Forest and Land Fires in Riau Province: A Case Study in Fire Prevention Policy Implementation with Local Concession Holders

Abstract

During the last 5 years (2010–2014), the frequency of forest and land fires in the Riau province had increased significantly each year. Various government policies were implemented to minimize forest and land fire such as through constitution, government policy, President’s policy, Ministry of forestry policy, Ministry of Agriculture policy, and Director General policy. The regulations mandated that every permit owner both in forestry and plantation sector must have facilities (infrastructure), human resources, and sufficient institutional system to prevent forest and land fires in their unit area. Besides, the government had also mandated to every business permit owner to consider biophysical aspects to prevent forest and land fires. However, forest and land fires in Riau are still continuing every year with increasing frequency. This condition creates a question about what is actually happening in Riau. This chapter shows that forest and land fire in June 2013 and January–March 2014 in Riau occurred because the policies were not implemented optimally by both forestry and palm oil plantation companies. Factors behind the forest and land fires in Riau province were attributed to (1) resources (human resources, information, authority, and facilities); (2) attitude of policy implementer in unit area; and (3) bureaucracy and an organizational structure. From five oil palm plantation companies observed, it was found that four companies classified into category 2 or do not implement the policies. The four companies with the level of policy implementation are as follows: (1) PT. MEG (23.0%); (2) PT. TFDI (23.0%); (3) PT. JJP (23.5%); and PT. BNS (48.3%). The other companies which were PT. SAGM classified into category 1 or do not implement the policies at all (18.5%). Of the 12 forestry companies observed, it was found that one company PT. SRL Blok III was classified into category 1 which do not implement the policies at all (7.22%). Another company PT SRL Blok V was classified into category 3 which lacked in policy implementation (50.78%). The remaining ten companies (1) PT. DRT; (2) PT. NSP; (3) PT. SPA; (4) PT. SSL; (5) PT.AA; (6) PT.SG; (7) PT.SRL Blok IV; (8) PT. SPM; (9) PT.RUJ; and (10) PT. RRL were classified into category 2 which did not implement the policy (26.20–43.40%).