Pengusahaan perkebunan kelapa sawit berwawasan konservasi
Conservation-based oil palm cultivation
Saharjo, Bambang Hero
MetadataShow full item record
The development of oil palm plantations has given a number of consequences on the great demand in land; however, in practice, there are a lot of accusations that land utilized comes from the conversion of forest areas, and this is suspected to be the cause of the loss of biodiversity of tropical rain forest ecosystems, cause of disruption of wildlife (flora and fauna), habitat fragmentation, and extinction of a large number of species, especially endangered species. The research was conducted in three (3) units of oil palm plantations located in Central Kalimantan Province in order to (1) determine the use and land cover change, (2) assume the plant species of wildlife suspected to be lost (biodiversity loss) and thought to be increased (biodiversity gain) as consequences of changes in land cover due to oil palm plantations (3) demonstrate the calculation of the financial analysis of oil palm cultivation carried out on various types of land cover and different peat depths, and perform analysis by taking biodiversity loss and gain biodiversity into account, and (4) formulate alternative models and describe the profile of conservation-based oil palm cultivation. Conservation-based oil palm cultivation in this research was defined as an activity with no biodiversity loss; in other words, the hypothesis indicated that biodiversity loss (bio-loss) was equal to zero. Based on the Provincial Spatial Plan of Central Kalimantan Province Year 2003 (Local Law Number 8 Year 2003), it is stated that the status of the land before it is opened for oil palm plantation is not a forest, but is located in the cultivation area/or in an area for other uses (APL). The result of analysis of land use prior to the opening of oil palm plantation showed that land for palm oil development was not entirely derived from wooded land cover (tuplah), but also from the areas of shrubs, mixed farming land/communal farms, and open land. Oil palm land developed came from the former concession, former estates of other companies, including land owned by the community through the process of compensation. Land cover based on the interpretation of land satellite images before land opening for oil palm plantations showed no identification of primary forests but only secondary forests, shrubs, mixed farming land and vacant land. The forested area that is still present in the plantation has retained its initial conditions and is designated as a conservation area in the forms of a riparian area and peaty forest area. Identification and analysis of the diversity potential of plants and wildlife in the forested areas (primary and secondary forests) and in shrubs were performed to determine the suspected missing species (biodiversity loss). The result showed that the density of vegetation in the conservation area inside the plantations was less than that in the primary and secondary forests, and the stand volume in the conservation area in the plantations had less potential than that in the primary and secondary forests. The abundance of Shannon species (Shannon H' Index) showed the species in the primary forest were still more abundant than those in the forested areas in the plantations. The Margalef species richness (Margalef DMg Index) in the plantations belonged to the criteria of moderate to 7 high species richness. Changes in forest land cover which is an important habitat for arboreal primates and has turned into palm oil plantations have caused some primates such as orangutans and owas that are highly dependent on the presence of forest life unable to survive safely and comfortably, and anteaters have become endangered as result of hunting to meet their high demand in market. Some species that used to live in the area, after their habitat had changed, are difficult to find; as a result, it can be said there has been a loss in plant and wildlife potential or "biodiversity loss", and this becomes an important and compulsory factor in conservation-based oil palm utilization/concession scheme. On the other hand, due to changes in land cover that was originally in the form of less potential land (such as land cover of open/vacant land) before it was changed into oil palm plantations, it is believed that the land cover can be beneficial for the development of wildlife predators such as owls and sawa snakes which will be beneficial for the oil palm plantation management, especially in pest control of mice because they disturb the oil palm crop production, and this is translated as part of "biodiversity gain". Although the utilization of biodiversity potentials in plantation operations for the business agents is not a must, it should be voluntary. In relation to the conservation-based oil palm concession scheme, the appraisal of the investment feasibility of oil palm utilization on peat land was based on the size of its investment criteria (NPV, IRR and PBP), producing eight feasible (profitable) alternative models, including cultivation of oil palm plantations in LGDang (0-3 meters) from the land cover of (1) shrubs with an NPV of Rp 278.246.174,-, an IRR of 38%, and a PBP of 4.50 years; (2) a secondary forest with a NPV of Rp 183.779.650,-, an IRR of 15%, and a PBP 7.90 years; (3) open land with a NPV of Rp 282.597.650, an IRR of 41%, and a PBP of 4.30 years; (4) a primary forest with a NPV of Rp 89.141.650,-, an IRR of 9%, and a PBP 10.70 years. Furthermore, the oil palm cultivation in LGDal (> 3 meters) from the land cover of (5) shrubs with, a NPV of Rp 220.570.287,-, an IRR of 32%, and a PBP of 5.00 years; (6) a secondary forest with a NPV of Rp 126.040.287,-, an IRR of 13%, and a PBP of 8.81 years; (7) open land with a NPV of Rp 224.858.287,-; an IRR of 35%, a PBP 4.80 years; and a primary forest with a NPV of Rp 40.320.287,- ; an IRR of 8% , and a PBP of 11.80 years Cultivation model selection which has the highest priority and provides the highest NPV per ha is Rp 282.597.650,- with an IRR of 41% (well above the disconto rate of 6.5 %) and a PBP for 4.30 years. As a consequence of the conservation-based oil palm cultivation scheme in answering the hypothesis whether there was a potential biodiversity loss (bio-loss was equal to zero), (1) the utilization should be conducted on open land cover (not on forested land cover). However, (2) if it should be conducted on forested land cover, there must be a replacement cost for the bio-loss, and (3) the investment must be feasible (profitable) indicated by a positive value of NPV, a greater IRR value than the discount rate and a shorter term of capital repayment (PBP).
- DT - Forestry