Advertisement
Check these out next
Stakeholder perceptions of fire and haze: early results
Nov. 10, 2015•0 likes•1,747 views
1 likes
Be the first to like this
Show More
views
Total views
0
On Slideshare
0
From embeds
0
Number of embeds
0
Download to read offline
Report
Environment
Presentation about Indonesia's fire and haze by Rachel Carmenta, Jacob Phelps, Willy Daeli and Aiora Zabala, 2015.
CIFOR-ICRAFFollow
CIFOR-ICRAFAdvertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Recommended
Stakeholder perceptions of fire and hazeCIFOR-ICRAF
Benefits, burdens and solutions to Indonesian Peatland FiresCIFOR-ICRAF
Political Economy of Fire and HazeCIFOR-ICRAF
Political Economy Study of Fire and Haze in IndonesiaCIFOR-ICRAF
Haze Crisis and Landscape ApproachCIFOR-ICRAF
Policy networks on climate change and ecosystem services in Peru and BrazilCIFOR-ICRAF
Stakeholder perceptions of fire and haze: early results
- Component 1: Stakeholder perceptions of fire & haze Rachel Carmenta, Jacob Phelps, Willy Daeli, Aiora Zabala
- Fire & Haze from Sumatran peatlands: a “wicked” environmental problem because... • No easy or technical solutions, especially on peatland • Hotly contested, political issues, multiple scales, sectors and actors
- Tropical peatland fires and transboundary haze Agroindustry Singaporean decision-makers Small farmers Hired labourers Local & national decision-makers External Investors
- What are the stakeholder perceptions? An application of Q method (> 200 interviews with diverse stakeholders) • Benefits, burdens of fire: 31 statements on a scale of importance • Solutions to fire: 40 statements on a scale of effectiveness
- How is this helpful? This new information can: • Clarify debates / positions / coalitions • Provide boundary object for negotiations • Identify contentious issues • Identify agreement areas • Debunk “myths” • Compliment remote sensing spatial analysis
- Initial analysis (i): benefits and burdens Distinct discourses (n = 6) characterized by scale: Agricultural development priorities Conservation Diplomatic tensions Economic focus Social focus among others
- Distinct discourses (n = 6) characterized by scale: Agricultural development priorities Conservation Diplomatic tensions Economic focus Social focus among others Which actors form coalitions in which discourse? Initial analysis (i): benefits and burdens
- Initial analysis (ii): solutions High variability in perceptions regarding solutions Distinct discourses (n = 8) characterized by: Awareness raising Culpability Enforcement Responsibility Technical reliance Temporal dimension
- High variability in perceptions regarding solutions Distinct discourses (n = 8) characterized by: Awareness raising Culpability Enforcement Responsibility Technical reliance Temporal dimension Which actors form coalitions in which discourse? Initial analysis (ii): solutions
- Initial analysis (iii): seeking agreement in solutions - The most effective solutions are the most contentious and include: revoking rogue company licenses, increased use of canals - Canal use is the solution option generating most disagreement - Measures need to be actor specific: whilst all actors are to blame (companies, investors, smallholders etc) enforcement against smallholders and laborers is deemed ineffective, while against companies considered highly effective - There is no strong solution (ve+ or ve-) agreed by all, rather agreement is with solutions ranking 0 (e.g. RSPO sanctions and raising environmental standards)
- Next steps for analysis and engagement: Fire and Haze C1 Analysis Refining our interpretation of the factors (discourses) Identify which stakeholders are populating which discourses Linking position in costs benefits discourse, to that in solution Analyze the perceived effectiveness and degree of agreement on solution options in current discussions and practice. Engagement Results on solutions to COP Stakeholder workshop in Pekanbaru Multi Criteria Evaluation on solutions
Editor's Notes
- Layout: Title Slide Variation: none
- While we often make assumptions about the actors involved in fire and haze and fire management, it is important to remind ourselves of the complexity involved in attempting to solve these problems. Evidenced in the current, and widespread failure, of fire control and management policies across the tropics today. Notably, consider the wide diversity of stakeholders, involved in shaping landscapes in places such as Riau, with multiple incentives for fire use and varying degrees of political power. Also, the wide range of actors who are affected by fire and haze. Meaningful solutions are challenged to address how each of these different groups experience and affect fire. Capturing this diversity is at the core of our research project, which is measuring perceptions across – at least – 10 different actor groups. These groups range from small-scale farmers with less than 2ha of land, to regional Indonesian investors, to government agencies, to Singapore decision-makers. This research contributes research at other scales, using different methodologies, notably remote sensing methods which are frequently used as a tool in fire management, yet a tool which is unable to capture an understanding of the socio-political and economic drivers of the processes behind the patterns it detects and one which is also underequipped as a stand alone instrument, to generate meaningful solutions.
- Layout: Closing Slide Variation: none
Advertisement