Cited by 26Oil Palm Production and SustainabilityConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource ManagementAgriculture, Land Use, Rural Development

Zero-deforestation commitments in Indonesia: Governance challenges

Open access
R., Pirard, S., Gnych, P., Pacheco, S., Lawry·2015

Abstract

Highlights Zero-deforestation commitments are emerging rapidly in Indonesia. They already encompass a large portion of crude palm oil production and almost all the pulp and paper (P&P) sector; typically, they reflect the values of the “no-deforestation, no-exploitation (social) and no-peat” policies. These commitments depend on definitions of ‘forests’ for their identification and conservation, which in turn rely on methodologies such as High Conservation Value and High Carbon Stock. Early implementation has revealed that the palm oil sector is facing a number of governance challenges to achieve commitments: the legal framework is not systematically supportive of the pledges, and the government promotes a different vision of sustainability. Of note is the fact that the P&P sector is more advanced. Integration of smallholders into sustainable value chains poses another challenge for the palm oil sector: traceability, better environmental performance and improved yields require urgent action. Legalization of smallholder operations is critical and goes beyond commitments, because it determines access to financing and certification, among others. To be effective, zero-deforestation commitments must align public and private governance arrangements. This requires an agreement on visions of sustainability supported by public policies; progress on land tenure; enforcement of progressive regulations at national and regional levels; and the implementation of strong policies to rationalize the expansion of small and medium holdings of oil palm. Legacy issues must also be addressed for the main palm oil and P&P groups: land restitution through due processes, support to smallholders and investments in land restoration are some promising avenues worth pursuing.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.17528/cifor/005871

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Internationally, public debates on zero deforestation and sustainable supply chains have thus far mostly represented local and international nature conservation organizations, governments and businesses.

    “Internationally, public debates on zero deforestation and sustainable supply chains have thus far mostly represented local and international nature conservation organizations, governments and businesses (Taravella and de Sartre, 2012;Pirard et al., 2015;Newton and Benzeev, 2018).”

    From Making deforestation risk visible. Discourses on bovine leather supply chain in Brazil (2020) · cites this paper as Pirard et al., 2015

    The Introduction identifies NGOs, companies, and public entities as actors in zero-deforestation commitments, and Box 1 describes NGO campaigns and government commitments (page numbers unavailable). The paper does not establish that these groups have mostly represented public debates internationally, or distinguish local from international conservation organizations. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Lee JSH, Abood S, Ghazoul J, Barus B, Obidzinski K and Koh LP. 2013. Environmental impacts of large-scale oil palm enterprises exceed that of smallholdings in Indonesia. Conservation Letters 7(1):25-33.
  2. Molenaar JW, Persch-Orth M, Lord S, Taylor C and Harms J. 2013. Diagnostic study on Indonesian oil palm smallholders: Developing a better understanding of their performance and potential, Global Sustainability Associates -Aid Environment - Triodos Facet. Nature. 29 July 2015. Tropical protection (editorial). Nature 523: 501. doi:10.1038/523501a · DOI
  3. Nepstad D, McGrath D, Stickler C, Alencar N, Azevedo A, Swette B, Bezerra T, DiGiano M, Shimada J, Seroa da Motta R et al. 2014. Slowing Amazon deforestation through public policy and interventions in beef and soy supply chains. Science 344(6188):1118-23.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
R., P., S., G., P., P., & S., L.
Published
2015
OpenAlex
W2174989398
Cited by
26
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2
Type
report
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
CGSPace A Repository of Agricultural Research Outputs (Consultative Group for International Agricultural Research) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Oil Palm Production and Sustainability
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › General Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agriculture, Land Use, Rural Development
Keywords
zero-deforestation commitments, Indonesia, palm oil industry, paper industry, high conservation value, forest governance, legal framework, traceability, land tenure, land restitution, land restoration, sustainable value chains, certification, public-private governance

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review