By Dr Susan E. Page, University of Leicester, UK

1. DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY
Challenges and Potential Benefits of Rehabilitating
Degraded Tropical Peat Swamp Forest
Sue Page & Laura Graham
DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY

2. Tropical Peatlands : Natural Resource Functions
Hydrology, Biodiversity, Livelihoods, Carbon
Tropical peat swamp forest (TPSF) provides:
Hydrological regulation
Biodiversity support
Livelihoods for local communities
Carbon storage
DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY

3. Tropical Peatlands : Natural Resource Functions
Carbon Storage
Tropical peatland area :
Global ~ 439,000 km2
SE Asia ~ 248,000 km2
Tropical peatland C store :
Global ~ 89 Gt
SE Asia ~ 69 Gt
Equivalent to:
3.5% global vegetation & soil
C pool
15-19% global peatland C
store
DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY
Page et al. (2011) Global Change Biology

4. Tropical peatlands:
needs & priorities
Extensive areas of “degraded” peat swamp
forests in SE Asia : > 50,000 km2 ?
Definition of “degraded” peat swamp :
Logged-over forest
Deforested / burnt / drained land
Agricultural / plantation land ?? - peat is
degrading, crop productivity may be low
Drivers of ecosystem degradation:
Logging (often uncontrolled) / deforestation
Drainage
Fire
DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY

5. Tropical Peatlands : SE Asia
Peatland Degradation
Current situation for TPSF in Sumatra
and Kalimantan*:
4% good condition
37% degraded forest (logged)
24% deforested and/or burnt
32% agricultural use
* Mietinnen and Liew (2010) Ambio
Less degraded sites may recover
in time
Heavily degraded areas may
never recover naturally
DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY

6. Problems :
Degraded landscapes – fire & flood
Loss of local livelihoods
DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY

7. Loss of carbon through peat
Southeast Asian oxidation3
Peatlands: (~260 Mt C yr-1)
Vulnerability
Reduced carbon sequestration2 Release of carbon
Carbon by fire4 (~190 Mt
sequestration1 (~10 Mt C yr-1)
Cyr-1)
(19 – 21 Mt C yr-1)
Vegetation carbon
sink Reduced
vegetation sink
Pool: 69 Gt (& increasing?) Pool: < 69 Gt
Natural overall carbon (& decreasing by 460 Mt C yr-1)
sequestration Current situation overall carbon source
Notes:
1 based on area of 252,229 km2 and carbon accumulation rate of 80 g C m2 yr-1 (Neuzil, 1997; Page et al., 2004)
2 based on deforestation of 121,000 km 2 of peat swamp forest (Hooijer, Page et al., 2010)
3 based on likely mean annual drainage depth of 60 cm and a resulting annual soil CO emission of 81 t ha-1 (Jauhiainen et al., in prep.)
2
4 based on average fire-related C emissions over period 1997-2006 (Page et al., 2002; van der Werf et al., 2008)
DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY

8. Scale of ecosystem degradation:
LOW vs. HIGH
Level of degradation : LOW
DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY

9. Level of degradation : MODERATE
DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY

10. Level of degradation : HIGH
DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY

11. Stages of post-fire secondary succession
‘Severe’ fires:
1997 & 2002
‘Moderate’ fires: 1997 &
2002
‘Moderate’ fire: 1997
DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY

12. Restoration, rehabilitation, mitigation ?
World Institutions & Indonesian Govt. now starting to recognise the
scale of the problem – in particular the GHG emissions from
degraded tropical peatlands
Small-scale hydrological restoration & reforestation projects
underway
Pilot projects to implement improved water management in
plantations
Larger-scale REDD demonstration, CDM & VCS projects in planning
& early implementation stages – will require huge investments e.g. in
fire management
Fire hotspots, 19-25 Sept 2009
(http://firefly.geog.umd.edu/firemap) DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY

13. Tropical Peatlands : SE Asia
Peatland Degradation
Understand the ecosystem!
TPSF vegetation and peat are highly inter-dependent.
Forest disturbance
direct changes to forest structure & composition
indirect changes through enhanced peat decomposition -
peat subsidence and increased tree fall and mortality
Forest disturbance and lowering of water table
increased risk of wildfires and combustion of aboveground
biomass and surface peat (e.g. 30 – 50 cm)
Deforestation and drainage
increased risk of dry season drought
Land subsidence (peat decomposition & combustion)
increased likelihood of wet season flooding
DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY

14. Key questions for restoration of
tropical peatlands
What is/are the restoration goals?
What are the ecological and social constraints?
What are the key ecosystem elements and functions to
be restored?
Will the restored ecosystem be sustainable?
What are the financial constraints?
What administrative and legislative instruments are
available to promote restoration?
DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY

15. Key questions:
What are the restoration goals?
Peat swamp forest or something else?
Land-use that meets local social/economic needs?
Ecosystem functions - all, or emphasis on
selected ones ? – e.g.
reduced GHG emissions (short term)
recommencement of peat formation (long term)
Who decides?
Top down ‘neo-colonialist’ approach
Bottom up empowerment
Two-way dialogue/consensus
DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY

16. Restoration goals
?
DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY

17. Restoration goals
?
DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY

18. Key questions:
Ecological constraints
Many and various! Different for every
ecosystem but also for every site!
Include:
Loss of forest canopy & change in microclimate
Loss of seed sources & seed dispersers
Changes in soil physical & chemical properties
Changes in ecosystem nutrient dynamics
Impaired hydrology – increased risk of flooding and
drought
Increased risk of fire
DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY

19. Ecological constraints:
Barriers to restoration
Constraints will have different impacts
depending on different rehabilitation end-
points and restoration methods and goals
DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY

20. The ecology of peatland restoration
DEGRADATION
Changes to environmental
conditions
Alterations to environmental conditions after degradation lead to
REGENERATION BARRIERS that must be overcome
Human-assistance in creating RESTORATION METHODS can
remove or find ways round these barriers.
NATURAL REGENERATION
e.g. seed death in harsh conditions e.g. repeat fires
e.g. seedling transplants e.g. fire prevention
DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY

21. Key questions:
Social constraints
Also many and various! Include:
Lack of understanding and support
Lack of knowledge & ability to implement
rehabilitation/restoration
Conflicting stakeholder views
Continued use of unsustainable land use
practices – e.g. fire, logging – which threaten
long-term restoration success
Limited awareness of and belief in short- and
long-term objectives and benefits of restoration
(next generation……..)
DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY

22. Key questions:
Social constraints
DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY

23. Identifying barriers
and opportunities
Ecological constraints
Limit what it is possible to restore
Social and financial constraints
Limit what can actually be achieved
Successful restoration may require:
Shorter-term increase in social capital (e.g. developing self-
sustaining community employment opportunities)
Longer-term restoration of natural capital (ecosystem
functions, biodiversity etc)
DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY

24. Identifying barriers and opportunities:
Are the constraints present?
Assumed ecological and social constraints
may not be present;
E.g. A recent study showed
Invasive sedges ameliorated harsh degraded environmental
conditions and supported young seedling survival and growth
– don’t remove!
A local community had:
• Deep understanding of forestry, ecology and restoration
techniques that could be facilitated and incorporated into
a restoration action plan
• A strong desire for and support of restoration activities
Investigate the study-site before investing
in costly rehabilitation methods
DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY

25. Conclusions
Restoring natural + social capital
The challenges are immense
But so are the opportunities
DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY

26. Challenge !
Opportunity ?
Terima kasih - Thank you
DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY