A hotspot appears near your concession. Your team receives the alert. The clock starts.

But before a fire becomes an emergency, there is another question worth asking: how well does your organisation understand and manage its exposure to karhutla?

For companies operating in plantations, forestry concessions, mining areas, and other fire-prone landscapes, Kalimantan forest fires are not only an environmental concern. They can create regulatory, operational, environmental, financial, and reputational risks.

As forest and land fires (kebakaran hutan dan lahan, or karhutla) return to the headlines in 2026, perhaps the bigger question is not simply where are the fires?

It is: how prepared are organisations operating in these landscapes to manage the risks around them?

What Is Happening with Forest and Land Fires in Kalimantan in 2026?

Forest and land fires continue to pose a recurring challenge across Kalimantan and other parts of Indonesia. In Central Kalimantan, the Governor issued Decree No. 100.3.3.1/142/2026 establishing an emergency alert status for forest and land fires.

Meanwhile, SiPongi provides information on fire hotspots and forest and land fire developments across Indonesia.

Data cited by WALHI recorded 34,262 hotspots, with approximately 74% located within areas covered by permits. These included oil palm plantation concessions, mining concessions, and forest utilisation areas.

A hotspot, however, does not automatically establish who caused a fire or whether it was intentional. Understanding the underlying risk requires looking at factors such as land conditions, weather, human activity, site characteristics, and existing prevention and response measures.

For organisations operating in these areas, the message is clear: fire risk needs to be understood before a hotspot becomes a larger incident.

Where Are the Biggest Risks for Organisations?

Karhutla risk is rarely limited to the presence of a hotspot.

For a company, risk can emerge from multiple areas: exposure of operational assets, environmental sensitivities, regulatory requirements, community relationships, business continuity, and potential recovery costs.

This is why understanding ‘karhutla risk’ requires more than simply monitoring where fires occur. Historical fire patterns, hotspot data, climate and seasonal conditions, land characteristics, and the organisation's own operations can provide a more complete picture of where vulnerabilities may lie.

What Does P.32/2016 Require?

Indonesia's Ministerial Regulation P.32/MenLHK/Setjen/Kum.1/3/2016 on Forest and Land Fire Control (P.32/2016) provides a framework for forest and land fire control, including aspects related to organisation, human resources, facilities and infrastructure, prevention, firefighting, reporting, supervision, evaluation, and post-fire activities.

But there is an important distinction between having the required systems on paper and understanding whether those systems adequately address the organisation's actual risks.

Compliance should not be treated as the finish line. It can be a starting point for identifying where an organisation may need to strengthen its risk management and preparedness.

Is Compliance Enough?

Not necessarily.

An organisation may have policies, procedures, plans, and documentation in place, but still face significant exposure if its underlying risks are not properly understood.

The more useful questions may be:

• Where are our highest-risk areas?

• Which environmental or operational assets are most exposed?

• Are our existing measures aligned with applicable requirements?

• Where are the gaps between our current practices and what is expected?

• What should we prioritise before the next fire season?

Having a system is not necessarily the same as having a resilient system.

What Happens After a Forest Fire?

The risk does not necessarily end when the flames are gone.

A burned area may raise questions about environmental damage, ecosystem recovery, regulatory obligations, land management, and future use. This is particularly relevant in sensitive ecosystems such as peatlands, where post-fire recovery and restoration can involve specific requirements.

For organisations, recovery can also mean significant financial and operational resources. This makes post-fire assessment and recovery planning an important part of a broader risk-management approach, not simply an activity that begins after an emergency.

From Karhutla Risk to Organisational Resilience

Preparedness needs to start before the fire. At Senang Eco, we see recurring karhutla in Kalimantan not only as an environmental issue, but as a sustainability, risk-management, and resilience challenge.

We help organisations take a step back from the immediate incident and look at the bigger picture: where are the risks, what do they mean for the organisation, and what can be done about them?

This can include assessing historical fire patterns, hotspot data, site characteristics, and climate-related risks to understand areas of greater exposure. It can also involve reviewing existing policies, plans, and practices against applicable requirements, identifying potential gaps, and developing practical priorities for strengthening risk management.

The aim is not to manage the fire itself. It is to help organisations better understand and manage the risks surrounding karhutla, before they become larger environmental, regulatory, or business challenges.

Ultimately, resilience is not just about responding when something goes wrong. It is about understanding risks early, making informed decisions, and being better prepared for what comes next.

Because recurring Kalimantan forest fires should not become business as usual.

Published: 2 September 2026