Laurance et al. (2015) raise important concerns about minimizing environmental impacts of future infrastructural expansion. This is achieved through the exploration of nine issues that project proponents should consider when planning such developments (Laurance et al., 2015). In response to the study I will be analysing their points through an important spatial use plan that is still under review and suggesting other means of mitigating environmental effects when Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) do not suffice.
A natural extension of Laurance et al.’s suggestions would be to consider a proposed infrastructural project that would benefit from the acknowledgement of their recommendations. In Indonesia, the current Aceh provincial government development plans involve the construction of major paved roads through Gunung Leuser Ecosystem (Caro et al., 2014). The plans are causing controversy due to the official protection of The Leuser ecosystem as a National Park (van Beukering et al, 2003) and the ecosystems place in the Tropical Rainforest Heritage of Sumatra World Heritage site (Caro et al., 2014). The plan was first proposed in 2013 and allocates large expanses of forest for clearance and industrial development as well as the construction of numerous new roads with the expansion of the Ladia Galaska road scheme (Clements et al., 2014). This is concerning for the Leuser ecosystem as predictive models have shown that forest areas in close proximity to roads in Aceh are particularly vulnerable to deforestation. This highlights the “avoid the first cut” issue put forward by Laurance et al. (2015). In Aceh, if they could indeed “avoid the first cut” from road developments then they would evade a predicted 40% increase in areas at high risk of deforestation (Clements et al., 2014).
In relation to this, Laurence et al. (2015) highlight the need to conduct EIAs prior to project approval. This would seek to acknowledge not only the primary effects but also secondary and tertiary effects of road construction, such as the increased vulnerability to deforestation. However, according to Clements et al. (2014), these assessments hold little weight in the rural communities of Aceh. EIAs are not mandatory there and even when conducted, they have little success in deterring road construction. In the case of the Ladia Galaska scheme, the majority of the proposed roads have not undergone EIAs and those that have, ignored regulations regardless (Clements et al., 2014) EIAs are an important element to the screening of potential impacts of a project but this example highlights how they cannot be considered in isolation. For instance, the people of Aceh largely support the Ladia Galaska road scheme because it would provide vast improvements to their intra-provincial transport efficiency (namely for palm oil (Gaveau et al., 2009)). This creates a clash of interests, which complicates the issue. To focus solely on the environmental impacts as Laurance et al. (2015) have done, is too narrow minded to make any progress. In the case of the Aceh provincial plan, EIAs have not proven to be enough to tackle the powerful socio-economic influences which now control project approval (Clements et al., 2014). Impact assessments need to consider biological, social and economic tradeoffs, even for minor roads at local scales, (Protected Areas and Development Partnership and International Centre for Environmental Management, 2003) in order to achieve a balanced, sustainable outcome for all stakeholders.
These socio-political influences are serving as a great barrier to any efforts at mitigating environmental effects (Clements et al., 2014). In cases like this, where infrastructural development seems inevitable, in spite of EIA recommendations, there are other potential strategies which Laurance et al. (2015) have neglected to touch upon. Compensation schemes such as Inter-governmental REDD (Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation) can effectively minimize the need for proposed roads. For example, the Norway-Indonesia pact made substantial progress in halting the construction of logging roads through natural forests and peat swamps (Clements et al., 2010). However, if road construction must go ahead, then there are also possible offset mechanisms such as payment for ecosystems services (PES), which involves using compensation as a means of changing behavior that would otherwise lead to environmental damage. Incentives are created to reconcile conflicting motives and align interests in the management of natural resources (Muradian et al., 2010). For instance, in Lao PDR, an area in Nakai-Nam Theun Protected Area was submerged by a hydro-electric dam project and this was offset through the creation of a $31.5 million management authority (Clements et al., 2014).
The recommendations put forward by Laurance et al. (2015) have a lot of value in the process of mediating negative environmental impacts of infrastructural projects. However, as can be seen in the active case of the proposed Aceh Spatial Plan, the implementation of such recommendations is not always so straight forward. Conservation professionals need to take a more progressive approach towards environmental protection efforts and acknowledge the strong role that socio-political factors play in decision-making so that more balanced and realistic outcomes can be achieved.