Migration connects land use in areas of origin with areas of new residence, impacting both through individual, gendered choices on the use of land, labor, and knowledge. Synthesizing across two case studies in Indonesia, we focus on five aspects: (i) conditions within the community of origin linked to the reason for people to venture elsewhere, temporarily or permanently; (ii) the changes in the receiving community and its environment, generally in rural areas with lower human population density; (iii) the effect of migration on land use and livelihoods in the areas of origin; (iv) the dynamics of migrants returning with different levels of success; and (v) interactions of migrants in all four aspects with government and other stakeholders of development policies. In-depth interviews and focus group discussions in the study areas showed how decisions vary with gender and age, between individuals, households, and groups of households joining after signs of success. Most of the decision making is linked to perceived poverty, natural resource and land competition, and emergencies, such as natural disasters or increased human conflicts. People returning successfully may help to rebuild the village and its agricultural and agroforestry systems and can invest in social capital (mosques, healthcare, schools).

Rural landscapes in many parts of Indonesia are rapidly being transformed, due to the expansion of agrocommodity plantations—oil palm in particular. At the same time, communities in those landscapes face declining crop yields and ecosystem degradation as a result of both climate and non-climate factors. We assessed local perceptions on climate stressors, adaptation and vulnerability using focus group discussions in Ketapang, West Kalimantan. We found that the main perceived climatic stressors were extreme and unpredictable seasons, fires, and saltwater intrusion, affecting ecosystem services and agricultural production. Land clearing and forest loss were mentioned as exacerbating non-climatic stressors. Respondents indicated willingness to adapt to these changes by investing in long-term measures, such as tree-planting. To adapt to yield declines, respondents indicated that many farmers shifted from rubber to oil palm. Such adaptation actions benefit households in the short term but may be at odds with long-term adaptation objectives at the landscape level. Finally, we found that perceptions about vulnerability differed between landscapes, and between communities at the landscape level and stakeholders at the district level. This stresses the importance of participatory and inclusive planning and multi-stakeholder processes towards context-based climate action planning to accommodate the differences in contexts and scale, and to reconcile the differences in perceptions.

Tripa is the last remaining peat-swamp forest that harbours a potentially viable Sumatran orangutan (Pongo abelii) sub-population in a formally but not effectively protected area. It appears to be a simple showcase where current efforts to financially support reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+) converge with biodiversity and social co-benefits. In practice, however, situation is more complex. REDD+ efforts interact with global palm oil trade and regulatory approaches (the moratorium) to achieve national goals for emissions reduction under umbrella of nationally appropriate mitigation actions (NAMA). To contextualize this debate, we assessed (i) land-use history and formal basis of palm-oil companies’ rights; (ii) carbon (C) stocks, historical emission levels and potential emissions that can be avoided; (iii) economic benefits of land-use options and opportunity costs of avoiding emissions; (iv) biodiversity and environmental services; and (v) alternative options for “high C stock development” and employment generation. Natural forest cover declined (54 % in 1995, 18 % in 2009) while oil palm increased 4–39 %. Aboveground C stocks decreased from 148 Mg ha⁻¹ in 1990 to 61 Mg ha⁻¹ in 2009, leading to average annual emissions of 14.5 Mg (carbon dioxide) CO₂e ha⁻¹ year⁻¹. While 41 % of these emissions yield less than American Dollar (USD) 5 of current economic benefits per Mg CO₂e emitted and might be compensated by REDD+, nearly all new emissions derive from a breach of existing laws, regulations and voluntary palm-oil standards. Substantial investment in alternative employment is needed, rather than carbon payments per se, to support livelihoods in a low carbon emissions economy.