Written  almost thirteen years ago. I post this today to remind all of us, not much has changed. Indonesia just faced one of the worst forest and land fires, floods, landslides are as common now as then. And there is the addition of technology disaster such as the Lapindo hot mud eruption, that remains a disaster until today.

Environmental Day celebrated amid rise in devastation

The Jakarta Post, Opinion – Saturday, June 14, 2003

The month of June brings seminars, speeches, tree planting, workshops and awards to commemorate the World Environment Day. In Indonesia, June is also the month of “environmental disaster” as haze blankets many cities such as Pontianak, Palangkaraya, Pekanbaru, Jambi and Palembang.

Apart from fire and the resulting haze, Indonesia is also prone to floods. In fact it is like a cycle: Floods during January and February, forest and land fire begins between March and May, intensifying in June, July and August, landslides in November and December, the beginning of the rainy season. And then floods again at the beginning of the next year. The government insists on calling these as natural disaster, when they are actually environmental disasters.

Unfortunately, even the United Nations uses the term natural hazards for floods and wildland fires, lumping them together with the “real” natural disasters such as earthquake, volcanic eruption and tropical cyclones. However, it does mention that disaster events are triggered by natural hazards and related technological and environmental disasters.

It is important to differentiate between natural and environmental disasters. The latter is human made and preventable. Floods are caused by disruption in the natural water regulation capacity when forests are clear felled in upstream areas, drainage systems are not well built in the cities, water catchment areas are converted into buildings and mangroves are cut in coastal areas.

Similarly land slides and forest fires are human made disasters when natural resources, particularly forests, are not managed sustainably. At the global level, climate change is also playing havoc, triggering environmental and natural disasters.

Environmental and natural disasters are on the rise and may continue to increase, and they threaten both sustainable development and poverty alleviation. It is projected that 100,000 lives would be lost each year due to natural hazards, with a global cost of US$300 billion annually by 2050, if the likely impact of climate change is not mitigated. Some 97 percent of lives lost due to natural disasters and a substantial part of the economic loss will be borne by developing countries including Indonesia (ISDR Background paper No. 5, 2002).

In 2000 alone, Indonesia lost an amount equivalent to 10 percent of its gross domestic product due to natural disasters according to official estimates. From January to March, natural disasters (probably a mix of natural and environmental disasters) killed 505 people and created 1,070,378 refugees (www.lin.go.id, May 2003). According to the Forestry Information Centre at the Ministry of Forestry, these disasters caused substantial loss at the national level, but no figure was mentioned.

The landslides of Garut, West Java early this year and in Pacet, East Java last year illustrate the severity of environmental disasters. At least 26 people were killed and 17 were missing during the landslide in Pacet, while 21 people were killed in the Garut landslide (The Jakarta Post, March 6, 2003). Residents in both areas are suing the state forestry firm Perhutani and the government for allegedly allowing legal and illegal logging in protected forests.

There are three important aspects of environmental and natural disasters. First, the poorest are the least prepared in mitigating the impacts of environmental disaster and they suffer the most, despite the fact that in most cases these disasters are caused by other parties. People in the Pekanbaru and Palangkaraya cities did not cut forests or set them on fire, but they have to breathe in the unhealthy hazy air. They could not move to hotels.

Calculations on economic loss caused by the disasters is often less than the reality because the externalities borne by communities are not considered — loss of school and working days, health costs, emotional stress, donations from other communities.

Second, the government often says it is helpless in preventing and mitigating environmental disasters, particularly floods and haze. With advances in technology for weather prediction, the warning for possible floods and fires is now given well in advance, yet disaster preparedness is often non existent. Disaster management — comprising disaster prevention, preparedness, mitigation, and recovery — is very weak.

Basic information, trained personnel and emergency procedures are either lacking, unclear or not followed. In 1997-1998 during one of the worst forest and land fires in the country, the government was practically crippled.

A UNDP- Ministry of Environment Study on the 1997-1998 forest and land fires had stressed the need for a stronger and decentralized disaster management institution equipped with effective policy and enforcement. But not much has been improved since then.

Third, many environmental disasters are preventable or at least can be reduced and mitigated. True, in many cases these disasters are caused by destructive actions or development projects in the past. The peat fires in Central Kalimantan occur in the dry season even if nobody set fire to the land; simply because the peat has become exposed to the sun, when peatswamp forest was clear felled in the past.

This general knowledge should form the basis for vigilant supervision and preparedness. But the government often says that they lack human power as the area to be patrolled is very vast. This is where community participation must be enlisted. And, the polluters pay principle must be applied.

Those who did the damage must be held accountable in preventing further damage by rehabilitating the damaged area and providing funds for stronger mitigation measures. Unfortunately weak law enforcement, corruption and lack of good environmental governance make such a simple effort almost impossible. These environmental disasters can also be avoided by making and enforcing the right policies on natural resources management.

Rather than spending money on the usual Environment Day rituals, it would be better for the government and public to engage in a process to develop and strengthen disaster management in Indonesia, within the context of sustainable development.

This would be a holistic approach rather than a partial measure that the government has always taken. For example, on May 20 three coordinating ministers issued a joint decree to form the Environmental Rehabilitation Team. The Coordinating Minister for People’s Welfare issued a decree, the Coordinating Minister for Economic Affairs issued another, and yet another came from the Coordinating Minister for Politics and Security.

The team’s task is to anticipate disasters caused by flood, landslide and drought through rehabilitation and reforestation. The Coordinating Minister for People’s Welfare is the Chair of the team, with the Environment Minister as Vice-Chair. In the past, such joint teams were ineffective.

This time it may be different because the level is coordinating ministers. But environmental disaster management needs to also involve the enactment of sound policies to prevent further environmental damage (not just rehabilitation) and also ensuring that these policies are adhered to.

Finally, disaster management needs the strengthening of relevant institutions, people participation, data and information, as well as human resources development. The key remains, sustainable management of natural resources, a far from reality situation in Indonesia.