Sustainable forest management and a healthy landscape

by Fitrian Ardiansyah, 3 December 2015, Paris, Indonesia Pavilion, COP-21, UNFCCC.

 

Fitrian_3 Dec_COP21

These remarks were taken from my presentation and discussion that contributed to a panel discussion on Natural Forest: Production and Conservation.

The key points are:

(1) IDH’s Tropical Timber Program has been working in three important tropical regions: i.e. Amazon, Congo Basin, Indonesia. We support and co-finance efforts of concessions and others to achieve certified sustainable forest management. In each region, the aim is to obtain 4 million ha of credible certified SFM (sustainable forest management). In Indonesia we collaborate with and support The Borneo Initiative and many concessions. The progress in Indonesia is that 1.5 million hectares have been certified (fully or control wood) and more than 2 million hectares are still in progress.

(2) We also work in the demand side, ensuring the uptake and market access of that SFM products.

(3) To achieve sustainability, addressing legality is a must and can act as a starting point. In our view, there will not be sustainability without legality. Initiatives like SVLK (timber legality verification system) in Indonesia should be encouraged and supported.

(4) Individual SFM and concessions are good but still insufficient, especially if we want to address cross-cutting issues and challenges. These include wildlife management and protection, fire, peat and water management, high conservation values and social dimension. These concessions – albeit having certified SFM – still need to work together among themselves and with other land use actors, including oil palm plantations, industrial timber plantations and communities. Based on this, selecting a landscape approach as a platform is imperative.

(5) In a landscape approach, not only regulations that would be crucial to guide collaboration, incentives need to be created so that better behaviour of land use actors can be ensured.

Please see the presentation here: SFM and landscape_FA_03122015

Note: Picture by Aristia Wanjaya

The effectiveness of the ‘marriage’ of environmental and forestry ministry

By Fitrian Ardiansyah, published in Coal Asia, December 17 2014 – January 17, 2015, page 78-79

for the pdf version (508kb), please see: Coal Asia 50_Fitrian Ardiansyah_78-79_Dec2014_Jan2015_KLHK

Coal Asia 50

 

Reducing deforestation and protecting the fragile environment while promoting forest production have been proved to be a challenging task for the previous forestry ministry. The merger of the environmental and forestry ministries into one agency is expected to at least ease the level of deforestation that is relatively high in Indonesia.

There are a number of challenges to achieve such an objective.

Traditionally, the forestry ministry has duties and functions to formulate and implement any government affairs in the field of forestry, including the designation, management and monitoring of the national forest estates, covering approximately 134 million hectares (70 percent of Indonesia’s land surface) in 2011.

In the same year, however, it was reported that only 98 million hectares of these national forest areas were still forested (52 percent of the land surface).

Other sectors and activities such as agricultural plantations and mining have been blamed for such massive forest loss but since the forestry ministry has also been pushing to continuously perform by increasing Indonesia’s export of timber related products, including plywood and pulp and paper, the ministry is also significantly responsible for continuous deforestation.

Several regulations, used as a regulatory framework to support the forestry ministry, clearly facilitate and support individuals, cooperatives, corporations and other entities to harvest and exploit timber and other forest products in the remaining forest areas.

These, among others, are Government Regulation (GR) No. 7 of 1990 on Industrial Timber Plantations, GR No. 51 of 1998 on Forest Resource Rent Provision, GR No. 3 of 2008 on Revision of GR No. 6 of 2007 on Forest Planning and Formulation of Forest Management and Utilization Plan, Minister of Forestry Regulation (MoFR) No. 35 of 2008 on Permits for Primary Forest Industrial Activity, and MoFR No. 50 of 2010 on Granting Licenses for Timber Production in Natural Production Forest.

In contrast, the environmental ministry has the government’s duties to protect and sustainable manage the environment, including the formulation and implementation of national policy and program, the regulation of environmental impact assessment processes, and the collection of relevant environmental data. This ministry has a big stake to support forest protection and conservation.

Unlike the forestry ministry, the environmental ministry has no direct control over particular forest areas, although they can conduct environmental monitoring. This ministry also had limited budget and personnel.

In some cases, the environmental ministry has proved to be effective in monitoring environmental protection as well as prosecuting those suspected to be violating environmental regulations.

One of recently few successful cases is the local court’s ruling in Aceh in January 2014 that found a palm oil company, guilty of illegally burning forests within the Tripa peat swamps, considered as part of the protected fragile Leuser Ecosystem, and has to pay a fine of approximately US$9 million as compensation and US$21 million for restoration activities of the affected forests.

In this situation, the environmental ministry was seen as an instrumental part in ensuring law enforcement in the land use and forest sectors.

The combination of environmental and forestry ministry, if both capacity and capability can be effectively utilized and coordinated, can lead to better law enforcement activities, signaling the seriousness of the current administration to uphold and execute the law and regulations.

This combination, however, can undermine forest protection and conservation, and sustainable forest management, and lead to further deforestation, if exploitative nature of forest and similar industries appears to be dominantly coloring the decision of the combined ministry.

The environmental ministry, according to Law No. 32 of 2009 on Environmental Protection and Management, for instance, has been given a slightly greater control over monitoring and reviewing other governments’ policies and permits, especially if these have potential environmental risks.

Such authority to review other government’s policies and permits can be strengthened within the combined ministry especially with the fact that the current combined ministry has presumably more human resources and budget.

The combined ministry can, however, undermine the role of the previous environmental ministry to review and monitor and, to some extent, control environmental management and protection, in the case of forest and land management, if decisions have been made internally to prefer forest exploitation.

When it comes to laws and regulations on environmental and forest protection, the combined ministry at least now has a more than sufficient legal umbrella, including Law No. 5 of 1990 on Conservation of Biodiversity and Ecosystems, GR No. 60 of 2009 on Revision of GR No. 45 of 2004 on Forest Protection, in addition to Law No. 32 of 2009.

To show that the combined ministry has become better in promoting environmental and forest protection, the ministry can use specific regulations previously utilized by the forestry ministry to deal with few upcoming challenges, including the recent Aceh provincial spatial plan (Qanun No. 19 of 2014) that does not mention the world renowned Leuser ecosystem, and the importance of its protection.

The home affairs ministry has responded to this plan and mentioned that there are 27 points needing to be corrected or revised by the provincial government.

The new environmental and forestry ministry can assist the home affairs ministry and the provincial government by showing that there are regulations such as PD No. 33 of 1998 on Leuser Ecosystem Area Management and Presidential Instruction (PI) No. 5 of 2001 on Eliminating Illegal Logging and the Illegal Timber Trade in the Leuser Ecosystem and Tanjung Puting National Park that need to be followed by the provincial government and incorporated as a regulatory framework of the provincial spatial plan.

The combined ministry can assist the provincial government and other sub-national governments to develop their respective areas by basing on the principles of sustainable development and green economies.

The combined ministry can further work together with relevant ministries, including the finance ministry, to develop further incentives so that other government’s ministries and local governments to mainstream and implement such principles.

The current administration has decided to combine environmental and forestry ministries. Only with the actual outcomes on the ground, such as reduced deforestation, that this administration will be considered successful compared to the previous one.

The combined ministry now has the chance to prove to the general public that combining both ministries is the right decision for the sustainability of Indonesia.

————————-

The writer is climate and sustainability specialist, a doctoral candidate at the Australian National University, and the recipient of Australian Leadership Award and Allison Sudradjat Award. He can be reached at fitrian.ardiansyah@anu.edu.au

Climate change and Indonesia’s key resources

By Fitrian Ardiansyah, published in Coal Asia, February 22 – March 22, 2014, page 150-151

for the pdf version, please see Opinion Fitrian Ardiansyah_CoalAsia_FebMar2014

Climate change and Indonesia ke resources

In his speech on a recent visit to Jakarta, the US Secretary of State John Kerry calls the world to pursue actions on climate change. This has propelled climate change back on the global news headlines.

With the current negotiation on climate change at the UN level converging toward Paris in 2015, expectedly resulting in a global climate change treaty agreed by all nations, the statement made by John Kerry is like a breath of fresh air since many countries have been waiting for the US examples and leadership in this issue.

A bilateral agreement between China and the US – reached a day before his visit to Indonesia – to cooperate more closely on combating climate change may potentially lead to wider and stronger commitments to curb greenhouse gases (GHG) by both and other big countries.

Any positive movement and actions coming out from the two superpowers are significant steps toward reaching a global commitment.

For Indonesia, actions from the two superpowers and wider global actions, including an agreed treaty, will definitely help and strengthen the country’s existing policies and programs on climate change.

As an archipelagic nation, Indonesia has started to experience climate change impacts, and if not seriously dealt with, these could further put pressure on the country’s economy, society and natural environment, which include extreme and unseasonal weather, droughts, flooding and trans-boundary haze.

At the same time, stronger actions on climate change at the global level are likely to provide a platform for Indonesia to decouple its economy from GHG emissions. Global agreed actions, particularly that include stronger commitments in terms of GHG emissions reduction, can in turn provide economic incentives for both state and corporate actors to reduce their emissions.

Without such incentives, it will be challenging for an emerging economy like Indonesia that has a high and relatively steady economic growth, a huge natural resources base and projected population expansion, to reduce the growth of its GHG emissions.

Sufficient economic incentives added with appropriate policies and programs can assist Indonesia to achieve balanced development – development that ensures economic growth and climate change mitigation.

To be able to attain this, however, the government of Indonesia may require specific interventions at the national and sub-national levels in key sectors such as energy (with key commodities including coal, gas and renewables) and agriculture (with key commodities including palm oil).

In the energy sector, Indonesia has significant resources and reserves of coal and gas, producing more this type of energy sources, not only for domestic consumption but also for meeting theexport demand. The 2012 data of the Energy and Mineral Resources Ministry indicate a persistent growth of production of coal, with the proportion of export reaching above 90 percent in the period of 2007-2009.

The increased domestic use of coal means that emissions from coal, which was minor contribution in 1980s and remained below 10 percent until late 1990s, have spiked in the last ten years. In 2009, according to the Energy and Mineral Resources Ministry, the contribution of emissions from coal was almost 40 percent.

The use of fossil fuels – i.e. coal, gas and oil – appears to continue playing an important role in the country’s energy mix in the future. Yet, to achieve a strong economic growth while ensuring the reduction of GHG emissions, Indonesia needs to dramatically boost investment in renewable energy and energy conservation (e.g. clean technology, eco-efficiency, eco-designs, etc.).

Boosting and attracting investments require policy reforms, especially which relate to energy subsidies and fundamental institutional changes. Many economists believe that huge energy subsidies have hindered the development of Indonesia’s renewable energy and can lead to energy security issues in the future.

In the agriculture sector, Indonesia has a challenging future in terms of providing food for its population. Several projections, for example, reveal that Indonesia’s rice consumption would exceed its production in 2020 and beyond. One of the possible factors causing this is likely to be the issue of land availability.

If climate change impacts are taken into consideration, the agricultural production may fall below these current projected figures. Climate change not only could lead to the reduction of the volume of agriculture commodities produced but may also result in other related damages and costs.

It is crucial, therefore, for the government to formulate policies and programs which ensure that the agriculture sector can cope with climate change challenges.

The current programs initiated by the Agriculture Ministry including by developing crop varieties which can cope with climate challenges (i.e. resilience to drought, flooding and diseases) and improving farmers field education on climate change and
variability, need to be further supported, especially at local level (i.e. ensuring farmers to have support so that they can increase their adaptive capacity).

Such programs and the lessons-learnt resulting from these not only can help Indonesia to develop climate change adaptation in the agriculture sector but also contribute to the negotiation of global adaptation programs and funds.

When it comes to discussing the agriculture sector, palm oil is undeniably one of the most important commodities for Indonesia.

With the skyrocketing demand for palm oil over the past 25 years, the challenge of climate change (both in terms of the future demand for biofuel and issues associated with deforestation) and the increase in capability to produce more, world production of palm oil, including in Indonesia, is expected to nearly double by 2020.

The amount of land given over to oil palms that has multiplied since the mid-1970s would even dramatically increase in the future.

Such increase in palm oil production leads to challenges and opportunities for Indonesia. Immediate and future opportunities for Indonesia, among others, are to show good cases that the country can meet the domestic and global demand by promoting sustainable palm oil production.

Key challenges include applying better land management, including no conversion forest and peat lands as well as the implementation of zero burning activities, and other GHG saving activities, including the use of POME (palm oil mill effluent) for energy and other uses.

The speech made by the US Secretary of State serves as a good reminder for the US itself, China and other big countries, including Indonesia, that all nations have responsibilities toward addressing climate change albeit with different capabilities.

When it comes to Indonesia’s domestic capability, the country needs to focus on its key sectors, resources and commodities. These sectors are both contributors to GHG missions and potentially affected by climate change impacts.

Strategically focusing on these sectors and resources means a further burden for a developing country like Indonesia because it requires huge financial, institutional and social investments.

It, nevertheless, also presents a good opportunity for the country not only to safeguard it against the threat climate change poses to development but also seize the economic opportunity that climate change presents.

Let us hope the current and future governments choose their options wisely.

————————-

The author is climate and sustainability specialist, a doctoral candidate at the Australian National University, the recipient of Australian Leadership Award and Allison Sudradjat Award, and Program Development Director of Pelangi Indonesia.

Challenges for better natural resources management beyond 2014

By Fitrian Ardiansyah, published in Coal Asia, December 20, 2013 – January 20, 2014, page 144-145

for the pdf version, please see Opinion Fitrian Ardiansyah_CoalAsia_Dec13Jan2014

CoalAsia_Dec13Jan2014_BetterNRM2014

With the 2014 general election on the horizon in Indonesia, one may wonder whether the issues of better natural resource management and environmental protection would be in the mainstream debate among political parties and presidential candidates.

To date, Indonesia has experienced a stable growth since its economy recovered from financial crisis in the late 1990s and maintained its real growth performance at average above 5 percent in the period of 2000-2011, as reported by the World Bank.

The 2012 McKinsey Global Institute Report states that Indonesia is the 16th largest economy in the world.

The strength of Indonesia’s economy has been helped by its strong exports of natural resources, such as oil, gas, coal and crude palm oil (CPO), making up around 50 percent of Indonesia’s exports, as argued by the Global Edge of Michigan State University.

Indonesia has abundant resources and reserves of coal and gas, and has pushed the production of this type of energy sources in recent years, not only for domestic consumption but also for meeting the export demand. The Energy and Mineral Resources Ministry (MEMR) records that the proportion of coal export reaching above 90 percent in the period of 2007-2009.

With regard to palm oil, Indonesia in 2009 surpassed Malaysia to become the biggest producer this commodity in the world. Indonesia’s CPO exports and resultant revenues have increased dramatically over the last several decades, from 3.8 million tons (valued at US$1 billion) in 1999 to 21 million tons in 2013 (US$22.40 billion).

Commodities from forests and oceans also contribute to Indonesia’s economy. The 2011 International Trade Strategies (ITS) Report showed that various forest commodities contributed roughly 3 percent to the country’s GDP (gross domestic product).

Furthermore, natural resources and commodities have contributed significantly to the country’s employment, energy supply and food security.

The forest related sectors, for instance, employed a combined total of 3.76 million people or 4 percent of Indonesia’s working population, according to the 2011 ITS Report. While in 2010, 38.3 percent was reported by the World Bank as the figure of employment in agriculture (percent of total employment) in Indonesia.

A big question remains whether the country can retain its strong growth and support the livelihood of its population when these resources are extremely degraded or depleted.

In the general context of economic growth and GDP, resource depletion may not create immediate negative impacts. The McKinsey reveals that currently and to a large extent, Indonesia’s economic growth is propelled by its domestic consumption rather than export of natural resources.

The report further suggests that the resource sector’s share of the economy has fallen since 2000, with mining, oil and gas accounting for only 11 percent of Indonesia’s nominal GDP.

In the mid to long-run, however, resource depletion may shake the very foundation of Indonesia’s exports and eventually its economy. With the global demand for commodities likely continuing if not increasing, especially in fast-growing emerging markets, export growth from Indonesia can only remain buoyant if the country manages its resources wisely.

Resource depletion will also hurt the country’s economy domestically. In fact, it has done some damages if oil subsidy is used as a case.

Indonesia has become a net importer of both crude oil and refined products since 2004. Oil consumption has been heavily subsidized as part of energy subsidies and this has cost the government Rp306.5 trillion (US $31.5 billion) in 2012, a figure much higher than that in 2010 (Rp139.9 trillion or US $14.4 billion), according to Directorate General of Treasury of the Finance Ministry.

To address this issue, in mid-2013, the Indonesian government and parliament approved a government budget that increased the price of a liter of petrol by 44 percent and diesel by 22 percent. This intervention may have helped the government’s budget deficit but even after the price rises, as stated in the Economist, the deficit is still expected to reach 2.4 percent of GDP, up from 1.8 percent in 2012.

The same fate of resource depletion can happen to gas, coal and other mineral commodities especially if these resources are not managed carefully, which in turns may hit back at the country’s economy.

In 2012, for example, the Vice Minister of the MEMR stated that high energy consumption has caused and could accelerate the imbalance between the exploitation of fossil energy resources (such as oil, gas and coal) and the speed of inventing new reserves, leading to a depletion of Indonesia’s reserves and increasing dependency on imported energy.

Moreover, resources depletion often brings about other economic costs in the forms of environmental degradation.

Destructive, illegal and uncontrolled resources extraction in forestry, agriculture, mining and fishery sectors have usually led to deforestation and forest degradation, and depletion of fish stock which eventually created environmental related disasters such as floods, landslides, fires and haze, land, air and water pollutions, and biodiversity extinction.

Some of these impacts and disasters may not be easily reflected in the GDP of the country.

The loss of natural resources and the associated environmental impacts will surely be felt by Indonesian people and affect their daily livelihoods.

Droughts, floods and landslides, for example, often adversely affect agricultural production, in which the impacts are felt both on the level of the local economy and in the balance of trade and the current account, potentially upsetting a country’s macroeconomic equilibrium.

According to the Agriculture Ministry, more than a million hectares of the country’s paddy fields and more than 100,000 hectares of corn fields have been impacted by diseases, floods and drought in the period of 2007-2011. Out of these areas, approximately 140,000 hectares of paddy fields and 18,000 hectares of corn fields have suffered from crop failures.

If such production losses are not dealt with seriously, Indonesia may face difficulties in reaching its goal to ensure food security for its people. Even if such losses are compensated through imports, similar imbalances may surface in other areas, which include putting further dependencies of the country’s economy on foreign agriculture commodities.

Therefore, it is undoubtedly important to continue reforming the management of Indonesia’s natural resources and put this as one of the country’s development priorities.

Potential Indonesian presidential candidates and political parties should be reminded that Indonesia’s economy could be in jeopardy if its current and future economic platforms will only lead to further resource depletion and environmental degradation.

Indonesian people may need to see the track records of their candidates toward 2014 with regard to resource management and environmental protection, and identify and only support leaders who have had commitments and actions in transforming Indonesia’s natural resource management for the better.

The upcoming election once again brings an opportunity as well as challenge for us, the public, to contribute to an important decision-making process for the future of our economy and livelihoods.

It is time to demand for better natural resource management and environmental protection from our politicians and leaders.

————————-

The author is climate and sustainability specialist, a doctoral candidate at the Australian National University, and the recipient of Australian Leadership Award and Allison Sudradjat Award.

Meaningful partnerships to manage our resources wisely

By Fitrian Ardiansyah, published in Coal Asia, November 23 – December 15, 2013, page 142-143

for the pdf version, please see Opinion Fitrian Ardiansyah_CoalAsia_NovDec2013

CoalAsia_NovDec2013_Meaningful partnership

With the alarming global challenges in the forms of climate change, natural resources depletion, environmental degradation, financial crisis, extreme poverty and social inequality, it is more than relevant now for countries and institutions around the world to find new and innovative solutions.

Some scholars have calculated that if human and industrial activities are set to continue with their current trend, the associated impacts resulting from respected activities may push our planet close to its ‘tipping point’, and if particular key environmental factors are measured, the impacts can move the present situation beyond the globally known ‘planetary boundaries’.

The planetary boundaries, as defined by reputable scientists like Professors Dave Griggs and Will Steffen, are a safe operating space for humanity, which are identified and quantified so that human activities can move forward without causing unacceptable environmental changes.

These boundaries include biodiversity loss, atmospheric aerosol loading, chemical pollution, climate change, ocean acidification, stratospheric ozone depletion, nitrogen and phosphorous cycles, global freshwater use and change in land use.

Since most changes in ecosystems are asymmetrical in nature, as defined in these planetary boundaries, once the impacts push our planet to reach its ‘tipping point’, it may be too late for humanity to formulate and implement actions to address these challenges.

One clear example is the anthropogenic climate change that has affected and will continue to affect the global world. A recent report by the Nobel Prize winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change projects that small-island and archipelagic nations, including countries in Southeast Asia, and their communities and ecosystems are among the most vulnerable.

Some scholars argue that we have witnessed the early signs of this change including a significant increase in climate related disasters such as extreme weather events, flooding, land sliding, drought, and fires and haze.

Such disasters will put further pressures to our already degraded environment due to decades of natural resources overexploitation and environmental degradation, among others, as a result of destructive and illegal logging, expansion of infrastructure and agriculture, and mining extraction activities.

Therefore, to find new and innovative solutions may require us to substantially reform our current development paths, for instance, by rethinking the overall economic growth, advancing social equity and ensuring environmental protection at all levels.

It is clear that to undertake such reforms, both industrial and developing countries need to come up with additional and adequate financial and technological resources. A country or an institution cannot do these reforms individually. Existing partnerships have to be strengthened and new and creative platforms of partnerships need to be explored and promoted.

With the current global economic and financial situation, no individual countries have sufficient financial muscles to address the global environmental challenges, without other countries to complement their actions.

In fact, hundreds of multinational corporations may have financial capitals which are more than the gross domestic products of most nations in the world.

This means that when it comes to addressing environmental issues and promoting sustainable management of our remaining natural resources, global partnerships need to be forged not only between the developed and developing nations, among developing countries, but also between state and non-state actors, more particularly with the private sector and key communities.

Such partnerships, if based on common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities, can open doors of new opportunities which are crucial to address global environmental challenges and eventually achieve the goals of green economy and sustainable development.

From the region of Southeast Asia, the Heart of Borneo (HoB) initiative can be considered as one of the platforms which can be a good test for the countries who support it – i.e. Indonesia, Malaysia and Brunei – to show that conserving and sustainably managing 22 million hectares of important forest and terrestrial ecosystems are not only possible but also economically and socially beneficial.

The three countries in this region which share the same island of Borneo and its remaining valuable terrestrial resources agree that no single country can deal with difficult environmental problems, such as large scale and widespread deforestation and forest degradation, and bring about sustainable solution in this island.

As a result, pledges and commitments have been announced by these countries and stipulated in key documents including the HoB Strategic Plan of Action.

Civil society groups have also taken part in this initiative by supporting some programs and efforts such as through on the ground conservation actions and community empowerment.

Although driven by the three governments and assisted by non-governmental organizations (NGOs), it appears that the HoB initiative can only work properly and achieve its goal if the private sector takes a major part in this initiative.

With mining exploitation and exploration, logging concessions and plantation development as key sectors influencing the development of the island, the involvement of actors from this sector as deemed crucial.

A recent initiative taken by the Government of Sabah State in Malaysia in launching its Forever Sabah initiative to support the HoB can be seen as an effort to promote a wide-range of partnership among key stakeholders influential in land use management in the HoB’s part of that state.

This effort, for instance, has brought together an energy company, that has a plan to increase renewable energy intake which could lead to further protection of forests, along with an award winning community based eco-tourism cooperative that will benefit from further conservation of fragile ecosystems, and plantation companies that try to restore forest important for wildlife corridors as an encouraged under the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil.

An NGO focusing on empowering indigenous and local communities through a model of kampong universities that provides useful knowledge and skills for natural resource management, and other key stakeholders, also have made strategic contributions to this initiative.

Similar efforts have taken place in the Indonesian part of the HoB, including in West Kalimantan province, particularly in Kapuas Hulu district, and in East Kalimantan province (Kutai Barat district). Both areas are striving to achieve an ideal goal of green economic development at local level by promoting a platform of collaborative actions among different stakeholders.

In another part of the world, such as the Amazon region, a multi-partners work that launched a 10-year initiative to preserve 12 percent, or 60 million hectares, of the Brazilian Amazon under the Amazon Region Protected Area can be used as a showcase. Other similar efforts in the Amazon have now ensured further protection and improved management of 80 percent of the Amazon’s original forest and establishing hundreds of millions of conservation fund.

Promoting such partnership at that large-scale requires not only political willingness but also concrete incentives and practical solutions on the ground. Otherwise, key actors and stakeholders may not necessarily have the ownership and be willing to support the agenda coming from the partnership.

It is of course still a long way to go for these partnership models to shine.

The involvement of non-state actors, in the government led initiative, however, displays that different actors’ efforts can complement each other.

The private sector and civil society, for example, can be actively involved in addressing the challenge in changing the unsustainable production and consumption patterns, while the governments can provide and improve enabling conditions, namely good economic policies and governance.

If such partnerships can be maintained, enhanced and magnified, one can dream and hope about the bright future of our human civilization.

————————-

The author is climate and sustainability specialist, a doctoral candidate at the Australian National University, and the recipient of Australian Leadership Award and Allison Sudradjat Award.