The increasing need for forest resources and cultivated land requires a solution in forest management to realize sustainable land use. Smart agroforestry (SAF) is a set of agriculture and silviculture knowledge and practices that is aimed at not only increasing profits and resilience for farmers but also improving environmental parameters, including climate change mitigation and adaptation, biodiversity enhancement, and soil and water conservation, while assuring sustainable landscape management. SAF, a solution for land management systems to reduce the rate of deforestation, is a smart effort to overcome the food crisis and mitigate climate change that is prospectively applied mainly in the social forestry area. Optimized forest land utilization could be achieved by implementing SAF and applying silvicultural and crop cultivation techniques to optimize productivity and meet sustainability and adaptability goals. This paper reviews the existing conditions, opportunities, and challenges in the mainstreaming of SAF in social forestry implementation to support the Sustainable Development Goals in Indonesia. Mainstreaming SAF should include policy innovation and regulation implementation, the use of appropriate technology, and compromises or trade-offs among benefits, risks, and resources. SAF is a strategy to revive the rural economy and community prosperity through the optimal use of local resources as well as a form of smart landscape and land-use management that has significant roles in soil and water conservation, bioenergy, climate change responses, and enhanced biodiversity conservation.

Climate change is a major challenge for Indonesia due to its impact on food, water, energy sustainability, and environmental health. Almost all Indonesian regions are exposed to floods, landslides, soil erosion, drought, and heavy rains. In response to these challenges, the Government of Indonesia has determined integrated watershed management (IWM) to be one of the key programs to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, as stated in the updated Indonesian nationally determined contribution (NDC). This paper intends to review Indonesia′s efforts in mitigating and adapting to climate change through an IWM approach, and its attempts to realize a decent life and environment for all communities. Improvement of the IWM can be conducted by strengthening the synergy between the responsible institutions for watershed management and the responsible institutions for handling mitigation and adaptation of climate change impacts. In addition, it is important to prioritize coordination, participation, and collaboration not only at the national government level but also at the international level, since numerous problems may exist in the transboundary between countries, and finding solutions should involve planning, implementation, monitoring, and evaluation. Implementing the micro watershed model (MWM), supported by culture, local wisdom, and traditional knowledge in communities, can be used to improve the current IWM.

This paper provides an overview of the implementation and obstacles of watershed management, and the alternative solutions based on a synoptic review of related studies and experiences across Indonesia. The review found that problems in the institutional aspect were hierarchical confusion, discrepancy, and asynchrony among regulations, and weak (participation, synchronization, and coordination) among watershed management stakeholders. The weaknesses in the planning stage are integration among sectors, a lack of community participation, and limited readiness to integrate watershed planning into regional planning. Stakeholders’ involvement is also a critical factor in successful implementation of degraded watershed rehabilitation, including in peatland and mangrove areas. Failure should be minimized by providing adequate information on degraded watershed characteristics, appropriate species choices, and effective mechanical construction for soil and water conservation. Community participation as the main factor in driving watershed management should be achieved by strengthening public awareness of the importance of a sustainable watershed and providing access for the community to be involved in each stage of watershed management. Another problem is data gaps which are essential to address from the planning to evaluation stages. The gaps can be bridged by using remotely sensed data and by applying hydrological-based simulation models. Simplified criteria for watershed assessment may also be required, depending on site-specific issues and the watershed scale.

Tropical peatlands are fragile ecosystems with an important role in conserving biodiversity, water quality and availability, preventing floods, soil intrusion, erosion and sedimentation, and providing a livelihood for people. However, due to illegal logging, fire and conversion into other land use, the peatlands in Indonesia are under serious threat. Efforts to restore Indonesia’s tropical peatlands have been accelerated by the establishment of the Peatland Restoration Agency in early 2016. The restoration action policy includes the rewetting, revegetation and revitalisation of local livelihood (known as the 3Rs). This paper summarises the regulatory, institutional and planning aspects of peatland restoration, in addition to the implementation of the 3Rs in Indonesia, including failures, success stories, and the criteria and indicators for the success of peatland restoration.

Indonesia has the second-largest biodiversity of any country in the world. Deforestation and forest degradation have caused a range of environmental issues, including habitat degradation and loss of biodiversity, deterioration of water quality and quantity, air pollution, and increased greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to climate change. Forest restoration at the landscape level has been conducted to balance ecological integrity and human well-being. Forest restoration efforts are also aimed at reducing CO₂ emissions and are closely related to Indonesia’s Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) from the forestry sector. The purpose of this paper is to examine the regulatory, institutional, and policy aspects of forest restoration in Indonesia, as well as the implementation of forest restoration activities in the country. The article was written using a synoptic review approach to Forest Landscape Restoration (FLR)-related articles and national experiences. Failures, success stories, and criteria and indicators for forest restoration success are all discussed. We also discuss the latest silvicultural techniques for the success of the forest restoration program. Restoration governance in Indonesia has focused on the wetland ecosystem such as peatlands and mangroves, but due to the severely degraded condition of many forests, the government has by necessity opted for active restoration involving the planting and establishment of livelihood options. The government has adapted its restoration approach from the early focus on ecological restoration to more forest landscape restoration, which recognizes that involving the local community in restoration activities is critical for the success of forest restoration.

With 120 million hectares of forest area, Indonesia has the third largest area of biodiversity-rich tropical forests in the world, and it is well-known as a mega-biodiversity country. However, in 2020, only 70 percent of this area remained forested. The government has consistently undertaken corrective actions to achieve Sustainable Development Goal targets, with a special focus on Goals #1 (no poverty), #2 (zero hunger), #3 (good health and well-being), #7 (affordable and clean energy), #8 (decent work and economic growth), #13 (climate action), and #15 (life on land). Good environmental governance is a core concept in Indonesia’s forest management and includes mainstreaming ecosystem services as a framework for sustainable forest management. This paper analyzes efforts to mainstream Indonesia’s remaining forest ecosystem services. We review the state of Indonesia’s forests in relation to deforestation dynamics, climate change, and ecosystem service potential and options and provide recommendations for mainstreaming strategies regarding aspects of policy, planning, and implementation, as well as the process of the articulation of ecosystem services and their alternative funding.