A very real and practical contribution? Lessons from the Kalimantan Forests and Climate Partnership

Abstract

On 9 September 2007, Australian government ministers and the Indonesian president announced a A$100 million Kalimantan Forests and Climate Partnership (KFCP). This would involve protecting 70,000 hectares of peat forests, reflooding 200,000 hectares of dried peatland, and planting 100 million trees in Central Kalimantan, Indonesia. Since then, the ambitions of the KFCP have been quietly but drastically scaled back. The area expected to be reflooded by the project is now just over 10 per cent of the original target. And little progress has been made on the ground. Four years on, blocking of the large canals required for reflooding has yet to commence, and only 50,000 trees have been planted. What has happened to what was labelled at its launch as “a very real and very practical contribution”, one that would yield “immediate and tangible results”? We analyse the KFCP both as an aid “announceable” and as a REDD project, and reach two main conclusions. First, the KFCP illustrates the damage that an emphasis on “announcing” new projects, and a lack of attention to reporting on project progress, can cause to aid. Not enough has been done to publicly reposition the KFCP as a much smaller, demonstration project.

Social learning through a REDD+ ‘village agreement’: Insights from the KFCP in Indonesia

“…Nevertheless, the community engagement programme was regarded by many interviewees as the KFCP's strongest achievement, a finding which supports those of others (e.g. Olbrei and Howes, 2012). KFCP positioned a 'community engagement' (CE) officer in each village who was tasked to keep the community intensively informed about KFCP activities and listen to community concerns and expectations (KFCP, 2012a).…”

Moonshots and the New Industrial Policy: Questioning the Mission Economy

“…The mission targeting forest preservation and reduction of CO 2 emissions in Indonesia, based on funding from the Australian government, was incrementally dismantled and can now be described as a failure (Olbrei and Howes 2012). By contrast, historical missions funded by and implemented by the Rockefeller Foundation to enhance agricultural efficiency in developing countries were successful (Wright 2012).…”

“…Geographically delineated missions include reaching net-zero emissions in different Swedish regions or to develop Covid-19 Plasma in six different countries . International collaboration in the form of foreign aid is also noted in a few missions (Olbrei and Howes 2012;Wright 2012).…”

“…Finally, lobbyists may also serve as powerful constituents for innovation directionality. The case of the Kalimantan Forests and Climate Partnership between Indonesia and Australia reflects such a case where a project with an initial ambitious aim to reduce deforestation and CO 2 emissions is incrementally downscaled over time until it resembles a simple demonstration project, with significant project delays, internal conflicts, and lack of transparency (Olbrei and Howes 2012).…”