing carbon money with villages
  • Helping communities build new ways to earn a living
What happened

The project had mixed results:

Slow approval: The company applied for permission to run the project in 2008 and got its final approval in 2013. The approval covered about half of the originally proposed area, so the rest of the peat area was not protected. By 2014, the company was still trying to get approval for the rest.

Little money so far: By 2014, the project had not yet sold any carbon credits, so villagers had not seen real money from it. Nearby businesses, such as oil palm plantations, were offering jobs.

Changes to forest use: Most families (82–97% of those surveyed) used firewood for cooking. New village rules were expected to limit how people used the forest. This raised worries about losing access to firewood and other things families depend on.

Unclear income sharing: The plan was for villages to share in the income through formal agreements and community programs. A 2014 government rule also says 10% of carbon sales goes to the government.

Villagers had mixed opinions: Mapping work with villagers helped them agree on village borders. People valued activities like selling rattan and running women’s savings groups. Some wanted the project to start quickly, while others were cautious. Some villages were also approached by palm oil companies, which split opinions.

Limited early contact: Before getting approval, the company did not talk much with communities, to avoid building up hopes that might not come true. In March 2014, it set up local firefighting teams after the approval was granted.

Open questions

Several things were still unclear:

  • Whether the company would get approval for the whole peat area
  • How the money would be shared
  • How the project would pay its costs if carbon money did not come in

The company said the project could continue without carbon money, but it did not explain how.

Note: This case is not a direct result of our own project. It comes from published research on a different project. It still raises issues that matter to our work, including land permission, forest rules, sharing of money, and community involvement.

Source: Indriatmoko, Y., Atmadja, S., Utomo, N. A., Ekaputri, A. D., & Komalasari, M. (2014). Katingan peatland restoration and conservation project, Central Kalimantan, Indonesia. In E. O. Sills et al. (Eds.), REDD+ on the ground: A case book of subnational initiatives across the globe (pp. 237–252). CIFOR.

A guide for peatland communities

Six things to check for getting a fair deal in carbon projects

Companies and governments may offer to pay your community to protect them because healthy peatlands store carbon. When peatlands burn or get damaged, that carbon affects the air. Your community could earn income by keeping peatlands healthy and preventing fires. This can be a good opportunity for your community. Use our guide to help you understand carbon projects and make an informed decision on whether a project is good for your community.

  1. Community Meeting and Approval First
  2. Understand What You're Getting Paid For and When
  3. Real Benefits for Your Community
  4. Community Training and Monitoring
  5. Check the Maps and Land Boundaries
  6. Get Independent Advice and Learn from Others