Bridging Technology and Conservation: Reflections from HCV Network’s Project Manager Mirzha Hanifah on her work in three landscape initiatives in Indonesia

In mid-July, I made my first trip to Seruyan Regency as part of the Jurisdictional Approach (JA) work conducted with HCVN’s member and partner, Kaleka. The purpose of the visit was to support a public consultation to validate the indicative High Conservation Value (HCV) map. This consultation was combined with participatory mapping work that Kaleka had facilitated in each village. Within the JA process, both participatory village mapping and public consultations play a crucial role, ensuring that the spatial information used in decision-making is not only technically accurate but also socially recognised.

Accustomed to interpreting landscape-scale patterns and changes through satellite imagery and spatial data, the long journey to Seruyan Hulu gave me the chance to reflect on how social verification, such as public consultations, becomes an important bridge that helps indicative HCV maps move beyond technical accuracy and become relevant for the people who manage and depend on the landscape.

Starting in Seruyan, Central Kalimantan

Seruyan stretches from the Java Sea in the south to the border with West Kalimantan in the north, with the Seruyan River connecting upstream and downstream areas. Its landscape ranges from lowlands, peatlands and swamps to dense forests in the north. Within the extensive oil palm estates that drive the local economy, the area still holds rich conservation values that require collective attention. To the south, Seruyan borders Tanjung Puting National Park, which reminded me of Camp Leakey and the long term work of Birutė Galdikas in studying great apes as a way to understand human evolution.

My work is different from the long term field studies carried out deep in the forest. Most of my time has been spent on spatial analysis and interpreting landscape change, yet my experience in Seruyan reminded me that what appears on the screen covers only part of the story. The rest exists on the ground within the relationships between ecosystems, communities, and the values that connect them. These elements ultimately determine whether our analyses are meaningful for those who manage and protect HCV areas.

From this process, I learned that one of the most important skills in the HCV Approach is the ability to listen. In a landscape context, listening means creating space for dialogue with stakeholders such as local government institutions, village communities, customary groups, private sector actors, and local organisations. This process is intended to be more than a formality. It aims to align perspectives so that indicative HCV maps can develop from technical interpretations into representations of reality that are recognised and shared by the people living in the landscape.

My work in Seruyan also reinforced the idea that technology provides only part of the answer. Remote sensing can show where changes occur, but the actions that follow depend on the people who live and work in the landscape. Indicative HCV maps gain their strength when they are validated through public consultation, aligned with village level participatory maps, discussed in multi stakeholder forums, and understood by their end users. The Jurisdictional Approach makes this process more efficient because all actors are encouraged to work within one shared framework.

From Seruyan, I learned that successful monitoring is not only about accurate data. It depends on how well stakeholders are connected and how ready they are to work together when they need to respond to change. The strength of the collaboration ecosystem often determines the strength of the monitoring itself.

‍Moving on to Merauke in South Papua

My learning did not end in Seruyan. The following month, I was once again brought into a landscape with its own complexity. This time I travelled to Merauke in South Papua Province to begin the implementation of the Forest Integrity Assessment (FIA) in the Danau Bian conservation area. If Seruyan taught me the importance of listening, then Merauke taught me that monitoring has dimensions that go far beyond detecting change.

Papua has always held a special place in my memory. It is often described as one of the last forest frontiers, not only because of the remaining forest extent but also because of its ecological significance. During the early morning flight from Jakarta, the continuous expanse of forest visible through the window at sunrise was a reminder of the scale and importance of the region.

In Merauke, I learned to integrate the FIA as a complement to other monitoring tools I had used in the past. The FIA is designed not only to identify whether forest cover remains but also whether the ecological integrity of the forest is still sufficient to support biodiversity, soil and water protection, and resilience to natural pressures.

My previous experience helped me interpret spatial patterns such as fragmentation and weekly or monthly alerts of land cover change. Working with the FIA added a deeper layer of understanding. Monitoring is not only about what is lost but also about the quality of what remains. Through this assessment, forest conditions are examined more thoroughly including structure and composition, disturbance levels, connectivity across habitats, regeneration patterns, and the presence of key species.

Throughout the process, I worked with field teams, conservation area managers, and local communities. The adaptation of the FIA relied on three sources of information: remote sensing data, field observations, and local knowledge. The combination of these elements allowed us to adjust the checklist so that it reflected the ecological and social context of the Danau Bian landscape.

Implementing the FIA in Merauke also helped clarify how different monitoring tools complete one another. Near real time alerts are valuable for detecting change within weeks or months, for example when new openings appear. These alerts, however, do not explain the ecological condition after the change has occurred. The FIA fills this gap through periodic and in depth evaluation. Its annual results can indicate whether conservation management is effective or requires improvement.

From this experience, I learned that near real time alerts provide warnings, while the FIA provides context and direction. Used together, they support a monitoring system that is more complete: fast enough to identify change and detailed enough to determine whether forest values are being maintained.

And last but not least, the infamous Aceh in Sumatera

My experiences in Seruyan and Merauke reminded me of the basic principles often mentioned by long-term wildlife researchers such as Birutė Galdikas and Dian Fossey. Galdikas once reflected on the difficulty of working in remote areas that are often overlooked and not well documented. Many of the most significant conservation challenges exist in places like these. Remote sensing becomes especially important in such contexts because it allows us to observe change in areas that are very difficult to reach. Yet, as Galdikas emphasised, technology still relies on local knowledge and collaboration to be meaningful.

Fossey’s principles of conservation, which include continuous monitoring, timely response to threats and targeted intervention, reinforce the idea that monitoring is not only about detection. It involves making decisions based on the information we gather. Advances in remote sensing and cloud computing now allow monitoring to be conducted more rapidly and across wider areas. But technology does not eliminate the need for interpretation and action.

After returning from Merauke, we facilitated a capacity building activity on HCV Screening with stakeholders in Aceh Province. The activity involved local government institutions working in forestry, agriculture, and plantation sectors, along with civil society organisations in the province.

Through this desktop assessment, we mapped the potential presence of HCV and its associated threats as a first step before conducting field work. The discussions made it clear that land cover maps alone were not enough. Stakeholders needed to understand which values must be protected, what threatens these values, and how this information should guide action.

The screening process became a point of alignment. It helped stakeholders establish shared understanding, allocate resources, and prioritise areas for participatory mapping, field verification, and full assessment. From this experience, I learned that data only gains meaning when the values inside it are understood together.

Across Seruyan, Merauke, and Aceh, three insights shaped how I now connect remote sensing with the HCV approach. Data will not move without collaboration. Rapid detection must be complemented by deeper evaluation. Monitoring without understanding values will always remain incomplete.

Reflections - technology is an incredible tool but ultimately people and partnerships are at the heart of driving conservation

Technology helps to overcome the limitations of conventional monitoring methods that depend on human resources, funding, and physical access. Yet these past six months at HCVN have reminded me that technology is only half of the story. The other half lies in ecological, social, and cultural values. After working across three very different corners of Indonesia — Seruyan, Merauke, and Aceh — I have come to understand that forest monitoring can no longer be viewed merely as a technical exercise. It is a journey that brings together data, values, social context, and the ecological realities found on the ground.

I am certain that the coming year will bring the next learning curve, helping me complete more pieces of the larger puzzle of how monitoring and conservation function in practice. This journey has shown me that understanding a landscape is an ongoing process, and each new experience continues to shape the way I see and approach this work.