T

he Berau regency in East Kalimantan has developed a model of ecosystem development in Kampung Merabu in Kelay that integrates economic growth and protection of through ecotourism. Attractions include the karst mountain range of Sangkulirang Mangkalihat. The Berau policy is very interesting, in contrast for instance to Pati regency in Central Java, where the local government has allowed the mountainous region Kendeng to become a mining site for basic materials for a cement factory, thereby inciting ongoing conflicts with local communities.

The case of Pati and other areas are classic examples of approaches to development that pursue economic growth at the cost of ecosystems and the social welfare of communities. Economic growth has even widened income inequalities and poverty. East Kalimantan, for instance, is dominated by the extractive industries of coal, oil and gas and wood. The province’s Gini ratio is 0.367 and is 13th of the 33 provinces. Papua is also a province that has among the highest poverty rates in the nation (Central Statistics Agency, 2013)

 Inequality and poverty in our regions, which are rich in natural resources, cannot be separated from policy management and control of natural resources that emphasize cash benefits for a particular party through corrupt practices that eventually discriminates against citizens, as cited by researchers.

Instead, attempts at a “green” approach need to be intensified despite many obstacles over more than two decades. Positive outcomes have emerged in New Zealand for example; its economic progress is built on agriculture and tourism and development activities and a use of renewable energy up to 35 percent. It has an average per capita income of US$42,017 (Rp 45 million per month) and a human development index of 0.919 (ranked sixth out of 187 countries).

 Elswhere, Ghana has introduced renewable energy stoves, which are 40 percent more efficient than firewood to assist in the storage of 15,000 tons of carbon emissions. Similarly, Costa Rica is developing a program of environmental services. Through the Environmental Services Act in 1996, beneficiaries of forestry such as power companies have paid approximately $230 million to the owners of forested areas for protecting the ecosystems.

In Indonesia policy-oriented environmental development has been ongoing since 1980. However, initiatives are only on a trial or pilot-project basis and have not provided benefits or had a significant impact on society. Although renewable energy such as micro-hydro or solar electricity has been developed for nearly a quarter of a century, there are still 19.3 million households that do not have electricity.

As a long-term investment, raising the people’s prosperity without damaging the environment requires technological support and infrastructure that is fair, inexpensive and efficient, while the government seems reluctant to encourage and promote the development of the green economy. There is hardly any policy designed to empower the people or institutions through science, research, education or training in the transition to a green economy. Many non-timber forest products with high economic value that could increase the people’s prosperity such as honey and sandalwood cannot be developed due to a lack of support from the government in the form of technology, capital and skills. This is different from the Cambodian government’s approach since 2010, which has drawn up a road map for green growth.

Instead the current government prefers to build a modern infrastructure as a basis for growth, though often breaching environmental rules and disrupting livelihoods. Yet development policies that pursue economic growth alone and do not care about the impact of income inequality, poverty and the protection of the ecosystem are disastrous.
_________________________________

The writer is program director of the Environmental Research Institute.