The Corals and Orangutan of Southeast Asia – Biodiversity conservation in Singapore and Indonesia

Submitted in 2023 in fulfilment of the requirements of the Masters of Science (Global Environment & Sustainability) at Birkbeck, University of London.

9/3/202415 min read

brown monkey lying on green grass during daytime
brown monkey lying on green grass during daytime

I. OVERVIEW

In this essay, I discuss two biodiversity conservation interventions – a state- and corporation-led coral nursey and man-made reef in Singapore; and a community-based conservation program by Tangkahan village in Sumatra (Purwoko et al 2021a).

Part II outlines the context, key features, and leading actors of each intervention. A comparison of both interventions, including their environmental and social impacts, is set out in Part III. In Part IV, I assess and evaluate both interventions from the perspectives of effectiveness and equity, as influenced by scale and actors. Finally, Part V discusses potential applications of the above in academia, policy, and practice.

II. CASE STUDIES

Singapore

With rapid coastal development and seawall construction, as Singapore increased its land area by almost 40% in just 60 years, Singapore’s coral reefs shrank by two thirds (Ng and Chou 2017). As part of Singapore’s Southern Islands conservation strategy, in 2007, the National Parks Board (“NParks”) and National University of Singapore established a coral nursery at Pulau Semakau, an island which also houses the country’s only offshore landfill (NParks 2022; MSE 2020; Connolly and Muzaini 2022). The project sought to cultivate ‘corals of opportunity’, affixing coral samples onto raised structures (Ng and Chou 2017).

In 2015, parties transplanted over 700 coral colonies from Semakau to manmade reefs in the Sisters’ Islands Marine Park (“SIMP”) (AsiaOne 2015).

Both initiatives are/were led by industry (the Keppel Group and others) and government (NParks, the National Environment Agency (“NEA”), and JTC Corporation (“JTC”) which is a statutory board (Singapore Infopedia 2004).

Indonesia

Indonesian orangutan are threatened with deforestation, habitat deterioration, and unlawful hunting and trading (Purwoko et al 2022b). Deforestation in Indonesia skyrocketed between the 1970s and 2015 due to international demand for timber and oil palm, population growth, and foreign investment (Tsujino et al 2016). Sumatran forests have experienced the world’s most rapid transformation (Supriatno and Ario 2015), exacerbated by drought and forest fires (Tsujino et al 2016), leaving the Sumatran orangutan (Pongo abelii) with a swiftly shrinking range. As Sumatran forests shrank by over 12% in the decade after 2009, Sumatran orangutan were compelled to venture beyond their natural range, increasing orangutan-human conflicts (Purwoko et al 2022b). The population of Sumatran orangutan has thus fallen steadily, and they “could become the first great ape species to go extinct” (Wich et al 2008:329).

Over two thirds of Sumatra’s mammals, including the Sumatran orangutan, live in North Sumatra’s Gunung Leuser National Park (“GLNP”) (Purwoko et al 2021a).

Within the GLNP buffer zone lies the Tangkahan village and ecotourism area, bounded by private palm oil plantations (Purwoko et al 2021a). Locals previously reliant on illegal logging (Purwoko et al 2022a) shifted their perspectives after a 2003 flash flood – aggravated by deforestation – destroyed nearby of Bukit Lawang (Nielsson et al 2016), causing over 85 deaths and leaving 120 people unaccounted for (CBS 2003).

Local park authorities and the local Tangkahan Ecotourism Community (“TEC”) group (formerly Lembaga Pariwisata Tangkahan (“LPT”) lead the project, supported by non-governmental organizations (Wiratno et al 2022).

Selection Rationale

Despite both being situated in tropical Southeast Asia, these case studies exhibit tremendous differences in conservation design in the actors initiating and implementing the interventions, and their underlying methodology.

III. COMPARISON

The environmental impacts of the Singapore coral projects appear to be beneficial. Generally, while coral reefs provide inter alia habitats, sustenance, income, defence, biodiversity (UNEP), Singapore’s coral reefs are the habitats of vulnerable marine species including reef fish, sea sponges, seahorses, and clams (ST 2023). Coral presence in the Southern Islands could encourage water filtration and improve water quality (UNEP; IADB 2017), particularly pollution from the Semakau landfill or marine traffic, given that Singapore’s territorial waters are predominantly utilised in port management (Ng et al 2013). The installation of the SIMP structures is also said to cause minimal ecological consequences given that they “sit on the seabed without piling or major works that would otherwise disturb the underwater environment” (JTC 2018).

The direct environmental benefits in Tangkahan are clear – amongst others, much reduced rates of deforestation and illegal logging have led to richer vegetation cover (Wiratno et al 2022; Situmorang and Hussain 2022) and the protection of the GLNP’s many biologically diverse species. Collateral environmental impacts, however, are mixed. While biodiversity conservation assures continued ecosystem services and increase the general quality of life for human and non-humans, rising numbers of ecotourists – and ancillary goods, services, and infrastructure – may raise concerns. In 2019, Tangkahan’s international tourists alone exceeded 31,000 (Purwoko et al 2021a). Increased visitation and development have been associated with habitat damage and destruction due to construction, human litter and waste, and indirect pollution by chemicals, lights, and sounds (Purwoko et al 2022b). TEC’s strategy to mitigate any such negative influences is unclear and could merit further study.

From the environmental perspective, the apparent success of the Singapore case study illustrates the textbook “techno-managerial nature of spatial planning in Singapore, which has been dominated largely by politicians and statutory boards,” (Connolly and Muzaini 2022:2182), harnessing expertise and political and financial backing to effect desired and scientifically efficacious conservation outcomes. However, coral cultivation and transplantation and use of artificial reefs addresses the symptoms of marine habitat degradation (i.e. greater sedimentation, reduced visibility underwater, and movement of debris by currents (Ng and Chou 2017)) but not necessarily its causes (i.e. coastal development, which continues unabated). This contrasts against Tangkahan, which has achieved positive results by tackling the root cause of habitat loss, being deforestation by reason of illegal logging, not by the deployment of technological mastery, but by the transformation of local mindsets and the mobilization and sharing of existing resources and capabilities.

The Singapore example exhibits equivocal results in terms of social impacts. On one hand, the Southern Islands strategy, as promoted by industry and government, including in parliament (Lee 2023), has possibly increased public awareness of the fragility of Singapore’s marine ecosystem and the importance of reef conservation. However, given Singapore’s largely urban landscape coupled with year-round high temperatures and humidity, community engagement with nature and conservation can be said to be limited. A 2020 survey of 1,000 residents revealed low rates of visitation to or activity in natural and outdoor spaces, which may correlate with a low “likelihood of engaging in environmentally-conscious behaviour” (Richards et al 2020:11).

Land use pressure arising from Singapore’s small land area and one of the highest global population densities has been cited as a reason for the central role of land use planning - primarily through law and government - in conservation planning, with public support and consultation (Chan et al 2010). Both the Semakau and SIMP projects were driven by government and supported by government and industry. The Semakau nursey was funded by the Keppel Group) (including S$250,000.00 for research (ASCEP 2015)), with assistance from the NEA (NParks 2022). Qualified divers donated their time toward maintaining and observing the progress of the nubbins (Ng and Chou 2017); notably, however, as of 2008, most of the divers were enlisted by Keppel, the majority being Keppel employees (Keppel O&M 2008). As for the SIMP project, it forms part of the ‘Grow-a-Reef-Garden’ initiative (ST 2018), whose leading collaborative actors are JTC and NParks, with 11 other companies committing S$290,000.000 in total (ST 2018). Two non-governmental partners – the St John’s Island National Laboratory and the Friends of Marine Park – were involved (ST 2023).

There is resounding consensus on the bountiful positive social-economic impacts of the Tangkahan intervention especially in terms of community engagement and economic prospects. Ecotourism in Tangkahan was initiated by GLNP management and the TEC), in which parties agreed to operate the ecotourism area as partners (Purwoko et al 2021b) and split the entry fee to the GLNP (Situmorang and Hussain 2022). After the Bukit Lawang disaster, the then-LPT not only managed to stop all illegal logging, but now also oversees small-scale elephant- and orangutan-ecotourism and patrols more than 17,000ha of the GLNP (Nielsson et al 2016). With additional income from ecotourism, the community now enjoys easier access to resources and opportunities. In 2019, visitors to Tangkahan spent approximately USD1.3 million collectively (Wiratno et al 2022). Tangkahan wildlife ecotourism has resulted in enhanced economic and social prospects for local residents, raising income levels, improving access to hygiene and shelter, and connecting the community with the worlds of academia and business (Situmorang and Hussain 2022). Some commentators suggest that ecotourism ameliorates poverty, conserves culture, and builds awareness amongst tourists of environmental issues (Siregar et al 2022). Indeed, as a multiple award-winning model of ecotourism and conservation (Wiratno et al 2022), Tangkahan’s “community-based collaborative ecotourism management” (Purwoko et al 2022b:13) has been cited as a leading example of how to generate communal benefits-sharing, earmark profits for operational use, and cooperate with various relevant stakeholders (Purwoko et al 2022b).

The social impacts of the two interventions differ vastly. In Tangkahan, social and financial advantages abound from the individual level as is fitting for a ground-up community-led endeavour. The lack of grassroots involvement in the Singapore model may perhaps be indicative of a consistent top-down, prescriptivist, and corporativist approach to conservation with modest (if any) social impacts on individuals and communities, which – if true and if perpetuated – may well engender further public disconnect from nature, conservation, and broader environmental issues.

IV. DISCUSSION

There have been positive ecological conservation outcomes in the Singapore example on the basis that transplants have been numerous and successful. The SIMP artificial reefs have displayed good progress in natural coral settlement and have attracted a range of diverse fish (ST 2022), with 85% of transplanted nubbins surviving the move (UN DESA 2022). Ecological effectiveness can be argued in Tangkahan itself given the preservation of the Sumatran orangutan’s habitat in the GNLP as seen above (albeit arguably not an explicit objective at the time of design). However, overall, they remain Critically Endangered (IUCN 2017) – their population fell from approximately 85,000 in Sumatra in 1900 to 6,600 in 2017 worldwied (Wiratno et al 2022).

The ecological success of the Singapore example can be attributed to the monetary, political, and scientific support rendered by large corporations, government, and academia. Conversely, Tangkahan’s positive habitat conservation outcomes are driven by strong leadership, ownership, and buy-in by local residents, buttressed by aid from local authorities.

The definition of equity should embrace not only monetary burdens and benefits but also consider distribution, procedure, and recognition (Dawson et al 2017). This involves examining the modes by which plans and decisions are formed, the persons and entities involved in the process, and the interests and concerns which are prioritized.

It is arguable that the Singapore case study is evocative of a long history of exclusion; first, active non-recognition of the concerns of Indigenous peoples and islanders, and second, passive and perhaps acquiescent non-recognition of a population which has become on the whole detached from nature. The Semakau nursery and SIMP per se do not generate direct social impacts on their host islands, but they - and other projects on Singapore's offshore islands - are built on a foundation of post-independence relocation of Indigenous and Malay communities (Connolly and Muzaini 2022). Before 1990, when Semakau was converted into a landfill and an adjacent island was absorbed during reclamation, both islands had been home to hundreds of village islanders, many of Indigenous descent; a petition to conserve the islands and their culture and relocate the landfill failed for cost reasons (Connolly and Muzaini 2022). At the time of the Semakau and SIMP interventions, the Sisters’ Islands were uninhabited by humans, and former residents of Sisters’ Islands have not been permitted to resume living there (Connolly and Muzaini 2022). As noted in Section III, one may reasonably propose that from the equity perspective, whether by historical design or current legacy, there is a suggestion of a hollowness in an environmental victory achieved without the will or participation by local folk.

As for Tangkahan, it is possible that only residents who are able to participate in ecotourism may reap the benefits of the program. The elderly or infirm, or those who are unable to work, to converse with domestic or international tourists (whether by reason of language or other impediment or personal choice), or otherwise to find employment in ecotourism, may face exclusion and marginalization. There may therefore be scope to explore whether the Tangkahan model offers opportunities or a safety net for such community members.

In pursuing social justice, and furthering Dawson et al (2017)’s component of recognition, the “equality, need, and desert” (Vucetich et al 2018:23) of non-human actors must be prioritised; further, human interests may be curtailed except where it would be unjust to do so, and if so, all reasonable endeavours ought to be taken to ameliorate and ultimately remove such injustice (Vucetich et al 2018). In Tangkahan, the trade-off between the interests of human and non-humans was managed by ensuring that locals’ loss of livelihoods from forest resources was offset by ecotourism income and GLNP entrance fees. Ecotourism could be one pathway toward harmonizing in orangutan-human interactions; generally by the establishment of strong institutions protecting orangutan numbers, upholding social acceptability, ensuring appropriate risk management; and particularly by providing local communities alternative income outside of the natural resources of forestlands (Purwoko et al 2022b).

The Singapore example could elucidate the trade-offs between efficiency and democracy – in the interest of costs, time, and resources, compromises seem to have been made in terms of community engagement and participation.

The triumvirate relationship between scale, effectiveness, and equity is reciprocal and interlinked. On one hand, as seen above, conservation is more effective and equitable at a multi-scalar level but particularly when led and operated at the community level with support and resources from government. On the other hand, equity drives effectiveness by increasing grassroots-level support and acceptance, thereby reducing overall monitoring and compliance costs (Dawson et al 2017) and enhancing the sustainability and longevity of the project and its ecological results to the benefit of all levels of society and future generations.

V. CONCLUSION

Drawing from the Tangkahan example, researchers and practitioners may wish to consider the role of the social sciences in understanding and operationalizing multi-scalar outreach. The drivers of loss of wildlife and habitats are influenced by society’s norms, structures, and systems, in turn driven by individuals, households, corporations, and nations, all of which invites the possibility of applying behavioural science to shape paradigms and values across the board (Nielsen et al 2021). At the individual level, autonomous or self-driven inducements, when combined with external rewards or disincentives, may deliver more effective and lasting conservation outcomes (Nilsson et al 2016). An excellent example of on-the-ground community engagement in North Sumatra was the Orangutan Mobile Education Unit operated by Conservation International, which visited residents of remote areas and communicated environmental knowledge into laymen terms (Supriatna and Ario 2015). In Tangkahan, the fusion of both extrinsic (tourism) and intrinsic motivations (local autonomy) could explain the significant (conservation-positive) changes in local conduct and values (Nilsson et al 2016). As for Singapore, much foundational work is warranted at an individual level to cultivate intrinsic motivations and engagement with nature in order to bridge the apparent gap between policy and people.

The effectiveness and equity of biodiversity conservation interventions can be enhanced by understanding and prioritizing local and Indigenous perspectives, concerns, and values, and in so doing enabling the cultivation of personal intrinsic motivations for conservation. Individual commitment to ecotourism is possible when we are empowered to participate and make decisions in the conceptualization and framing of the program (Purwoko et al 2022a). In pursuing grassroots support and legitimacy, it is essential to acknowledge, incorporate, and elevate the expertise and opinions of local leaders. Local elders and community members may be incentivized to participate in, support, and take ownership of ecotourism programs if their local knowledge and wisdom are respectfully recognized and centred in the design and presentation of such programs (Purwoko et al 2022).

Both cases also suggest that biodiversity conservation practice could benefit from Löfqvist et al (2023)’s equity-centered approach (albeit in the restoration context), which seeks ecosystem rehabilitation while simultaneously focusing on the persons most affected by a proposed intervention. This framework could be operationalized by inter alia (1) consulting with multiple stakeholders, especially local and marginalized groups, at all stages, while addressing systemic structures and processes which perpetuate inequalities; and (2) ensuring that global conservation goals incorporate equity metrics and outcomes such as jobs, earnings, access to nutrition, biological diversity, and adaptability to climate impacts (Löfqvist et al 2023). In the Singapore example, there could be room to consider inviting the return of islanders, calling upon their local knowledge and experience, and involve them in the ongoing management and care of the SIMP project.

References:-

  1. Asia Centre for Social Entrepreneurship & Philanthropy (“ASCEP”). (2015). ‘Philanthropy on the Road to Nationhood in Singapore’. Philanthropy in Asia: Working Paper No. 1. December 2015. https://www.issuelab.org/resources/23702/23702.pdf

  2. AsiaOne. (2015). ‘Corals in Semakau sucessfully relocated to Sisters' Islands Marine Park’. https://www.asiaone.com/singapore/corals-semakau-sucessfully-relocated-sisters-islands-marine-park

  3. CBS. (2003). ‘Flood Death Toll Climbs on Sumatra’. 3 November 2003. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/flood-death-toll-climbs-on-sumatra/

  4. Chan, L., Davison, G., and Chia, C. (2010). ‘Biodiversity Conservation in Singapore’. In Citygreen Issue No. 1, NParks, 2010. https://www.nparks.gov.sg/Cuge/Resources/Publications/CITYGREEN

  5. Connolly, C. and Muzaini, H. (2022). ‘Urbanizing Islands: A Critical History of Singapore’s Offshore Islands’. Nature and Space 2022, Vol. 5(4) 2172–2192. DOI: 10.1177/25148486211051082

  6. Dawson, N., A. Martin and F. Danielsen. (2017). ‘Assessing equity in protected area governance: approaches to promote just and effective conservation’, Conservation Letters 11(2) 2018, p.e12388.

  7. Han, H. (2017). ‘Singapore, a Garden City: Authoritarian Environmentalism in a Developmental State’. The Journal of Environment & Development , March 2017, Vol. 26, No. 1 (March 2017), pp. 3-24.

  8. IADB. (2017). ‘How we can save Caribbean Coral Reefs and why we should’. 1 March 2017. https://blogs.iadb.org/caribbean-dev-trends/en/can-save-caribbean-coral-reefs/

  9. International Union for Conservation of Nature (“IUCN”). (2017). ‘Sumatran Orangutan’. https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/121097935/123797627. Updated in 2017. Accessed on 5 September 2023.

  10. JTC Corporation (“JTC”). (2018). ‘Singapore's Largest Artificial Reef Project to be piloted at Sisters' Islands Marine Park to Enhance Marine Biodiversity’. 17 May 2018. https://www.jtc.gov.sg/about-jtc/news-and-stories/press-releases/singapores-largest-artificial-reef-project-to-be-piloted-at-sisters-islands-marine-park

  11. Keppel Offshore & Marine (“Keppel O&M”). (2008). ‘Nursing life forms under the sea’. In OffshoreMarine, September 2008. https://www.keppelom.com/theme/default/files/om08_sept.pdf

  12. Lee, D. (2023). ‘Response by Minister Desmond Lee, at the 14th Parliament of Singapore, to Mr Louis Ng’s Motion for Adjournment on “Protecting Our Marine Spaces and Southern Islands” on 20 March 2023’. Singapore. https://www.mnd.gov.sg/newsroom/parliament-matters/speeches/view/response-by-minister-desmond-lee-at-the-14th-parliament-of-singapore-to-mr-louis-ng's-motion-for-adjournment-on-protecting-our-marine-spaces-and-southern-islands-on-20-march-2023

  13. Löfqvist, S. et al (2023). ‘How Social Considerations Improve the Equity and Effectiveness of Ecosystem Restoration’. BioScience 73: 134–148. February 2023. Vol. 73 No. 2. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biac099

  14. Ministry of Sustainability and the Environment, Singapore (“MSE”). (2020). 'Saving Semakau — One island’s role in managing Singapore’s waste'. 14 January 2020. https://www.mse.gov.sg/resource-room/category/2020-01-14-newsletter-saving-semakau-one-island-role-in-manaing-singapore-waste/

  15. National Parks Board of Singapore (“NParks”). (2022). 'Strategies and Actions'. https://www.nparks.gov.sg/biodiversity/our-national-plan-for-conservation/national-biodiversity-strategy-and-action-plan/strategies-and-actions. Updated 13 April 2022. Accessed 18 August 2023.

  16. Ng, C.S.L, and Chou, L.M. (2017). ‘Coral reef restoration in Singapore — past, present and future’. In: Lye L-H, Neo H, Kondepudi S, Yew W-S, Sng JG-K (eds.), Sustainability Matters: Environmental Management in the Anthropocene. Singapore: World Scientific, pp. 3–23. https://doi.org/10.1142/9789813230620_0001

  17. Ng, LCS, Toh, T.C., and Chou, L.M.. (2013). “Current Status of Coral Reef Restoration in Singapore.” Official Conference Proceedings 2013. The Asian Conference on Sustainability, Energy & the Environment 2013, Osaka, Japan.

  18. Nielsen, K.S., Marteau, T.M., Bauer, J.M., et al (2021). ‘Biodiversity conservation as a promising frontier for behavioural science’. Nature Human Behaviour. Vol 5, May 2021, pp 550-556. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01109-5

  19. Purwoko, A., Thoha, A.S., and Syamsinar. (2021)a. ‘Analysis of the attractions of Tangkahan Nature Tourism Area, Gunung Leuser National Park, North Sumatra Province’. IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci. 912 012065. doi:10.1088/1755-1315/912/1/012065

  20. Purwoko, A., Patana, P., and Daulay, U.A. (2021)b. ‘Integration of conservation and economic development in Gunung Leuser National Park’. IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci. 739 012055. doi:10.1088/1755-1315/739/1/012055

  21. Purwoko, A., Nurrochmat, D.R., Ekayani, et al (2022)a. ‘Examining the Economic Value of Tourism and Visitor Preferences: A Portrait of Sustainability Ecotourism in the Tangkahan Protection Area, Gunung Leuser National Park, North Sumatra, Indonesia’. Sustainability 2022, 14, 8272. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14148272

  22. Purwoko, A., Kuswanda, W., Situmorang, R., et al (2022)b. ‘Orangutan Ecotourism on Sumatra Island: Current Conditions and a Call for Further Development’. Sustainability 2022, 14, 11328. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141811328

  23. Singapore Infopedia. (2004). ‘Jurong Town Corporation’. https://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/infopedia/articles/SIP_553_2004-12-31.html

  24. Siregar, O.M., Siregar, A.M., and Andriansyah. (2022). ‘Literature Review: Identification Of Sustainable Ecotourism In Tangkahan’. IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1115 (2022) 012068. doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1115/1/012068

  25. Situmorang, R.O.P., and Hussain, M. (2022). ‘Assessing the impacts of local intention on community-based wildlife ecotourism in Tangkahan, Gunung Leuser National Park (GLNP) and the development strategy in the post-COVID19 outbreak’. IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci. 1115 012005. doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1115/1/012005

  26. Straits Times (“ST”). (2018). ‘Reef structure to promote coral growth installed off Sisters’ Islands’. https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/environment/reef-structure-to-promote-coral-growth-installed-off-sisters-islands

  27. ST. (2022). ‘Corals blossom on artificial reef structures off Sisters' Islands: 8 'planter boxes' placed on seabed in 2018 show encouraging signs of marine life’. 3 October 2022. https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/environment/corals-blossom-from-artificial-reef-structures-sunk-in-2018-on-seabed-off-sisters-islands

  28. ST. (2023). ‘100,000 corals to be planted in Singapore waters, Big Sister’s Island to reopen in 2024’. https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/100000-corals-to-be-planted-in-s-pore-waters-big-sister-s-island-to-reopen-in-2024-with-tidal-pool-forest-trail

  29. Supriatna, J., and Ario, A. (2015). ‘Primates as Flagships for Conserving Biodiversity and Parks in Indonesia: Lessons Learned from West Java and North Sumatra’. Primate Conservatio, 2015(29) : 123-131. https://doi.org/10.1896/052.029.0109

  30. Tsujino, R., Yumoto, T., Kitamura, et al (2016). ‘History of forest loss and degradation in Indonesia’. Land Use Policy 57 (2016) 335-347. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2016.05.034

  31. UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs (“DESA”). (2022). ‘Progress report for Assessing the efficacy of the largest artificial reef structures of Singapore for biodiversity conservation, research test-bedding, and promoting marine environment outreach and education’. 7 June 2022. https://sdgs.un.org/partnership-progress/assessing-efficacy-singapores-largest-artificial-reef-structures-biodiversity. Accessed on 31 August 2023.

  32. UNEP. ‘Seven Ways You’re Connected to Coral Reefs’. https://www.unep.org/news-and-stories/story/seven-ways-youre-connected-coral-reefs#:~:text=Water%20filtration,in%20water)%20in%20the%20water. Accessed on 29 August 2023.

  33. UNESCO Jakarta. (2012). ‘Saving the Heritage of Gunung Leuser National Park - Tropical Rainforest Heritage of Sumatra’. JAK/2012/PI/H/3. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000219384

  34. Vucetich, J.A., D. Burnham, E.A. Macdonald, J.T. Bruskotter, S. Marchini, A. Zimmermann and D.W. Macdonald. (2018). ‘Just conservation: What is it and should we pursue it?’ Biological Conservation 221 2018, pp.23–33.

  35. Wich, S.A., Meijaard, E., Marshall, A.J., et al. (2008). ‘Distribution and conservation status of the orang-utan (Pongo spp.) on Borneo and Sumatra: how many remain?’ Oryx 42.3 (2008): 329-39. https://doi.org/10.1017/S003060530800197X

  36. Wiratno, W., Withaningsih, S., Gunawan, B., and Iskandar, J. (2022). ‘Ecotourism as a Resource Sharing Strategy: Case Study of Community-Based Ecotourism at the Tangkahan Buffer Zone of Leuser National Park, Langkat District, North Sumatra, Indonesia’. Sustainability 2022, 14, 3399. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14063399