Forest Management Units’ Performance in Forest Fire Management Implementation in Central Kalimantan and South Sumatra

Abstract

Wildfires in Indonesia are an annual phenomenon which peak in dry El Nino years, with up to 2.6 million ha of forest and land burnt in the drought year of 2015. This is an annual disaster for the country and surrounding region, with severe impacts on the environment, as well as human health, economic and social factors. Forest Management Units (FMUs, known locally as Kesatuan Pengelolaan Hutan, KPH) are the implementation agencies on the ground that play a strategic role in both the prevention and suppression of forest fires. FMUs are mandated to establish a local fire brigade, to provide adequate personnel and equipment, and to carry out fire prevention as well as suppression programs. This research aimed to analyze the performance of forest fire-related policy implementation. The study was based on five FMUs in fire-prone regions of Central Kalimantan and South Sumatra, Indonesia. The performance of the FMUs is measured by achievement of the policy objectives and effectiveness of policy implementation. Our analysis shows the policies, standards and objectives to manage fire are clear for FMUs, but there are challenges in their implementation, such that fire control activities have not been fully implemented. Most FMUs have limited capacity and resources, as well as complicated budget mechanisms and low community participation. Strengthening FMU capacity will significantly improve their performance in forest fire control, particularly in the initial stages. This can be done at three scales: personnel, organization and system.

1. Introduction

Indonesia’s tropical forest areas face a high risk of fire. Forest fires have occurred since the 17th century, but have significantly increased in area and intensity since the 1980s [1]. They now cause huge economic losses and extensive environmental damage almost on an annual basis, and are an economic, environmental and social disaster for Indonesia and often for the region more generally. Forests are naturally wet environments which do not tend to burn naturally in most of Indonesia, so forest fires are mostly as a result of anthropogenic factors [2]. The first large forest fire event that attracted the attention of the global community occurred in 1982–1983, as a result of national policies such as logging concession allocations, development of plantations including oil palm, intensification of crop production and construction of irrigation infrastructure, which led to extensive forest exploitation and conversion [1,3,4]. These activities typically dry out the ecosystem much more than in its natural state, increasing the risk of fire. High fire risk is compounded by the extensive deployment of fire-dependent agricultural practices and El Nino-induced drought conditions. The area burnt during the 1982/83 fire season was estimated at 3.2 million ha (MHa), mostly over forest that had been logged [5]. The second large forest fire event occurred in the period 1997–1998, where the burnt area was estimated to reach around 2.5 MHa, and the economic costs were estimated at up to USD 4.5 billion [5].

In 2015, prolonged forest fires burnt an area of 2.6 MHa [6], resulting in economic losses estimated at around USD 16 billion and causing the premature deaths of more than 100,000 people, mostly due to severe respiratory problems [7]. Prolonged forest fires again reoccurred in 2019, burning an area of 1.6 MHa [8], with the World Bank estimating that the fires cost Indonesia more than USD 5.2 billion. Forest fire severity is influenced by a range of complicated factors such as the interaction between climate, land cover and land management, including land clearing activities for plantation and agriculture [1,9].

Extensive forest fires continue to threaten the existence of Indonesia’s tropical forests, as they contribute to high rates of deforestation. More than 66% of fires in 2015 occurred in forest areas and contributed up to 30% of the area deforested in that year [10]. The high risk of forest fires in Indonesia is often exacerbated by inadequate forest management at the site level [1,7,11]. Poorly managed forests, including those without utilization permits or clear forest boundaries, have a higher risk of deforestation driven by forest fires because they are freely accessible, increasing the risk of forest land claim conflicts [12]. Furthermore, fire is often used by some actors to develop agricultural land in the conflict area to show the power of their land ownership or to get higher financial benefits [2]. In order to strengthen the management of forest areas at the site level, since 2002 the Government has developed a new system of forest management in which the entire state forest area in Indonesia is divided into Forest Management Units/FMUs (in Bahasa Indonesia Kesatuan Pengelolaan Hutan or KPH). The policy was stipulated in the Government Regulation No. 34/2002 on Forest Management and Formulation of Forest Management Plans, Forest Utilization and Use of Forest Areas. FMUs constitute the smallest forest management area that are considered best possible to be managed in an efficient and sustainable way. FMUs are designated according to the main purpose of the forest management, either for production, protection or conservation. Around 540 FMUs have been developed to date, and are the key organizations tasked with managing forest area on the ground. The organizations’ authority lies under the provincial government for those FMUs whose main purposes are protection and production and under the central government authority for those with a mostly conservation purpose. The authority of FMU organizations has been dynamically changing with the change of regulation related to local government decentralization. From here on, the term FMU is used to refer to these organizational units. The new forest management system originated in the Forestry Law No. 41/1999 that mandated development of FMUs [12,13,14]. The FMUs were established to optimize forest uses and benefits, as well as preventing open access and encroachment [12,15,16]. Several pilot FMUs were initially established to provide examples of how forest management at site level would work. However, as a new system, the establishment of FMUs was a complex process, requiring interactions with several institutions and provision of sufficient personnel and budget to perform their task.

FMUs are expected to be the forefront in forest area management on the ground [17], including protecting forest areas from both natural and anthropogenic disturbance, such as forest fires and encroachment [18,19]. As mandated in the Ministerial Regulation of Environment and Forestry No 32/2016 on Control of Forest and Land Fires, FMUs are responsible for preparing forest management plans and controlling forest fires. FMUs must fulfill a number of obligations in order to manage fires including establishing a fire brigade, providing adequate personnel and infrastructure and conducting fire prevention and suppression activities.

Given that FMUs have significant responsibilities for sustaining forests and controlling forest fires, they are critical to reducing the human health, economic, social and environmental impacts of fire, including sustaining Indonesia’s tropical forest resources [17,20]. Forest fire management requires a detailed technical, socio-economic and political response, so an investigation on how FMUs carry out their responsibility is warranted. Forest fires often occur in remote areas with limited access and infrastructure, making fire suppression efforts difficult to carry out and requiring extra resources. Moreover, implementing the forest fire management-related policies issued by the government is not a simple process of adopting the required particular actions. Policy implementation is often more complex than policy formulation and policy evaluation processes, since it involves various actors with different interests and capacity levels and stages of translating a particular requirement into practice that is often shrouded by different perceptions [21]. Failed forest fire management-related policy implementation in Indonesia has been showed, when forest concession holders in Riau Province did not comply with the forest fire management policies that had been outlined by the local and central government, leading to uncontrolled forest fires almost every year in the province [22]. A similar situation could happen to FMUs, considering the dynamics of the FMU establishment process until now, including FMUs’ resources, bureaucracy and the political situation of the local and central government.

Limited attention has arisen to systematically defining barriers faced by FMUs that may impede implementation of forest fire management-related policies in Indonesia. The van Horn and van Meter policy implementation model emphasizes several factors that influence the successful implementation of a policy, including standards and policy objectives; policy resources such as funds and other incentives; communication between organizations and enforcement activities; characteristics of implementing agencies; economic, social and political environment; and disposition of implementing agencies [23]. According to the model, the capacity of implementing organizations greatly influences the success of their policy implementation, with capacity often limited by poorly trained staff or by inadequate information and financial resources [24]. The barriers in the policy implementation process are the conditions that prevent progress towards stated policy goals, which exist in a wide variety of dimensions, including social, financial, cultural and institutional [25].

This study aimed to investigate the implementation of the forest fire management policy that is carried out by FMUs including constraints and challenges that can hamper the government’s goal of reducing forest fire-induced deforestation. Based on the identification of the constraints and challenges, we suggest a pathway forward to improve the performance of FMUs in controlling forest fires. This paper is beneficial in supporting decision makers to achieve the effective implementation of forest fire control policies at the ground level.

2. Research Methods

2.1. Study Area

The research sites in Central Kalimantan and South Sumatra were chosen because they are the top two provinces in Indonesia experiencing the most fires and are highly prone to forest fires due to extensive areas of degraded peat. Central Kalimantan accounts for 56% of Kalimantan’s peatland area (2,550,440 ha), while South Sumatra accounts for 19% of Sumatra’s peatland area (1,123,117 ha) [26]. During the El Nino droughts of 2015 and 2019, both of these provinces experienced significant fire damage [27] (Figure 1). Fires on peatland are challenging to extinguish because the organic material can be more than 3 m thick and act as a fuel source [28,29].

South Sumatra province had the largest burnt areas in Indonesia at approximately 646,299 ha in 2015 and 336,798 ha in 2019 [8]. Ogan Komering Ilir (OKI) Regency has the highest level of fire vulnerability and has the highest proportion of fire-prone villages in South Sumatra [30,31,32]. A total of 377,333 ha of forest and land area was burnt in OKI Regency in 2015, and the resultant smoke haze was associated with economic losses of up to USD 3.90 billion because it paralyzed the transportation sector [30,33], while Central Kalimantan Province was the province that experienced the second-largest forest fire, reaching 583,833 ha in 2015 and another 317,749 ha in 2019. Pulang Pisau Regency is the most fire prone area in Central Kalimantan, due to the large area of peatland which burns every year [34].

Extensive fires in both provinces occurred in FMU management areas. In OKI Regency, South Sumatra, fires occurred in the area of Lempuing-Mesuji FMU and S.Lumpur-Riding FMU. Lempuing-Mesuji FMU has almost 50% of its area noted as being vulnerable to fire with 10,035 ha of peatland greater than 5 m deep and not currently under management [35]. In Sungai Lumpur-Riding FMU, forest fires occurred in 1996, 1999, 2011, 2015 and 2016, impacting on almost all of the forest area. The area impacted by fire in 2016 was 206,475 ha, of which 109,815.58 ha occurred on very vulnerable land [36].

Extensive fires in Central Kalimantan have occurred in the area of Kahayan Hilir FMU, Kahayan Tengah FMU and Gerbang Barito FMUs. A fire incident in 2015 in Central Kalimantan Province burned 577,563 ha of forest land, of which 132,938 ha occurred in the Kahayan Hilir FMU area. Peatland in Kahayan Hilir FMU area covers 256,929 ha, of which 206,234 ha (51.59%) is more than 4 m deep [37]. The Gerbang Barito FMU is on an ex-peatland development area of one million ha. Nearly 60% of the working area of the Gerbang Barito FMU is peatland greater than 3 m deep and prone to forest fires [31]. Based on these considerations, the following FMUs were chosen as research sites: Lempuing-Mesuji FMU, S.Lumpur-Riding FMU, Kahayan Hilir FMU, Kahayan Tengah FMU and Gerbang Barito FMU.

2.2. Methods

A qualitative approach was used to reveal the forest fire management policy implementation carried out by FMUs. Data collection began in early March 2020, and the study was extended from April to September 2021 due to the COVID-19 outbreak.

The data collection approach employed in this study included a semi-structural in-depth interview, document analysis and focused group discussion (FGD). The data collected includes the contents of the legislation on forest fire management and is also related to the authority and duties of the FMU function due to the dynamics of existing regulations; FMU responsibility in forest fire management; forest fire control practices and its constraints; and FMU’s capacity to do their task. In addition, secondary data were collected to supplement the primary data.

A total of 15 people were selected purposively to complete the study. Of these 15 people, 10 were sourced from FMUs and 5 from the central government. Participants from the FMUs were the head of the FMU and the coordinator of fire prevention at the FMU. The 5 people from the central government who are relevant to policies related to forest fire management and FMUs.

The first data sets collected were for forest fire management and FMU policies. Policy documents include the Ministerial of Environment and Forestry Regulation No 2/2016 (MoEF No 32/2016) on Forest and Land Fire Management and regional regulations on forest fire management. FMU policy documents include the Omnibus Law on Job Creation, Government Regulation No. 23/2021 on Forestry Implementation, and MoEF No. 8/2021 on Forest Management and Forest Management Planning, Forest Utilization in Protected and Production Forest Areas. The findings of the document analysis are then used as the basis for semi-structural in-depth interviews with participants.

The first interview was conducted with participants at the MoEF to seek more information about FMUs’ authority and duties in forest management, including forest fire management, following the Omnibus Law. The next interview was conducted with FMU participants to learn about the forest fire management policy’s practices. The detailed information gathered includes the FMU’s activities in controlling forest fires, the resources owned by the FMU to carry out these activities, and its constraints (Appendix A). The first interview took place in-person at the Kahayan Tengah FMU, but due to the COVID pandemic, further data collection occurred through online meetings. During the online meeting, all FMUs described their forest fire management practices, resources, and challenges. Focus group discussions (FGD) on constraints and the efforts that FMUs have made to overcome the constraints were also discussed during the online meeting. In addition, telephone interviews were conducted to confirm the results of previous data collection. Furthermore, an online meeting with participants from the central government was held based on the results of data collection from the FMU. The meeting with central government participants covered the overall progress of FMU development, FMU roles and tasks following the Omnibus Law, budgeting for FMU for forest fire management implementation, and coordination between central institutions related to FMU and forest fire management (see Appendix A). Secondary data includes long-term management plans for FMUs and national forestry statistics.

Data from interviews was coded and processed for data analysis in order to understand specific themes and descriptions. To analyze the content of laws and regulations, qualitative content analysis was used to understand the meaning and context of the text mentioned in the relevant regulation. An assessment of the FMU’s performance of forest fire management policy using 3 criteria include how far the objectives had been met, policy implementation and policy impact [38].

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Forest Fire Management Policy in Indonesia

The forest fire management regulation that applies nationally in Indonesia is the Minister of Environment and Forestry Regulation No 32/2016 on Forest and Land Fire Control. This regulation replaced the previous Minister of Forestry Regulation No. 12 of 2009 concerning forest fire control because of the need to adjust to the dynamics of forest and land fires.

Based on the result of content analysis of MoEF Regulation No 32/2016, it regulates organizations, human resources, infrastructure and operations related to forest and land fire control as well as funding. The scope of forest fire control activities including fire prevention, fire suppression and post fire (

Table 1. Data collection.

Data	Technique	Source of Data	Participants
Forest fire management policy	Document analysis	MoEF regulation No. 32/2016 and related regional regulation	-
Responsibility FMU related to forest management including forest fire control	Document analysis	Omnibus Law No 2/2020; Government Regulation No.23/2021; MoEF Regulation No. 8/2021	-
	Semi structure in-depth interview	Central Government	1 respondent
Forest fire control practices and their constraints, and also FMU’s capacity	Semi structure in-depth interview and FGD (online meeting)	FMU	10 respondents
The FMU Development, Forest and Land Fire Management and the capacity of FMU.	FGD (online meeting)	Central Government	4 respondents

). FMUs are given the responsibility to undertake forest fire control. Besides that, FMUs should form a fire brigade, provide human resources, provide facilities and infrastructure, and carry out forest fire control. The FMU must provide a fire brigade with a minimum requirement of 1 team unit consisting of 1 leader and 14 members. The FMU must also maintain infrastructure for controlling forest fires including personal equipment, team equipment, four-wheeled vehicles specifically for forest fire control, data processing and communication facilities, and transportation facilities. Other facilities include Personal Protective Equipment, fire flapper, Global Positioning System (GPS), handheld radio, car radio, fire water pump, hose, nozzle and others. In addition, FMUs must also have other infrastructure facilities including campaigns, command posts and firebreaks.

In MoEF Regulation No 32/2016, the government established Manggala Agni, a fire brigade that spans the central, provincial and district levels, and also the Land and Forest Fire Controlling Task Force that has a coordinating function from the central to district/city levels. At the operational level, each Regional Technical Implementation Unit for Forest and Land Fire Control, Forest Park Area Technical Implementation Unit, Forest Management Unit and Forest Product Utilization Business Permit Holders are required to form a brigade for forest and land fire prevention. Manggala Agni operates at national, provincial, district and management unit levels and overlaps with FMU areas on the ground. Key areas covered by MoEF Regulation No. 32/2016 are summarized in

Table 2. Forest and Land Fire Control Activities by FMUs based on MoEF Regulation No. 32/2016.

Prevention	Fire Suppression	Post Fire
Socialization and fire prevention campaign	Early detection of hotspots or firespots	Monitoring of burnt areas
Application of agroforestry	Early fire suppression	Inventory of burnt area
Fire Care Community assistance	Fire suppression coordination	Loss assessment
Land preparation without burning practice	Fire suppression mobilization	Coordination of post-fire handling
Fuel management	Advanced suppression
Early warning and Fire Danger Rating System/FDRS application	Demobilization of suppression
Installation of signs and warning boards	Evacuation and rescue
Construction and management of firebreaks, canal blocks, ponds and water reservoirs
Dissemination of fire vulnerability information
Fire prevention patrols
Coordination through meetings and working visits

.

At the provincial level, South Sumatra Provincial Regulation No. 8 of 2016 regulates the prohibition of burning; outlines obligations for forestry and plantation business owners to provide facilities and infrastructure as well as controlling forest and land fire; inviting the community to participate in forest and land fire control; and coordination mechanisms in fire suppression. However, this Regional Regulation does not mention FMUs. In Central Kalimantan Province, Regional Regulation No. 01 of 2020 (concerning Land Fire Control) contains a prohibition on burning land, with an exception for customary law communities on non-peatland outside of emergency alert periods. Burning of up to 1 ha per household can be carried out after obtaining a permit, up to a maximum of 20 ha in one village, with at least 1 km between burnt areas. Again, there is no acknowledgment of FMUs. Thus, only the regulations from MoEF engage FMUs in forest fire management.

Meanwhile, the issuance of Law Number 23/2014 concerning Regional Government has implications for a delegation of authority in the forestry sector to provincial governments. As a result, FMUs were transferred to the authority of the provincial government, including the handover of personnel, infrastructure, budgets and documents.

The Omnibus Law had an impact on many sectors, including forestry. According to the Omnibus Laws, the fundamental change FMU is that FMUs are no longer an entity that can use forest for business, but rather a facilitator who is responsible for ensuring forest management implementation. Despite the change in FMU responsibilities, based on the derivative regulation of the Omnibus Laws, Government Regulation No 23/2021 on Forestry Implementation states that FMUs are still obliged to implement forest management, including forest fire management. According to MoEF Regulation No 8/2021 on Forest Management and Forest Management Planning, Forest Utilization in Protected and Production Forest Areas, FMUs are tasked with facilitating the control of forest and land fires, as well as the procurement or construction of infrastructure and facilities for forest fire control infrastructure. Based on the regulations related to FMUs, FMUs indeed do have responsibility in forest fire management.

3.2. Implementation of Forest Fire Control Activities by FMUs

Each FMU carries out forest fire control in its working area, especially in areas that are not already allocated through permits or management rights. Prior to the enactment of the UUCK, FMUs could generate income from their forest areas to support the implementation of their duties as managers. For areas that are allocated to other uses, the permit holders or management rights holders are responsible for controlling forest fires, under the supervision of the FMU. After enactment of the Omnibus Law, the authority for FMUs to conduct business in the forest area was revoked, but the FMU is still responsible for controlling fires in the FMU area.

Aspects of the forest fire control programs that had been implemented by each of the FMUs as per MoEF Regulation No. 32/2016 are shown in

Table 3. Forest fire control programs implemented by FMU. Establishment of each given activity by each of the FMUs is signified by a ‘√’.

Activities	Kahayan Tengah	Gerbang Barito	Kahayan Hilir	Sungai Lumpur-Riding	Lempuing-Mesuji
Establishment of fire brigade	√	√	√	√	√
Fire prevention patrols	√	√	√	√	√
Socialization of forest fire management	√	√	√	√	√
Establishment of fire care communities	√	√	√	-	√
Early suppression	√	√	√	√	√
Coordination with relevant agencies	√	√	√	√	√

. Most of the activities had been established as of the time of this study, with only Sungai Lumpur-Riding FMU having not yet started to establish its community fire awareness program (fire care community).

3.2.1. Fire Care Community Organizations

Based on MoEF Regulation No. 32/2016, the forest fire control activities implemented by FMUs include establishment of a fire care community (Masyarakat Peduli Api, MPA, in Bahasa Indonesia) in each fire-prone village, which aims to engage the community in controlling forest fires. The establishment of a fire care community organization in each fire-prone village aims to engage the community in controlling forest fires but is still a work in progress in many FMUs. Until 2021, Kahayan Tengah FMU has only been able to form an MPA in 7 of about 30 fire-prone villages in its forest area, while Lempuing-Mesuji FMU has facilitated the formation of only one MPA group. The Sungai Lumpur-Riding FMU works with companies to establish MPA groups in its working area.

3.2.2. Fire Prevention Patrols

Fire prevention patrols are carried out by FMUs especially in the dry season, from May to October. The frequency of patrols is different for each FMU. Kahayan Tengah FMU patrols four times per month, while Kahayan Hilir FMU patrols twice per month. Each year this activity will be different depending on the available budget. In addition to carrying out its own patrols, Kahayan Hilir FMU also collaborates on a joint patrol program with Manggala Agni and Regional Disaster Management Agency (BPBD). However, in 2020, patrols were only carried out eight times.

3.2.3. Information Dissemination

Socialization to provide information to the public regarding forest fires can be carried out specifically or in conjunction with patrol activities. Kahayan Tengah FMU conducts outreach activities to village communities five times in a year in different places. Seven out of the thirty areas had previously received forest fire management training. Sungai Lumpur-Riding FMU and Lempuing-Mesuji FMU conducted socialization four times a year in different places.

3.2.4. Fire Suppression

FMUs can carry out direct suppression, but if the fire gets out of control they will then ask for support from relevant agencies. Mobilization of resources and equipment is usually carried out by Manggala Agni or BPBD. FMU infrastructure is facilitated by the Central Government and Regional Governments, and includes vehicles to transport fire suppression equipment, two-wheeled vehicles for personnel and a set of fire suppression equipment and machines.

The activities carried out by FMUs tend to focus on fire prevention. The dominant activities carried out are patrols, establishment of the MPA, and socialization activities. Many of the other fire prevention activities noted in Table 2, including fuel management, land preparation without burning, and firebreak management have not been extensively put into practice. Likewise, the capacity of FMUs limits their fire suppression to only the early stages, and none of the post-fire activities are carried out by FMUs.

A study in Riau [22] found that inadequate implementation of policies related to forest and land fire management by plantation and forestry companies (as the manager of forest and land at site level) was a factor in causing the repeated fires that continue every year. Key factors behind forest and land fires in Riau Province include (1) human resources, information, authority and facilities; (2) the attitude of policy implementers at higher levels; and (3) bureaucracy and organizational structure [22]. The importance of effective participation of stakeholders in forest fire management is critical in Indonesia, as has been found in Riau [22]. The importance of stakeholder participation is also found in the United States which has a very advanced and successful forest fire management system and the Chinese government which has begun to develop a forest fire management system [39]. As found in Spain, an important issue for the improvement of forest fire management is the effective participation of stakeholders [40]. As the stakeholder and forest manager at site level (state forest area) and operational organization on fire management, FMUs need adequate capacity and support to be able to implement forest fire regulations and management in order to prevent recurrent forest fires. Support for FMUs to be able to implement forest fire regulations and management especially around fire prevention, fire suppression and post-fire management are very important for preventing recurrent forest fires.

3.3. Capacity of FMU’s to Conduct Forest Fire Control

Inadequate resourcing (including personnel, infrastructure and budget) has been raised as an issue for implementation of FMU functions [13,41]. The specific resourcing for fire management in each of the five FMUs in our study is summarized in

Table 4. Human resources, facilities-infrastructure and budget dedicated to fire management by the five study FMUs.

Description	Central Kalimantan			South Sumatra
(Benchmark) *	Gerbang Barito	Kahayan Tengah	Kahayan Hilir	Sungai Lumpur-Riding	Lempuing-Mesuji
Human resources (at least 1 trained fire brigade with 15 members)	17 main personnel and 15 contract workers	2 fire brigades, each with 15 members. Noted as having a wide range of skills, but not many younger participants	20 personnel in total but only 7 active personnel, supported by a fire brigade from provincial government	8 main personnel, 6 contract foresters, 6 non-permanent workers and 1 support staff	15 main personnel
Infrastructure and facilities (**)	Support provided by provincial government but limited	Provincial government provides cars, and other fire suppression equipment	Support provided by provincial government but limited	Needs more infrastructure such as water transportation facilities, and operational cars	1 patrol car, 4 motorcycles, 4 units of brigade personnel equipment, 10 water pumps, 1 drone
Budget (Not available)	USD 98,500 (2020) supported by APBN (rehabilitation sharing fund)	USD 105,600 (2020) supported by APBN (rehabilitation sharing fund)	less than USD 7000	limited budget 2020: USD 4300 from central government budget, USD 7000 from provincial government budget	limited budget 2020: USD 6300 from central government budget, USD 10,500 from provincial government budget
Area (Ha)	155,701	3782,550	369,958	613,200	136,520

* The benchmark refers to MoEF Regulation 32/2016. ** at least: 1 fire truck, 1 water tank truck, 2 personnel/logistic transportation cars, 2 motorcycles, 6 water pumps with 50 hoses and 5 nozzles, 1 GPS, 1 mobile radio, 4 walkie talkies, and also fire hand-tools and safety clothes for each personnel.

. Fire management represents around 35–57% of the FMU staffing levels.

As shown in Table 4, resources are limited and variable across the five FMUs. To support its capacity to deliver on its stated functions, each FMU should be equipped with sufficient personnel. Specifically for fire prevention, each FMU is mandated to establish at least one fire brigade with 15 personnel. Based on Ministry of Environment and Forestry Regulation no P.32/2016, only two of the five FMUs studied had firefighting teams with the necessary personnel. Other FMUs are not quite there yet, but they do have personnel who can be assigned to temporarily assist with fire suppression. Furthermore, 20–30 fire personnel are inadequate to cover an area of more than 350,000 ha if fires occur in their area. Responsibility structures also need to be clarified so that fire control can be led by one organization.

Most FMUs have limited fire infrastructure and often have no infrastructure in some categories. Of the five study FMUs, four were equipped with operational vehicles (car, motorcycle) and fire equipment, but in insufficient numbers. This is despite Ministry of Environment and Forestry Regulation No. 32/2016 stating that each FMU should be provided with sufficient fire equipment/infrastructure consisting of personal and team equipment, fire and transportation vehicle, data and communication tools. This includes personal protective clothes, GPS, walkie talkies, mobile radio, fire water pump, hoses, nozzles, etc. To be more specific, in accordance with Ministry of Environment and Forestry Regulation No. 32/2016, each fire team with 15 personnel should be equipped with at least: 1 fire truck, 1 water tank truck, 2 personnel/logistic transportation cars, 2 motorcycles, 6 water pumps with 50 hoses and 5 nozzles, 1 GPS, 1 mobile radio, 4 walkie talkies, and also fire hand-tools and safety clothes for each personnel. None of the five studied FMUs have met this standard for fire equipment yet.

In regulation, budget allocation to support FMU implementation, including fire management activities, can be sourced from the state budget, regional budget and the reforestation-sharing fund. However, in practice, the regional budget allocation for FMUs is very limited, equating to approximately only USD 7000–10,500 per year or less. That allocation is utilized for delivering routine fire management activities such as socialization, fire patrol, area protection, and fire prevention. As an illustration, carrying out a 10-day integrated fire patrol that involves five personnel costs around USD 800. This implies that the annual budget of USD 10,500 can only cover 14 integrated fire patrols without delivering other fire management activities. Additionally, the implementation of extinguishing early small fires that involves 15 personnel for about 1–2 days requires USD 180–360, which means USD 10,500 can only support 29–57 early fire suppression events without conducting other activities.

Support from the state budget can be higher, but still minimal, equating to USD 7000–10,500 per year, and additionally, state budget support is not guaranteed every year. The Sungai Lumpur-Riding and Lempuing-Mesuji FMUs received national budget via Production Forest Management Agency Area V Palembang in 2018 and 2020. That element of the national budget is targeted towards fire prevention socialization, fire suppression and prevention, and delivering fire equipment grants, i.e., motorcycles, fire safety clothes, fire water pump and hoses.

The amounts allocated by the reforestation-sharing fund tended to give greatest support to FMUs located in Central Kalimantan. Provinces with greater forest resources (timber production), such as Central Kalimantan, receive a higher proportion of the sharing fund compared to provinces with less forest resources. This is because the revenue for the reforestation fund is a proportion of the timber production and utilization in each province.

It is apparent that most FMUs face insufficient resources to perform their designated tasks [17,20,42,43,44]. This strongly influences their performance in delivering on their roles and responsibilities [17,43], particularly for fire management [45].

3.4. FMUs’ Perceptions of Constraints on Forest Fire Control and Implications

Interviews and focus group discussions (FGDs) with respondents from the FMUs revealed that they were facing a number of internal and external challenges in managing the forest fire control activities (

Table 5. The constraints reported by FMUs in forest fire control. Establishment of each given activity by each of the FMUs is signified by a ‘√’.

Aspects	Gerbang Barito	Kahayan Tengah	Sungai Lumpur-Riding	Lempuing-Mesuji	Kahayan Hilir	Implications
Low competency and quantity of human resources	√	√	√	√	√	Fire control activities are insufficient
Limited budget and infrastructure	-	√	√	√	√	Fire control activities are insufficient
Complicated budget mechanism	√	√	-	√	√	Delays in financing FMU activities
Low awareness by the community	√	√	√	√	√	Inhibiting fire control
Poor accessibility/fire spots are out of reach	√	√	√	√	√	Difficult to handle even small fires
Unproductive land/peatland	√	√	√	√	√	Barrier to early fire suppression
Area under management is too great	√	√	√	√	√	Unsustainable forest management
Low water availability in dry season	NA	√	√	-	√	only small area of forest fires can be handled by FMU staff

). The challenges are related to the FMUs’ capacity to conduct fire management activities such as insufficient staffing, and a low level of training, limited budgets and infrastructure and complicated budget mechanisms. As well as these internal challenges, external challenges included low public awareness, poor accessibility to remote forest areas, unproductive peatlands, large areas to manage and limited water in the dry season.

The respondents from FMUs identified that low public awareness is a barrier for fire prevention because fire remains the most practical and inexpensive way to prepare the land, as well as to collect other natural resources such as fish, timber and for hunting. Human factors are hard to control, as there is a lack of efficient alternatives for clearing the land [46]. Communities in Riau had reduced burning but this was having a disproportionate effect on poorer farmers who had no suitable alternatives for land preparation, resulting in abandonment of the land and/or a reduction in their capacity to earn a living [47].

The source of funding for FMUs can be derived from the national budget and/or the provincial budget. The national budget comes through the relevant ministries/agencies such as MoEF, National Disaster Management Agency (BNPB), and the reforestation-sharing fund. The reforestation-sharing fund is sourced from the national budget that is allocated to the regions based on earnings from harvesting of natural forests, the returns from which are divided between the central government and producing regions [48,49]. Four of the five FMUs reported that their existing budget was insufficient to support the implementation of the duties and responsibilities of FMUs in controlling forest fires, even though additional funding sources have been made available through fiscal transfers from the central government in the form of a reforestation-sharing fund. This problem was particularly acute in the South Sumatra FMUs, as they only received around USD 10,500, compared to up to USD 105,400 in Central Kalimantan. The Reforestation sharing fund across the three FMUs in Central Kalimantan also provided assistance for Fire Care Community (MPA) groups.

However, the FMUs face challenges in trying to access the reforestation-sharing fund budget, because it is managed by the Provincial Government. Respondents reported that FMUs often face complex bureaucratic pathways to access the reforestation-sharing fund for implementing fire control, often resulting in delays in financing FMU activities or even for obtaining a relatively small quantum of budget. Saharjo [50] also found similar constraints faced two FMUs in Java. The financing gap that appears in forest fire control programs between the central and local governments has also been reported in other studies [1,17].

For effective fire control, accessibility to fire areas is critical. Several of the study FMUs reported facing limited accessibility, including Kahayan Tengah, Sungai Lumpur- Riding, Lempuing-Mesuji and Kahayan Hilir. Unproductive vacant land is often prone to fires because it is openly accessible to people looking for fish and birds, and who can accidentally (or purposefully) ignite fires. The limited resources of FMUs can cause difficulties in handling even small fires in difficult to access locations. To improve this situation FMUs need adequate infrastructure including vehicles and fire suppression equipment. Human access to forests and nearby habitats is a key determinant of the level of fire susceptibility, and can help to better understand areas of higher risk from human-caused fires [51]. Kahayan Tengah FMU also reported that water was difficult to obtain during the dry season, which is another potential barrier to early fire suppression.

Another major problem reported by FMUs was the low level of community participation and awareness in controlling forest fires. For example, small fires are sometimes not reported in Kahayan Tengah FMU because they depend on the FMU officer or the fire brigade from the regional MoEF office to extinguish the fire. Respondents from Gerbang Barito, Kahayan Hilir, Sungai Lumpur-Riding FMUs indicated similar low awareness issues. It is clear that effective forest management requires involvement of the local community, and schemes such as Community Based Forest Management should be better utilized to achieve sustainable forest management, including forest fire prevention and biodiversity protection [9,14,52].

While it is evident that FMUs face a number of challenges, all of the respondent FMUs strived to maintain adequate personnel to monitor work areas, conduct patrols and extinguish fires. Kahayan Tengah FMU suggested that the number of personnel could be increased through greater support from the Provincial Government. Meanwhile, Kahayan Hilir FMU noted that administrative staff are sometimes required to also serve on the fire brigade because of the large area that needs to be serviced and small number of staff. Kahayan Tengah and Kahayan Hilir have management areas over 100,000 ha so it is difficult for them to protect the entire area from the threat of forest fires on a skeleton staff.

As one of the strategies in fire management, it is necessary to balance the approach to suppression and prevention efforts to better manage fire risk in the long-term [53]. Prevention of forest fires is much more effective than suppression, and has become an emerging issue and global concern primarily due to the negative impact of forest fires on ecosystems, biodiversity, habitats, livelihoods and economies [54].

Given the limited staffing, some of the FMUs have sought to increase their capacity through partnerships. The Sungai Lumpur-Riding FMU carried out several initiatives to strengthen the capacity of the FMU, including: (i) cooperation with business license holders in the use of shared facilities to support fire control (building fire towers, extension, patrol, and others); (ii) coordination with the forestry disaster management task force at the district level with Fire Care Community in each village. Since most of the Sungai Lumpur-Riding FMU area has been managed by private corporations under the business permit for utilization of industrial timber forest products scheme, fire control activities are carried out in collaboration with business license holders who utilize forest areas. Similarly, Lempuing-Mesuji FMU in South Sumatra facilitates good relations between the company and the community through partnerships and patrols to control forest fires. They also collaborate with several institutions, namely: (i) Regional Peat Restoration Team of South Sumatra Province in peat wetting activities; (ii) Peatland Restoration Agency in the construction of canal blocks, drill wells, and the construction of demonstration plots for peat revegetation; (iii) Regional Disaster Management Agency, Fire Brigade, Army, and Police in joint preparedness and patrol activities; and (iv) the company in terms of cooperation in the fire control.

3.5. FMU Performance in Forest Fire Management Implementation

In this study, FMU performance of policy implementation on forest fire management was measured using two criteria how far the objectives (measures) were met and how well the policy was implemented. For the first criteria, Minister of Environment and Forestry Regulation No. 32/2016 clearly defines the scope of forest and land fire control including fire prevention, fire suppression and post fire (see Table 1). It is not open to multiple interpretations. The regulation includes specific measures such as the establishment of a forest fire control organization led directly by the FMU and the formation of a firefighting team equipped with the personnel and infrastructure required to carry out fire control operations. Furthermore, it is mandated that resources come from regional budgets, national budgets, and other non-binding legal sources, such as funding from other agencies for fires. The development partner institutions include civil society organizations, and bilateral and multilateral cooperation funds. The achievements of the measures regarding are still below the benchmark (see Table 4).

The second criteria for measuring the FMU’s performance in the forest fire management is how forest fire control activities are carried out. The FMUs have undertaken the following activities: establishment of fire brigades, fire prevention patrols, information dissemination, establishment of fire care community and early fire suppression as well as coordination with relevant agencies (see Table 3). Most of these activities are still below the existing need.

Regarding the establishment of a fire brigade at FMU, the number of members is still insufficient, or the members are understaffed, and many lack the necessary training and skills, while regulations require personnel to be trained and certified. Therefore, the fire prevention patrol is carried out within the constraints of the available budget, and not the entire area is covered, as well as the information dissemination activities. Regarding the fire care community, the FMUs are still working on the establishment of a fire care community in all fire-prone villages. Early fire suppression activities related to fire prevention patrols. The more frequent the patrols of fire prevention, the earlier fire suppression can be done to prevent larger fires from spreading.

The other criteria, the impact of the policy, are not applicable in this study. The impact of implementing forest fire control measures is proportional to the frequency of fires, as indicated by hotspots or the area burned. Both of these data could not be obtained at the time of the study.

Information on hotspots is available on the Ministry of Environment and Forestry’s website on a daily basis and can be used by anyone, including FMUs, to monitor hotspots in their area. FMU staff have used hotspots for monitoring and to target ground checks at locations suspected of having hotspots or fire incidents. However, FMU does not have a data management system for hotspots and burned areas. This is a limitation to its use at the FMU level, both for ease of use for identifying fire incidents and reporting changes due to FMU land management/community management practices or fire control implementation. Besides that, the measurement of the impact of forest and land fire policies based on the number of hotspots or burned areas cannot be claimed as solely due to the work of FMUs because there are many other actors are involved in forest fire control on the ground, including forest utilization permit holders and forest area users. As well, other government actors, such as Manggala Agni or the Regional Disaster Management Agency, also exercise control at the site level. For example, in the Kahayan Hilir area, there is also Manggala Agni from the Kapuas DAOPS or the Regional Disaster Management Agency who performs fire prevention and suppression activities.

Measuring FMU’s performance in forest fire management policy implementation using these two criteria reveals that limited resources, including budget, infrastructure, and personnel, appear to be barriers for FMUs to complete the tasks assigned. This implies that FMUs can only partially fulfill their objectives outlined in the forest fire management policy.

In terms of policy implementation, it is not only a lack of resources that is a barrier to policy implementation. The Indonesian central government is on its way to regaining its authority for forest administration and management through FMUs and social forestry programs which have implications for power struggles between national, provincial and district bureaucracies [55]. The others barriers to policy implementation are bureaucratic procedures [56], politics [57], administration [58] and unsynchronized regulations [48,59]. With the research method developed from this study, we did not proceed to the stage of analyzing other barriers to FMU’s implementation of forest fire management policy.

3.6. The Way Forward to Improve Capacity of FMUs on Forest Fire Management

While FMUs are tasked with a critical on-ground role in fire prevention and control in Indonesia, they are currently limited in their capacity to fulfill this. There is a clear need to increase the capacity of FMUs so that they can be more deeply engaged with fire management on the ground. It is required to strengthen the institutional capacity of FMUs, empowering the institutional capacity of FMUs and partnership of forest resources utilization to overcome the problem of low institutional capacity of FMUs [60]. There are parallels with the conceptual framework for capacity building in the health sector [61], such that FMU capacity could be improved through the three key aspects: personnel, organization and systems, all working together as parts of a single strategic approach.

On the personnel side, FMUs source their staff from the Provincial Forestry Agency, who are typically more familiar with public service administration rather than forest management, but coming into an FMU, they should have an increased focus on comprehensive forest management, including forest fire control. They should also more closely engage and empower the community in conducting fire prevention activities. Therefore, a stronger focus needs to be placed on training and education of FMU personnel to build their capacity in forest fire control and community engagement.

At the organizational level, capacity building needs to focus on improving organizational strategic planning, financial management, information management, logistical and infrastructure systems, communication networks and human resource development and management. Funding should be more secure and sufficient to allow FMUs to adequately implement the relevant policies. Currently financial management depends strongly on Provincial Forestry Agency governance, which is heavily focused on administration and can impede the execution of field activities or fire prevention activities. Regarding the limited budget, this capacity building can be accomplished through government funding, business license holders or international cooperation. International assistance is already available in Indonesia. The German government, through the German company Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit GmbH (GIZ), is the most powerful actor behind FMUs in Indonesia [55].

As a policy facilitator for MoEF, FMUs have an opportunity for a more stable budget situation by engaging in the implementation of MoEF programs. For instance, MoEF supports a social forestry program that can empower communities to manage forest areas, so that abandoned areas can be transformed into productive land and become community assets that also have a lower risk of fire because they are under management. FMUs should be in the strongest position to work with MoEF to develop and deliver long-term forest management plans with the community. Additionally, while human resources are currently provided by the provincial forestry agency, the central government could also provide greater support in this area, noting that MoEF Regulation no P.08/2021 explicitly states that both central and regional levels of government have responsibility for providing resources to FMUs.

Finally, there is an opportunity for FMUs to work more closely with Manggala Agni to improve fire management governance and coordination. Manggala Agni is the operational fire brigade coordinated by MoEF at the central level, and at the regional/provincial level, and by Daops Manggala Agni (Daops MA) at the site level. Manggala Agni and Daops MA were established in 2002 with primary responsibility for fire suppression in conservation forests, but their role was expanded in 2016 to cover the entire forest and land areas. Currently, 34 Daops MA have been established, with a minimum of two fire brigade teams in each. Daops MA is well equipped with fire suppression infrastructure, consisting of fire vehicles (cars, motorcycles), fire equipment and machinery, information technology for identifying hotspots and fire incidents. Additionally, Daops MA also works with communities on fire prevention activities in villages that have been identified as being fire prone. Villages are classified as fire prone based on a range of factors, including hotspot distribution, peat distribution, land cover, forest area, elevation, slope, distance to river, distance to road, distance to forest and land concessionaires, and historical fires. Those fire-prone villages are also located within the area managed by FMU.

Strengthening collaboration between FMUs and Daops MA could be one mechanism for improving fire control at the system level. Collaboration between some FMUs and Daops MA has started, for example in the implementation of fire prevention and suppression patrols. Given the current resourcing constraints, fire management in Indonesia may be more efficient if FMUs focus their efforts on forest fire prevention activities and Daops MA have the primary responsibility for fire suppression. Regarding the need for collaboration in fire management, Presidential Instruction No. 16/2011 (Improvement of Forest and Land Fire Management) noted that more than 25 government institutions were required to collaborate together in combating forest fire incidents. The collaboration of various entities on fire prevention also requires intense coordination and cooperation on distribution of responsibilities so that they can complement and support each other [62].

4. Conclusions

The forest fire management policy implemented by the FMUs is identified through central government regulation. Forest fire control is only part of the forest management activities assigned to FMUs. The FMUs in our study carried out forest fire management as mandated, but their performance in implementation was poor because FMUs can only partially meet the policy objectives. Limited resources, including budget, infrastructure and personnel, appear to be barriers for FMUs to complete the tasks assigned. Additionally, there are other actors representing the central government with sufficient resources to control forest fires. It seems that there are other factors such as political, bureaucratic and administrative barriers. The central government and regional governments are responsible for strengthening the capacity of FMUs.

The capacity of FMUs can be strengthened through a focus on improvement of personnel, organization and systems. Capacity building at the system level requires commitment from both the provincial and central government, which is responsible for the establishment and development of FMUs. FMUs have a clear role in working with communities to improve forest fire prevention efforts, particularly in the development of social forestry programs to increase their value as community assets and help protect them from fires. Communities will benefit if forests are managed properly and protected from fires.

As there are multiple actors tasked with controlling forest fires on the ground, it is necessary to clarify the line of responsibility as this will help each organization to understand and respond within the given limits. A review of the responsibilities of FMUs is needed to determine whether they should retain responsibility for suppressing forest fires. There is also a need for a broader review of the roles and interactions between the many government agencies responsible for forest fire control to better understand how to clarify roles and responsibilities and ensure that they are adequately resourced at the site level.