Finding Strategies for Peatland Rehabilitation; Agroforestry Systems on Various Types of Peat Depth in Three Villages in Central Kalimantan

• Autorzy: Rotinsulu Johanna Maria , Afentina , Yanarita , Indrayanti Lies , Nursiah , Dewi Sevana

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.12911/22998993/144422

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Peatland rehabilitation is an urgent need in order to minimize the effects of peat degradation and to support climate change mitigation. However, the rehabilitation of degraded peatlands still faces many obstacles. This study aimed to study the agroforestry system on peatlands applied by traditional communities as an effort to discover a peatland rehabilitation strategy. This research was conducted in the Pilang, Tanjung Taruna, and Kalampangan villages from February to August 2019. The data in this study were obtained through field observations, interviews with the community, and Focus Group Discussion. The data was then synthesized using descriptive statistics. The results of data analysis showed that in the study area, six types of agroforestry systems were found. Communities develop different agroforestry systems at various types of peat depths. Farmers develop vegetable and fruit-based agroforestry on shallow peat, rubber-based agroforestry, annual crops and fruit on medium peat, fruit and rubber forestry plants on deep peat. Most farmers planted endemic species including Rubber (Havea braziliensis), Galam (Melaleuca leucadendra) and Gerunggang (Cratoxylum arborescens). The results of this study can be adopted as a peatland rehabilitation strategy since they are in accordance with the socio-culture of the local community and capable to accommodate economic and conservation interests.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

agroforestry system; peat land rehabilitation; local community; climate change mitigation

• Wydawca: Polskie Towarzystwo Inżynierii Ekologicznej ; Lublin University of Technology
• Czasopismo: Journal of Ecological Engineering
• Rocznik: 2022
• Tom: Vol. 23, nr 2
• Strony: 150--158
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 30 poz., rys., tab.

Twórcy

autor

Rotinsulu Johanna Maria

• Department of Forestry, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Palangka Raya, Indonesia

• https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8784-4374

autor

Afentina

• Department of Forestry, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Palangka Raya, Indonesia
• Center For The Study of Climate Change and Low-Carbon Development, University of Palangka Raya, Indonesia

• https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0752-4395

autor

Yanarita

• Department of Forestry, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Palangka Raya, Indonesia

• https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9525-0309

autor

Indrayanti Lies

• Department of Forestry, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Palangka Raya, Indonesia

• https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3371-4005

autor

Nursiah

• Department of Forestry, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Palangka Raya, Indonesia

• https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7391-8504

autor

Dewi Sevana

• Alumni of the Department of Forestry, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Palangka Raya, Indonesia

Bibliografia

• 1. Afentina, Yanarita, Indrayanti L., Rotinsulu J.A., Hidayat N., Sianipar J. 2021. The Potential of Agroforestry in Supporting Food Security for Peatland Community – A Case Study in the Kalampangan Village, Central Kalimantan. Journal of Ecological Engineering, 22(8), 123–130. https://doi.org/10.12911/22998993/140260.
• 2. Berkes F. 2008. Sacred Ecology, 2nd ed. Taylor & Francis, New York, NY.
• 3. BPSa (Statistic Centre Agency). 2021. Pulang Pisau Regency in Number. Indonesia.
• 4. BPSb (Statistic Centre Agency). 2021. Palangka Raya in Number. Indonesia
• 5. BRG (Peatland Restoration Agency). 2018. Profil of Pilang Village. Indonesia
• 6. Charnley S., Paige Fischer A., Jones E.T. 2007. Integrating traditional and local ecological knowledge into forest biodiversity conservation in the Pacific Northwest. Forest Ecology and Management, 246, 14–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2007.03.047
• 7. Cheyne S.M., Macdonald D.W. 2011. Wild Felid Diversity and Activity Patterns in Sabangau Peat-Swamp Forest, Indonesian Borneo. Oryx, 45(1), 119–124
• 8. Jaenicke J., Rieley J.O., Mott C. 2008. Determination of The Amount of Carbon Stored in Indonesian Peatlands. Geoderma, 147, 151–158
• 9. Covington W., Niering W.A., Starkey E., Walker J. 1998. Ecosystem restoration and management: scientific principles and concepts. Human agents of ecological change. Elsevier Publisher.
• 10. Dudley N., Mansourian S., Vallauri D. 2005. Forest landscape restoration in context. In: Mansourian, S., Vallauri, D., Dudley, N. (Eds.), Forest Restoration in Landscapes. Springer, New York, 3e7.
• 11. Falkowski T.B., Diemont S.A.W., Chankin A., Douterlungne D. 2016. Lacandon Maya traditional ecological knowledge and rainforest restoration: Soil fertility beneath six agroforestry system trees. Ecological Engineering. Elsevier Publishing, 92, 210–217. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2016.03.002.
• 12. Giesen W., Sari E.N. 2018. Tropical peatland restoration report: the Indonesian case. Berbak green prosperity partnership/Kemitraan Kesejatheraan Hijau (Kehijau Berbak). Millennium challenge account Indonesia, contract no. 2015/Grant/010. Euroconsult Mott MacDonald in association with Universitas Jambi, Mitra Aksi foundation, Perkumpulan Gita Buana and Perkumpulan Walestra. For the Indonesian Peatland Restoration Agency, Badan Restorasi Gambut, 82. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.30049.40808
• 13. Giesen W. 2021. Tropical Peatland Restoration in Indonesia by Replanting with Useful Indigenous Peat Swamp Species: Paludiculture. In Tropical Peatland Eco-Management. https://doi.org/10.1007/978–981–33–4654–3
• 14. González-Coloma A., Reina M., Sáenz C., Lacret R., Ruiz-Mesia L., Arán V.J., Sanz J., Martínez- Díaz R.A. 2011. Antileishmanial, antitrypanosomal, and cytotoxic screening of ethnopharmacologically selected Peruvian plants. Parasitol. Res., 110, 1381–1392.
• 15. Graham L.L.B, Giesen W., Page S.E. 2016. A common-sense approach to tropical peat swamp forest restoration in Southeast Asia. Restor Ecol, 25(2), 312–321. https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.12465|
• 16. Leifeld J., Menichetti L. 2018. The Underappreciated Potential of Peatlands in Global Climate Change Mitigation Strategies. Nature Communications, 9, 1071.
• 17. Leifeld J., Wüst-Galley C., Page S. 2019. Intact and Managed Peatland Soils as a Source and Sink Of GHGs From 1850 to 2100. Nature Climate Change, 9, 945–947.
• 18. Maftu’ah E., Ani Susilawati A., Sulaeman Y. 2021. Agroforestry for restoration of degraded peatlands. E3S Web of Conferences 305, 03001. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202130503001
• 19. Menzies C.R., Butler C. 2006. Understanding ecological knowledge. Pages 1–20 in C. R. Menzis, editor. Traditional ecological knowledge and natural resource management. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln, Nebraska, USA.
• 20. Murdiyarso D., Hergoualc’h K., Verchot L.V. 2010. Opportunities for reducing green-house gas emissions in tropical peatlands. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci, 107(46), 19655–19660.
• 21. Nowak K. 2013. Mangrove and peat swamp forests: refuge habitats for primates and felids. Folia Primatol, 83, 361–376
• 22. Page S., Hoscilo A., Wösten H. et al. 2009. Restoration Ecology of Lowland Tropical Peatlands in Southeast Asia: Current Knowledge and Future Research Directions. Ecosystems, 12, 888–905.
• 23. Parrota J.A., Agnoletti M. 2007. Traditional forest knowledge:challenges and opportunities. Forest Ecology and Management, 249, 1. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2007.05.022
• 24. Posa M.R.C., Lahiru S., Wijedasa L.S., Corlett R.T. 2011. Biodiversity and Conservation of Tropical Peat Swamp Forests. BioScience, 61(1), 49–57.
• 25. Peat Monitoring. 2017. Peat Clasification. https://pantaugambut.id/pelajari/apa-itu-gambut/jenisjen-is-gambut. Accessed 30 September 2021.
• 26. Sugiyono. 2015. Research method in education program (Qualitative and Quantitative approach). Alfabeta Publisher Bandung. Indonesia
• 27. Uprety Y., Asselin H., Bergeron Y. 2017. Preserving ecosystem services on indigenous territory through restoration and management of a cultural keystone species. Forest, 8, 194. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/f8060194
• 28. Warren M.W., Kauffman J.B., Murdiyarso D. et al. 2012. A Cost-Efficient Method to Assess Carbon Stocks in Tropical Peat Soil. Biogeosciences, 9, 4477–4485.
• 29. Wich S.A., Meijaard E., Marshall A. et al. 2008. Distribution and conservation status of the orang-utan (Pongo spp.) on Borneo and Sumatra: how many remain? Oryx, 42(3), 329–339.
• 30. Yu Z. 2011. Holocene carbon flux histories of the world’s peatlands: Global carbon-cycle implications. The Holocene, 21(5), 761–774. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959683610386982