Sumber Jaya (Lampung, Indonesia): From conflict to sustainable land use Fahmuddin Agus, Soil Research I nst it ut e and ASB, Bogor, I ndonesia wit h cont ribut ions f rom Gamal Pasya (BAPPEDA Lampung/ I CRAF), Suyant o, Suseno, Kusuma Wij aya, Meine van Noordwij k, Desi Suyamt o, At iek Widayat i, Desi Suyamt o (I CRAF), Bruno Verbist (KU Leuven, Belgium) Kurniat un Hairiah, Didiek Suprayogo, Widiant o (Univ. Brawij aya) Af andi (Univ. Lampung) Kasdi Subagyono, Ai Dariah, Maswar, Set iari (Soil Research I nst it ut e)
Coverage • Land use system • Land use scenarios • Negotiation as a prerequisite for sustainable land use • Research findings on coffee based farming systems • RUPES Mechanism for what and how
Land Uses and Conflicts in Sumberjaya
Land use status in Sumberjaya Land Use Area (ha) % Paddy field 2,447 4.5 Home garden 2,051 3.8 Multi-strata farming 2,150 4.0 Shifting cultivation 1,835 3.4 Fallow/abandoned 753 1.4 State forest land 31,571 58.3 Plantation 12,449 23.0 Others 938 1.7 Total 54,149 100 Source: West Lampung monograph, 2001.
Actual Land Use in Sumberjaya 100 Permukiman Settlement 80 Saw ah Paddy field land use (%) Kopi multistrata Multistrata coffee Kopi mono kultur Sun coffee 60 Kopi muda Young coffee Padang rumput Savanna 40 Perladangan berpindah Shifting cultivation Hutan baru dibuka Cleared forest 20 Belukar Bush Hutan Forest 0 1970 1978 1984 1990 2000 year
In mid 90s, coffee plants were replaced with Calliandra calothirsus CONFLI CT 1997: Famers replanted coffee, but with tenure uncertainty
Land use scenarios Trade-offs Current land use Multistrata coffee: Livelihood Environment Sustainability Annual upland: Livelihood? Environment? Sustainability? Seconday Forest: Livelihood? ‘Environment’ Combination of above
Soil loss (Agro)forest Benefi ts C Restoration of Forest Functions Degradation ---- Restoration--- Forest -- Climax
Negotiation Support System For Sustainable Land Use
Negotiation Support System for Sustainable Land use performance indicators actors, new components & stake- landscape technologies Plots (land use s.s.) holders mosaic Matrix (filter) resource Roads/streams interactions negotiated agreed natural resource Negotiation changes management agreement spontaneous change
Research Findings
1. Run off and soil loss (Bodong sites) 500 15.0 RunOff 450 13.5 Erosion 400 12.0 350 10.5 Soil loss (mm/year) Run Off (mm/year) 300 9.0 250 7.5 200 6.0 150 4.5 100 3.0 50 1.5 0 0.0 NF 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Multi Gliri Paras Agroforestry Coffee Monoculture, years
Ratio of Erosion to Runoff, Bodong site mm of soil loss per mm of run off water 0.040 0.036 0.035 0.030 Erosion : Run off 0.025 0.025 0.020 0.015 0.013 0.010 0.010 0.008 0.006 0.005 0.005 0.003 0.002 0.001 0.001 0.000 0.003 0.002 0.002 0.000 F 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 i i . s t r 1 1 1 N l i u a l G r M a Time, years P Coffee monoculture
Bench terrace and hedgerows effects on soil loss in Jember (East Java), 31% slope, 2,768 mm annual rainfall (Coffee and Cacao Research Inst, 1998) Soil loss (t ha -1 yr -1 ) Treatment Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 25.80 a 2) Control 17.75 a 0.55 a 0.88 a Bench Terrace (BT) 1.51 b 1.17 b 0.35 a 0.82 a BT + L. leucocephala 3.03 b 1.19 b 0.28 a 0.82 a BT + V. zizonioides 1.90 b 0.61 b 0.28 a 0.83 a BT + M. macrophylla 0.33 b 0.88 b 0.21 a 0.83 a
Sediment pits/ rorak Graded terrace Rorak Alternative management techniques NVS Multistrata Partial weeding Multistrata
2. Variation in soil loss Location slope/ Soil Rain fall Altitude loss Soil Family (t/ha) Bodong* / 60-70% Typic Paleudults, clayey, kaolinitic, 37.21 458 mm 830 m isohiperthermic Tepus 57-66 % Oxic Dystrudept, very fine, kaolinitic, 0.42 434 mm 820 m isohiperthermic Laksana 56-68 % Oxic Dystrudept, very fine, kaolinitic, 0.02 571 mm 820 m isohiperthermic
Bodong Laksana Tepus
Tepus Tepus Laksana Laksana Bodong Bodong 0 - 10 0 - 10 Kedalaman tanah (cm) Soil Depth (Cm) 10 - 20 10 - 20 20 - 40 20 - 40 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10 50 55 60 65 70 75 BD (g/cm3) Total pore (%) Ruang pori total (% vol) Total pore and BD (Tepus, Laksana dan Bodong)
0 - 10 0 - 10 0 - 10 0 - 10 Kedalaman tanah (cm) Kedalaman tanah (cm) Kedalaman tanah (cm) Kedalaman tanah (cm) 10 - 20 10 - 20 Soil Depth (Cm) Soil Depth (Cm) 10 - 20 10 - 20 Soil Depth (Cm) Soil Depth (Cm) 20 - 40 20 - 40 20 - 40 20 - 40 Tepus Tepus Tepus Tepus Laksana Laksana Laksana Laksana Bodong Bodong Bodong Bodong 10 15 20 25 30 35 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 10 15 20 25 30 35 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Pori drainase cepat (% vol.) P ermeabilitas (cm/jam) Pori drainase cepat (% vol.) Drainage pore (%) P ermeabilitas (cm/jam) Permeability (Cm/hour) Core sample measurement of soil permeability and drainage pore
Where to prioritize conservation implementation under limited resources ?
Negligible 3. Map of erosion prone sites Medium High Low
Where to allocate the forest reserve to minimize sedimentation?
Riparian Forests Fraction = 0.25 Settlements Forests
Forests on Steep Slopes Fraction = 0.25 Settlements Forests
Random Forests Fraction = 0.25 Settlements Forests
Effectiveness of Forest Reserve Allocation on Sediment Loss (FALLOW Simulation) Sediment Loss (t/ha) 30 20 10 0 1 10 19 28 37 46 55 64 73 82 91 100 Year Riparian Steep Slopes Ridge Top Random Remote
Other prospective conservation measures Arachis pintoi as cover crop
Farmer’s perception of selected conservation techniques Conservation technique Function Erosion control Bench terrace Contour ridging Reduce weeding Low cost & simple Sediment pit (rorak) Improved soil fertility Ridge Increase/accumulate organic matter Partial weeding Fodder Arachis pintoi (cover crop) Maintenance soil moisture
Farmers test of Arachis Early (2 Months after planting) growth of A. pintoi Establised (Six months after planting) A. pintoi
Farmers adaptation to Nilam/Patchouli ( Pogostemon cablin Bth) hedgerows
Profitability of Different Land use in Sumberjaya Profitability (Returns to land) Returns IRR NPV NPV to Labour at financial at financial price at social price price Rp.000 Rp.000 Rp (%) 1. Coffee Monoculture in Protection forest -1,881 -541 6,176 4.9 a. pionir - traditional b. semi intensif 24 5,730 8,016 15.1 2. Simple shade coffee 6,994 15,684 13,501 31.8 a. with comercial crops at low layer 2,443 7,485 9,927 21.4 b. without comercial crops at low layer 3. Coffee Multistrata with fruit trees 15,342 33,510 18,771 36.5 a. with comercial crops at low layer 10,853 25,476 15,683 29.3 b. without comercial crops at low layer 4. Coffee Multistrata with Timber trees 7,496 15,981 13,924 32.2 a. with comercial crops at low layer 3,501 9,329 8,933 23.3 b. without comercial crops at low layer Source : Budidarsono and Wijaya (2004)
How could we best facilitate sustainable land use management?
Trade off between Livelihood and Enveronmental Services of Coffee Multistrata ) CARBON,Watershed BIODIVERSITY, ES Multistrata systems Beneficiaries of Poor m ultifunctionality at global and local levels : C seq, biodiversity, erosion/flood redxn REWARD MECHANI SMS
Possible RUPES Mechanisms in Sumberjaya Activities Services Possible Buyer Rewards HKm (multistrata, Water quality, Tenure, farmer Community/Govt, conservation) water flow, C, preferred planting PLTA, Biodiv. materials, International facilitation of community(??) cons. technologies River Water quality Village PLTA care/riparian development, etc.
Institutional Partnership/Forum Development To Support Multi-level Negotiation Activities Negotiation Partners Level Proposal for HKm, Dialog Sub-district CBO (Farmer groups) Forum of Way Besai Local NGO (Watala, etc), NARS Watershed, TAC RUPES International org, University, LGUs Initial HKm certification 5 District/ CBO (Farmer groups) yr, Criteria and indicator Kabupaten Local NGO (Watala, etc) on HKm 25 yr, Multi- International org, University, stakeholder Team for NARS, LGUs, DPRD (peoples’ Spatial and Land use representatives) Policy Voluntary Working Group Provincial Local NGO (Watala, etc) for Natural Resources and Level International Org, NGO, Environmental Mngt. University, LGUs, Land tenure WG, KPSDA National level MoF, MoA, MOHA, International (land use, tenure, conflict Org. , and status), (Dialogues, policy inputs
Conclusions • Erosion and runoff are significantly reduced as coffee and other tree canopy, soil cover and litter layer develop. Conservation intervention, in addition to coffee, is necessary for selected sites with low soil permeability/low porosity. • Multistrata coffee system is the closest to forest in providing environmental services and can also provide reasonable livelihood to people living on forest margin such as sumberjaya.
Recommend
More recommend
