Hello friends! (:
This week, we will be talking about the potential loss of biodiversity in the new capital
Bornean orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus) are endemic to the island of Borneo in Indonesia. Sadly, the species, which is illustrated in the picture above, has been reduced by half since 1999 and according to the International Union for Conservation of Nature, the Bornean orangutan is critically endangered.
The figure above, provided by the Kontinentalist who delivered the content about the impact of the relocation of the capital to the environment, is visually effective in illustrating the pressure that people will put on due to the relocation. Personally, I believe that because of this, the relocation of capital will eventually reduce the population of the orangutans.
Other than that, the new capital city is going to be located in Penajam Paser Utara and Kutai Kartanegara; which are located near two river systems: Balikpapan bay and the Mahakam river. These two rivers, as shown in the map above, are home to the critically endangered Siamese crocodiles, and the endangered Irrawady Dolphins. Personally, I am afraid that if we relocate the capital, there will be a higher chance of river pollution, such as the one seen in Jakarta where 13 rivers are very polluted. If the dumping of sewage or waste is unregulated, this can potentially cause an irreversible loss of marine biodiversity.
So, considering the potential pressure to the animals and environment, should the government relocate the capital?
If the answer is no, that does not mean the government do not need to take care of the urban wildlife in Jakarta. Many residents in Jakarta are still not aware of the importance of biodiversity and wildlife. Residents of Pantai Indah Kapuk, North Jakarta, for example, pressurised the authority to get rid of the Monkeys because they are being a nuisance. Yet, the government should instead spark conversation about the importance of biodiversity and wildlife reserve in the capital and protect the flora and fauna of the city.
If the answer is yes, the government need to make a conscious effort to do conservation. For example, they can partner with organisations like the Nature Conservancy or Canopy Ecology, pioneered by Dr Meg Lowman (who shared her inspirational story to Tembusu residents during one of the students’ tea, by the way!). By doing this, more people can witness and learn more about the rich biodiversity that Kalimantan has first-hand and will be more galvanised to conserve it.
Cr : Dennis Tan ( with permission )
This needs to be done as soon as possible because the biodiversity crisis is a more serious threat compared to climate change. It is because the impact of climate change can still be “reversed” even if it takes billions of years. Yet, once one species become extinct, there is no way to revive it back to life. The government could also craft a policy that ensures that no forest will be disturbed. Or maybe, should they consider not relocating the capital at all? What do you think? Let me know in the comment!
Thank you!
Hey Sherry! OMG we look great in Dennis’s picture btw <3
This balance of human needs and bioD conservation has been such a hot topic in class and it’s really refreshing to learn about it in the context of Indonesia. I was wondering in what ways can the government balance this struggle during its relocation. Considering the fact that it is the capital of Indonesia, this would imply that there would be great amounts of human traffic and activities. How then will conservation be taken into account?
Hi Chuanny yesss haha <3 Thanks for coming here!
I believe that it is rather difficult to answer this question since I have no experience working as government officials and hence, I am not able to understand the things that they consider during their decision-making processes. However, as a local, I believe that they are able to restrict the development of residential areas, industrial areas, or agricultural areas near these vulnerable areas. Perhaps, they could also even limit the rate of people migrating into the city to prevent overpopulation or urban sprawl, which could increase demand and put pressure in the area. Thanks!
Sher
Hi Sherry!
This was a great read! Thanks for shedding some light on the potential conflict with biodiversity brought about by a relocation of the capital. Personally, I think that as long as relocation takes place, even with extensive conservation efforts in place, there will be some inevitable damage to biodiversity. Conversion of natural land to urbanized ones, and the daily activities needed to support livelihoods are likely to have impacts on nearby ecosystems no matter what, and this is especially crucial for Indonesia, considering the tropics are one of the most biodiverse places on Earth. Perhaps another glaring issue (I’m not sure if this is really relevant) is the issue of illegal deforestation, which is rather rampant in Indonesia as well. Will shifting the capital open up more opportunities for illegal deforestation to occur, and what could be done? Of course, I understand that this might be a huge question, so no need for a super elaborate answer; just wanna know your thoughts on it.
Cheers!!
Jeng Wei
Hi Jeng Wei! Glad that you enjoyed reading this post! I agree with you! and yes, illegal deforestation is still happening even now ): However, on the contrary, I personally think that the deforestation would be more regulated. I know that it is a rather unorthodox view but I guess since the government is living near the area, they can experience the negative environmental impact first hand and put stricter regulations! But again, I would not know for sure so I could not give a definite answer for now!
Hey Sherry!
Thanks for the reply! That is indeed a unique perspective, I’ve never thought about it from that point of view! I guess all we can do now is to see how the situation unfolds, and whether or not the government decides to strengthen its regulations. Looking forward to your future posts!
Cheers!
Jeng Wei