A Decade After Indonesia’s Worst Fires, the Haze Persists

The return of haze to parts of Indonesia in 2026 is a stark reminder that despite a decade of efforts to address the issue, the problem persists. While the current fires are smaller than those that ravaged the country in 2015, the underlying causes remain unchanged.

A key factor contributing to this stalemate is the economics of land clearing. A recent World Bank study found that small-scale operators in Indonesia can clear land more cheaply by burning it rather than using mechanical or manual methods. This disparity in costs has significant implications for policymakers, who have struggled to create an environment where non-burning methods are incentivized.

The Indonesian government’s efforts to combat forest and land fires through enforcement and prevention measures have had some success. Since 2015, the country has implemented stricter regulations, increased funding for firefighting efforts, and established a body dedicated to restoring and monitoring its fire-prone peatlands. However, these reforms remain vulnerable to exploitation.

In South Kalimantan, The Straits Times found that land clearing by burning remains a cheap and attractive option for some farmers, despite the risks of punishment and public health consequences. This is largely due to the fact that hiring an excavator or using other mechanical methods can be prohibitively expensive, especially when compared to short-term gains from burning.

The return of hotspots in concessions also raises questions about the effectiveness of Indonesia’s prevention efforts. The government body responsible for restoring and monitoring peatlands, which was created after 2015, has since lost its mandate. This gap in oversight is particularly concerning given the scale of burning over the past decade, with nearly 900,000 hectares burned by late August alone.

The economic costs of Indonesia’s haze problem are already being felt, with estimates suggesting that forest and land fires between January and August could cost the country anywhere from 39.29 trillion rupiah to 123.1 trillion rupiah in economic and health losses. The human toll is equally devastating, with over 113,000 wildfire-related respiratory infections reported across seven affected provinces.

In light of these findings, it’s clear that Indonesia still has a long way to go in addressing its haze problem. While the government’s efforts are commendable, they must be complemented by more effective policies aimed at reducing the economic incentives for burning. This includes implementing stricter regulations on land clearing, increasing funding for prevention measures, and ensuring that companies responsible for fires face meaningful consequences.

The Indonesian president’s call for tougher punishment for those responsible for forest and land fires is a step in the right direction, but it’s only one part of the solution. To truly address this problem, policymakers must be willing to tackle the underlying economic drivers that perpetuate burning rather than just treating its symptoms.

Indonesia’s international partners also have an important role to play in supporting efforts to reduce deforestation and promote sustainable land-use practices. By working together, it’s possible to create a more resilient and fire-prone-free future for Indonesia – one that balances economic development with environmental protection.

The clock is ticking, however, as the current fire season shows no signs of abating anytime soon. With the rainy season expected to arrive later than previously forecast, the consequences of inaction will only continue to mount. It’s time for Indonesia and its international partners to redouble their efforts and work towards a solution that truly addresses the root causes of this perennial problem.

Ultimately, tackling the economics of land clearing head-on is essential if Indonesia hopes to eradicate its haze problem once and for all. Anything less would be a missed opportunity to create a more sustainable future – one where development and environmental protection go hand-in-hand.