Keywords

1 Introduction

Indonesia suffers from recurrent land and forest fires due to extractive activities including clearing and burning peatland for large- and small-scale agriculture expansion, including encroachment of state forests for illegal plantations (Astuti et al., 2022). There have been many studies on community-based fire management in Indonesia (Nurhidayah, 2014; Nurhidayah, 2013; Suyanto et al., 2002). This paper contributes to this growing literature on fire governance by examining the challenges faced by MPAs despite existing peatland restoration programs in the community. Responding to the widespread fires in 2015, President Joko Widodo launched a program in 2016 to restore degraded peatland and prevent the recurrence of land and forest fires through the establishment of Peatland Restoration Agency (Badan Restorasi Gambut or BRG) (Astuti, 2020). The BRG was tasked to restore 2 million hectares of degraded peatland for five years, from 2016 to 2020. Despite failing to achieve its mandate (Astuti et al. 2020), BRG’s work has been extended for another four years until 2024. President Joko Widodo broadened BRG’s task to also include the restoration of degraded mangroves and changed the agency’s name to Peatland and Mangrove Restoration Agency (Badan Restorasi Gambut dan Mangrove/BRGM).

Peatland fires contribute to greenhouse gas emissions, exacerbate climate change, endanger human health, and cause economic loss (Miller et al., 2021). Peatland restoration is a way to mitigate the risk of forest fires (Henry, 2021). The BRG’s key strategy in restoring peatlands is through the 3R program: rewetting dry peatlands, revegetation with endemic plants, and revitalization of community livelihoods. According to the BRG, peatland restoration aims not only to restore the ecological conditions of peatlands but also to improve the community’s social-economic conditions through sustainable livelihoods. Stakeholders’ engagement is crucial in successfully implementing the 3R program. The community fire brigade (MPAs) is one of the critical stakeholders implementing the 3R program. The involvement of the MPAs in peatland management and conservation is crucial in the establishment of Desa Peduli Gambut (DPG-Peat care villages) – a BRG’s key strategy in implementing the 3R program at the community (village) level. In short, MPAs play a significant role in the revegetation and livelihood restoration activities as well as rewetting efforts. Rewetting is the process of restoring natural water flow and saturating peatland, which can reduce greenhouse gas emissions, slow subsidence, and reduce wildfire risk.

Drawing from the cohesive fire management strategy framework, this chapter examines the role and challenges of community-based fire management and peatland restoration. The case study was conducted in two fire-prone provinces, Riau and Central Kalimantan, in 2019. We interviewed local community members and MPAs in six villages, including Rimbo Panjang, Temusai, and Lukun villages in Riau Province. In Central Kalimantan, we conducted the study in Tumbang Nusa, Simpur, and Sidodadi villages. We interviewed a total of 60 members of MPAs in six villages and conducted focus group discussions with a representation of local communities who participated in the BRG’s 3R program. We interviewed local government officials from the Regional Disaster Management Agency (BPBD), the Manggala Agni, and the Regional Team of Peatland Restoration Task Force (TRGD). We also interviewed NGOs, such as Kemitraan (Partnerships) and academics to understand the challenges of peatland governance and coordination effort at the local level.

The rest of this chapter is divided into four sections. The following section provides the literature review on the fire prevention, preparedness, and suppression model. The third section outlines our case study areas in Riau and Central Kalimantan Provinces. The fourth section emphasizes our research findings, followed by a discussion in section five. The sixth section concludes the paper.

2 Community-Based Forest Fire Prevention, Preparedness, and Suppression Model

With the increase in incidents of forest fires, the involvement of local people is seen as a crucial element of community-based fire prevention, preparedness, and suppression (Paton et al., 2013). Researchers have highlighted the significance of the community-based fire management (CBFiM) by clearly stating that the community is the key to the survival of forests through the integration of indigenous knowledge, conservation values, and sustainable development (Paton et al., 2013). Community-based fire management has emerged as an alternative framework that promotes a bottom-up approach (Croker, 2020). Zhang defines CBFiM as “an approach in which villagers have shown a profound understanding of fire prevention and control and have participated voluntarily in fire management” (FAO, 2011).

We draw from the model of the cohesive management strategy (Fig. 8.1) as a lens to understand the challenges and effectiveness of a community-based fire management strategy in Indonesia. This model represents a holistic human and nature relationship. We use this model to represent broad challenges of land and forest fire management that need to be addressed, including the ecosystem, human or social system, and fire governance (US Forest Service, 2021). In addition, a study on cohesive management strategy can be used to identify areas of weaknesses and strengths in fire responses and how this evaluation can facilitate social learning, adaptation, and ultimately more resilient socio-ecological forest fire response institutions (Steelman and Nowell, 2018). We also assess the implication of the peatland restoration program under Jokowi’s administration in strengthening the capacity of local communities to deal with the fire problem. We do this by assessing the link between the BRG’s 3R program (rewetting, revegetation, and revitalization) with the MPAs’ works at the community level.

Fig. 8.1
A venn diagram of the Fire management strategy model depicts fire-adapted communities, safe and effective response, and ecosystem at the top.

Model of cohesive fire management strategy. (Source: US Forest Service, 2021)

Full size image

The cohesive fire management strategy model defines three interrelated areas for effective land and forest fire prevention. These three elements are ecosystem toward a resilient landscape, a social system through fire-adapted communities, and a fire management system with a safe and effective response. In understanding a resilient landscape, we follow IUCN’s proposition that human well-being is directly related to the presence of a healthy environment (IUCN, 2021). IUCN promotes a strategy called the ecosystem approach for an integrated management of land, water, and living resources that promotes conservation and sustainable resource use in an equitable way (CBD, 2021). The ecosystem approach recognizes that humans are an integral component of ecosystems (CBD, 2021). Ecosystem restoration is one of the priorities in the ecosystem approach. Ecosystem restoration is defined as “the process of halting and reversing degradation, resulting in improved ecosystem services and recovered biodiversity.” Ecosystem restoration encompasses a broad continuum of practices, depending on local conditions and societal choices (UNEP, 2021). The end goal is to achieve a resilient landscape. With its explicit focus on creating robust systems to persist and adapt over the long run, the concept of resilience has emerged as a critical way to manage ecosystems to sustain biodiversity and ecological functions in an uncertain future.

The second component of the model is the social system with the goal to achieve fire adaptive communities. The National Wildfire Coordinating Group defines the fire-adapted community as “A human community consisting of informed and prepared citizens collaboratively planning and taking action to coexist with wildland fire safely” (US Forest Service, 2021). In this research, we examine community-based fire reduction strategies and whether the communities in our research have adopted risk reduction behaviors through the 3R program. The third component of the model is the fire management systems with a safe and effective response. In this case, we define the fire management system as related to the capability and availability of fire suppression resources. These resources include human resources, equipment, funding, knowledge, and training. In this paper, we use this framework for a cohesive fire management strategy to analyze the BRG’s 3R program implementation at the local level and whether the program facilitates MPA’s work in achieving peatland resilient landscape.

3 Research Locations

We conducted research in two fire-prone provinces: Riau and Central Kalimantan. Riau Province is one of the seven priority provinces of the BRG’s peatland restoration target. Every year wildfires sporadically ravage certain areas of 10 out of the province’s 12 districts. Many oil palm plantations grow in peatland areas in Riau. Interviewees indicated the use of fire for land clearing as the main cause of annual land and forest fires. An investigation by an environmental NGO indicates that approximately 1.4 million hectares of forest area in Riau have been planted with oil palm trees (Beller et al., 2016). This figure shows that more than 27% of the total forest area in Riau has been converted into palm oil plantations. The conversion of forest areas into mono-agricultural areas shows the role of large plantation industries in changing and degrading peatland landscapes (Astuti, 2021).

In Riau Province, we conducted research in three villages. The first village is Lukun Village in Meranti Islands District. The majority of the population (80%) is Malay. The community’s main livelihood is from planting sago (rumbia), rubber, and endemic/local trees such as gerunggang (Cratoxylon arborescens (Vahl), punak (Tetrameristra glabra), balangeran (Shorea balangeran), galam (Melaleuca cajuputi subsp. Cumingiana), and Nimbung (Oncosperma tigillarium). Javanese, Banjar, Bugis, and Nusa Tenggara Barat (NTB) migrants entered in 1956–1970 through the transmigrasi program. The migrants were more interested in growing rubber trees. Due to recurrent forest fires, Lukun village has become the BRG’s target for peatland restoration through the peat care village program. The second village is Temusai in Siak District. Temusai village is mostly inhabited by people with Javanese ethnicity who make up about two third of the total population of 1,450 people in 2019. The third village is Rimbo Panjang in Kampar District, which borders Pekanbaru City, the capital city of Riau Province. Rimbo Panjang village consists of mostly Malay ethnic with the majority of the population coming from the Pariaman District in West Sumatra.

Central Kalimantan province is also one of the BRG’s priority provinces for peatland restoration. Central Kalimantan vulnerable peatland areas are heavily degraded due to the conversion of peatland to large-scale plantations. Research shows more than 58,000 hectares of protected peatlands have been illegally converted into palm oil plantations (Astuti et al., 2022). During the New Order regime, the Pulang Pisau district was subjected to the controversial Mega Rice Project. The project, which started in 1995, has resulted in significant degradation of the fragile peatland ecosystem with more than 4000 km of irrigation canals built to drain peatland. The peatland drainage has become the primary cause of fires and toxic air pollution.

Drawing from qualitative data, we highlight the role and challenges of community-based fire management and peatland restoration at the local level in three villages in Pulang Pisau District, Central Kalimantan. The first village is Tumbang Nusa, which is part of the Kahayan River Basin ecosystem. The village area is divided by the river into eastern and western regions. The second village is Simpur. Similar to Tumbang Nusa Village, Simpur village is also located on the banks of the Kahayan River. The ethnic population in Simpur Village is predominantly Dayak. The third village is Sidodadi Village. Sidodadi is a transmigration settlement unit hosting migrants from the Provinces of West Java, Central Java, and East Java. The village borders with the Sebangau National Park. In the next section, we outline our research findings by highlighting the diverse challenges that the MPAs and local communities face in doing forest fire management. We also outline opportunities in achieving fire-adapted communities by emphasizing communities’ diverse social capital and strengths.

4 Research Findings: Challenges and Opportunities in Community-Based Fire Management and Peatland Restoration

4.1 Challenges in Community-Based Fire Management and Peatland Restoration

Large-Scale Extractive Activities and Peatland Degradation

The first challenge on peatland restoration and community-based fire management is the high degree of peatland degradation in all the research areas. Altered peatland landscape due to the large-scale plantation has caused annual fires in Lukun Village. The village location is in border with PT National Sago Prima (NSP) concession in an area called the Ulu Mahmud. Due to the opening of large-scale plantations, the Ulu Mahmud area is very prone to fire. In 2018 and 2019, the forest fires caused damage to the Ulu Mahmud areas covering more than 800 hectares. Villagers also encroached into the forest area for agricultural activities and often used fire as the cheapest land clearing method.

We also found that the majority of Temusai village landscape has been converted from peatland forest into palm oil plantation. The large-scale land conversion was driven by the boom of the oil palm industries in the Siak Regency. Around 35% of the village area is under private palm oil concession. A network of canals are built to drain peatland to make them more adaptable for palm oil. Consequently, in almost every dry season (July–September), Temusai village suffers from peatland fires. Landscape degradation that is caused by palm oil plantation also occurs in Simpur village in Central Kalimantan.

Small-Scale Extractive Activities and Community Livelihood

Interviewees in Lukun have indicated that local villagers are somewhat responsible for the annual forest fires due to smoking (while illegally logging timber in the forest). The interviewees acknowledge that illegal logging has caused damage to the ecosystem, including forest fires. However, raising awareness on the impact of illegal logging is difficult as the environmental damage only affects forests instead of the villagers’ house and properties. Based on the interview with respondents, it is difficult to find alternative livelihoods to shift from illegal logging to other activities offered by the revitalization program under the BRG. Several revitalization programs such as bee farming and fish farming have not been successful in changing communities’ livelihood due to lucrative opportunities offered under illegal logging.

We also found in Simpur village that some of the canal blocks have been removed by local communities as they are seen to obstruct the community’s boat access to the farming areas. Canal blocks are constructed in the community’s land as part of the rewetting activities. However, without the proper socioeconomic mapping of the community’s relationship with the water canals and a proper informed consent protocol, the restoration program may fail to deliver the intended outcome and instead face opposition from the community.

Partial and Misdirected Restoration Activities

We found that almost all villages face a similar problem of a partial restoration program. The community-based peatland restoration funded by the BRG often only addresses a partial area that is prone to fires. Meanwhile, the degree of degradation from the extractive activities is widespread. Consequently, peatland fires still recur even in the communities targeted by the peatland restoration program. We also found that the rewetting strategy through canal blocking has not been working properly due to landscape changing and unavailability of water during dry season as well as community’s noncooperation.

Through interviews with local MPAs, we found that restoration activities are often carried out outside the most fire-prone areas. For example, despite suffering from annual forest fires, the Village Forest is not targeted for the rewetting program due to national regulations that prevent BRG from entering state forest areas. BRG’s authority to conduct restoration only covers the area outside of the state forest. The Ministry of Environment and Forestry is the government institution that has the authority and mandate to protect and manage peatland in the state forest.

Local Conflict and Absentee Land Owner

Land conflict and lack of responsibility of the absentee owner are indicated as the cause of unmanaged land and forest fires. Fires usually start from and occur on conflicted land or the abandoned land owned by absentee owners. Due to its strategic access, many peatland areas along the main road are sold to investors who do not reside in the village such as occurred in Rimbo Panjang in Riau and Tumbang Nusa village in Central Kalimantan. Almost 50% of land ownership in Rimbo Panjang has been transferred to outside investors. These investors do not live in the vicinity of the village and usually neglect to take care of the land. Consequently, shrubs and grass grew on the neglected lands and easily became fuel for fires during the dry season (July–September). The unmanaged land is prone to fires, and when fire occurs, the absentee owners do not engage in fire suppression activities. We also found similar phenomena of absentee land owners in a neighboring village in Sidodadi and Temusai villages. In addition, according to observation, the social cohesion in many peat care villages may deteriorate due to jealousy between elite(s) who receive the benefit from the peatland restoration program and other local communities excluded from the program.

Difficulty in Finding Affordable No-Burning Technology at the Local Level

One of the challenges in creating adaptive communities is the difficulty in finding an alternative cheap method for no-burning technique. According to interviews with locals, to open a hectare of land will cost 7–8 million rupiah with heavy machinery (tractor). The interviews reveal the relatively high cost of practicing no-burning agriculture method. Consequently, some local people still use fire for land clearing.

Our research findings show that the ban on the use of fire for land clearing has reshaped the social relations at the community level and unintentionally exacerbate community’s precarious livelihood. For example, in Simpur, most of the villagers work as farmers. The community utilizes peatland areas for rice farming. Due to the prohibition of burning practices, the locals no longer plant rice; instead, they become precarious workers for nearby plantation companies. Moreover, before the fire ban, local communities had strong social cohesion as they usually worked collectively for rice farming. However, due to the prohibition of burning practices, the locals prefer to abandon their land. This has caused a problem as the local community is no longer actively involved in the fire control and prevention. Additionally, interviews with the local community indicate that the locals ignore the fires on their property as they are afraid that they will be accused of igniting the fires. Due to low community involvement, fire control and suppression solely become the MPA’s responsibility.

Lack of Funding, Institutional Support, and Fire Suppression Equipment Reduce MPA’s Effectiveness in Fire Management

We found that the most common challenges in the fire management system faced by all communities and MPAs are lack of funding and fire suppression equipment. For example, in Lukun, the head of the village highlighted during an interview that the allocation of 30 million rupiah from the Village Fund is barely enough for the operationalization fund and salary for all MPA members who conducted fire suppression for a month. In Temusai, the MPA receives 2 million rupiah annual funding from the BPBD in addition to the village’s annual budget of 24 million rupiah funding for MPA. The funding is mainly used for operational costs such as purchasing gasoline or diesel for motorbikes and pumping machines. A member of the Temusai MPA provides an illustration on the cost of firefighting funds. To extinguish fire covering 7–10 hectares area, the MPA will require 5 million rupiah for a week of fire suppression operation. However, if forest fires were to occur on an area of ​​more than 10–30 hectares, the operation cost will be greater. A similar problem is also faced by the village authority in Rimbo Panjang, which has an allocation of 15–20 million rupiah annual budget for fire suppression. Apart from the lack of adequate operational “funds” for quick extinguishing actions such as buying gasoline, diesel, food, and transport costs, the MPAs also often have minimal access to technical equipment such as mobile pumps, tents, and long water hoses.

Due to its voluntary nature, the MPA often only has a limited number of members. Although the village document shows that the local MPA is consisted of 35 members, only 15 to 20 members are currently active in Temusai Village. Many respondents highlight that they rarely receive payment and honorarium despite a big responsibility to prevent forest and land fires. Based on interviews, MPA members in Temusai have proposed the provision of insurance that will cover accidents and death while on duty. Extinguishing forest and land fires is a high-risk activity, and the provision of an insurance scheme is crucial for protecting MPA members. Most of the time, the MPA members are not equipped with proper safety equipment such as gloves, anti-fire clothing, helmets, anti-fire shoes, and masks while on duty. Extended fire suppression task also means that many MPA members have to leave their primary livelihoods while on duty, potentially affecting their household income. Our research findings indicate similar problems in terms of insufficient protection measures for MPA members in Lukun Village. Meanwhile, in the case of Simpur village, the private sector has offered support to the MPA for a joint patrol and fire suppression activities. The collaboration is seen as a win–win strategy for both the private sector and the village.

In Tumbang Nusa, the village has received support in the form of deep well construction. Tumbang Nusa village has received almost 300 deep wells for rewetting in the BRG’s peatland restoration program. The deep wells have played a significant role in keeping the peat’s moisture during the dry season and preventing fires. The establishment of deep wells benefited the local communities, as they have created jobs for locals and MPAs. However, the communities have faced challenges in maintaining the deep wells due to the lack of maintenance funding. The MPA has initiated seeking the maintenance fund from the Regional Peatland Restoration Team (TRGD). However, due to limited technical capacity and knowledge on how to deal with complex bureaucratic processes, the MPA’s proposal did not meet the TRGD’s requirement. Consequently, the MPA was unsuccessful in acquiring funding for deep well maintenance. According to interviews with the local community, only 20% of the deep wells are working properly. The rest are either missing or damaged. This has resulted in many deep wells failing to operate during the 2019 forest fires. This case shows that regulation and complicated bureaucracy may jeopardize land and forest fire prevention.

4.2 Opportunities in Community-Based Fire Management and Peatland Restoration

Community’s Active Collaboration in Fire Management

Our research findings show that a strong social capital can facilitate communities to become adaptive and resilience society. For example, in Temusai a strong kinship rooted in common socio-cultural background has united the village in their responses to forest fires. For example, the village government is willing to allocate village funds to build a reservoir on land donated by the village community. There is also an initiative from communities to rent abandoned land owned by absentee land owners to become productive and to prevent land and forest fires. The local communities are also obeying the prohibition of not fishing in the dry season as it has caused land and forest fires because of irresponsible smoking (dumping cigarette butts) by fishers in canal or stream areas near the peatland. Similar phenomena of strong cohesive community are also shown in Sidodadi village. Local villagers have awareness that their village area is prone to forest fires. Therefore, to anticipate and prevent land and forest fires, the village has local regulations that prohibit burning activities. This local regulation is facilitated by a partnership with the program in peat care villages (DPG). If villagers conduct burning activities and damage their neighbor’s land and crops, they are obliged to pay for the damage. In addition, the community also has good social cohesivity and works together with the MPA to develop a fire management system.

Sustainable Livelihood Potential

Development of sustainable livelihood that attunes to local potential can facilitate the achievement of adaptive and resilient communities. In Lukun, sago farming can be developed as a tool for peatland restoration due to high interest from the local community. According to the Regulation of the Minister of Environment and Forestry number P.16/MenLHK/Sekjen/Kum.1/2017 concerning Technical Guidelines for the Restoration of Peat Ecosystem Functions, sago is one of the tree species recommended by the government to be planted on peatlands. Sago can grow on wet peatland. Therefore, developing sago crops can be an alternative and sustainable livelihood option for the community. We saw a similar potential in Rimbo Panjang village through the development of local pineapple. Rimbo Panjang has always been known as a famous pineapple producer in Riau province. The community that manages the land for agriculture, such as pineapple plantations, is usually responsible for preventing fires from occurring on their land. The BRG through the peat care village program has facilitated the development of deep wells in pineapple areas to maintain peatland moisture. The rewetting program has been hugely successful due to the overlap between community’s and the government interests in maintaining peatland moisture.

5 Discussion and Way Forward

5.1 A Cohesive Approach to Community-Based Fire Management

Based on six case studies, we have reviewed the challenges and role of community-based fire management in two provinces in linkage with the peatland restoration program. We examined the condition of the peatland ecosystem in the villages and the adaptive capacity of the communities and analyzed the fire management capability of the villages. In terms of the resilient peatland ecosystem, six case studies in Riau and Central Kalimantan provinces have shown that in all villages, the peatland ecosystems have changed because of anthropogenic activities, due to intensive either small-scale or large-scale plantations. This finding aligns with other research on drivers of peatland degradation in Indonesia (Dohong et al., 2017; Astuti, 2021; Miller et al., 2021). In addition, absentee lands, where the owner is absent, have created additional risk by leaving their lands susceptible to fires. To prevent land and forest fires, peatland restoration is one of the critical measures to achieve ecosystem resilience.

Rewetting the peat is an important step in revegetation and protection of remaining peat carbon stocks (Page et al., 2008). However, our research findings show that the BRG’s rewetting activities have some limitations. We found that rewetting infrastructure, such as deep wells, often are constructed far from the most fire-prone areas. We also note that ensuring the sustainability of rewetting infrastructure is a critical issue and can only be achieved when there is a benefit for the community such as in Rimbo Panjang case. In the case of canal block construction, we suggest a genuine process of getting the villagers’ informed consent. Otherwise, as we have found from the case studies, the canal blocks are being removed by the villagers who found their water access blocked by the infrastructure. Page et al. (2008) suggest that the successful restoration of degraded peatlands must be grounded in scientific knowledge, relevant to socioeconomic circumstances, and should not proceed without the consent and cooperation of local communities (Page et al., 2008). Lack of maintenance funds for operationalization also creates ineffectiveness in rewetting in the dry season. Therefore, we suggest the village authority prioritize the village fund for the MPA’s maintenance and operationalization funding.

The locals require funding and awareness to enable effective efforts to prevent and control land and forest fires. However, the level of awareness and involvement in the community is patchy at best. For example, absentee owners rarely have the responsibility to prevent forest and land fires. In the context where the use of fire is prohibited, local communities stop tending to their lands. Consequently, the banning of burning has the unintended consequence of increased fire risk by creating absentee owners. Our research shows that a village that has a strong and cohesive fire adaptive community is not guaranteed to be free from fires. Our case studies show that despite the high awareness of locals to prevent land forest fires in their village, fires might start from neighboring villages that has occurred in Temusai, Sidodadi, and Tumbang Nusa villages. Therefore, creating cohesive and adaptive fire communities requires a landscape (based on peatland hydrological ecosystem) instead of a jurisdictional (a village-based) approach (Astuti, 2020).

In addition, there should be rewards and punishment for the local villagers who conducted slash and burning activities to establish a deterrence effect (Nurhidayah, 2019). For example, the reward could be in the form of an incentive given to MPAs or local communities who can prevent land and forest fires in their villages. The BRG’s revegetation and revitalization program could be used as an incentive (grant or funding to establish sustainable alternative livelihood suitable with local potential), for example, promoting paludiculture and sustainable farming in peatland villages. Inclusion of all local communities is the key to sustainable livelihood and fire prevention. Meanwhile, punishment can be conducted at the village level by tapping into customary law that exists in the communities. Promotion of nonburning technology and alternative livelihood that locals can accept are also crucial in creating fire adaptive communities. Paludiculture is considered a sustainable peatland management practice involving plant cultivation in wet conditions with adaptive plants, such as purun and sago (Budiman et al., 2020).

5.2 Collaboration and Engagement of Diverse Stakeholders in Community-Based Fire Management and Peatland Restoration

While the MPA is the first and initial responder of the firefighter in the village, other actors such as BPBD, Manggala Agni, Babinsa, and the local police play a critical role in providing assistance when the fires become uncontrollable at the village level. Despite this critical role in fire suppression, the deployment of these firefighter forces is hindered by long bureaucracy and regulation. For example, according to interviews with informants, BPBD from the regency level will only be deployed if the Head of Regency has issued an emergency status. To be declared emergency status, it requires land and forest fire occurrence in four to five villages. Similarly, at the provincial level, the fire forces will only be deployed when the governor issues an emergency status at the provincial level. According to an interview with an informant, the issuance of the provincial emergency status requires three to four districts to be affected with fires. These bureaucracies hinder a fast and effective response from all stakeholders involved in preventing and controlling land and forest fires.

In addition, most local governments in fire-prone areas do not allocate particular budgets for forest fire mitigation (Secha, 2021). Therefore, when fires occur, they have to draw from the emergency funds intended for natural disasters. The emergency funds can only be used for fire suppression and do not cover fire prevention. We therefore suggest that the local government look at the potential of using reforestation funds for fire prevention activities, including for the MPA support. Government Regulation No. 35/2002 has allowed this fund to be used for forest fire control and management (Febrianto, 2019). Special budgeting has to be allocated for the MPA either from the local government annual budget or the village fund. In addition, the private sector and NGOs can step in to address the gap in support for community-based fire management and peatland restoration. While in our research we found that the Kemitraan has been involved in the capacity building for the MPAs during the first stage of the peatland restoration program in Central Kalimantan, we do not find a similar level of support in the Riau Province.

6 Conclusion

Community-based fire management remains a critical element for Indonesia’s land and forest fire prevention and control. The critical role of the MPA in fire prevention and control is shown during the peatland restoration program. Despite this critical role, the effectiveness of the MPAs in delivering their duties is hindered by many aspects. Our research findings show that the MPA suffered from inadequate funding, lack of insurance and salary, and inadequate fire suppression equipment. We also found that the MPAs faced long and complicated bureaucracies when they sought assistance during fire suppression events. Lack and delay of funding for rewetting of dry peatland and to perform maintenance of the existing rewetting infrastructures such as deep wells and canal blocks has hindered land and forest fires prevention and control as many deep wells failed to operate during 2019 land and forest fires. Two other factors also contribute to the challenges in effectively delivering fire prevention and suppression, including the degradation of the peatland ecosystem and the lack of community adaptiveness to forest fires. The promotion of reward and punishment to the local villagers to prevent slash and burning activities and the promotion of cheap and reliable no-burning technology will be the key in achieving adaptive and resilient communities. These complex challenges need to be addressed by improving the 3R program in the future peatland restoration program.

We also highlight the complexity of Indonesian “emergency” bureaucracy, which has hindered the delivery of effective fire suppression activities. Improving collaboration among stakeholders, such as BPBD, Manggala Agni, the private sector, and NGOs, will contribute further to effectively delivering a fast response in tackling peatland fires, especially during the El Nino season. Therefore, overlapping regulation between sectoral institutions has to be harmonized to allow a quicker and coordinated response toward forest fire prevention. A holistic reform to reduce sectoral silo in the implementation and engagement of all stakeholders, including the private sector and NGOs, is needed to ensure the effectiveness of community-based fire management and peatland restoration programs. This study suggests that a holistic reform and engagement of all stakeholders are needed to ensure the effectiveness of community-based fire management and peatland restoration programs and to achieve a resilient community.