Forest Fires and the Test of Geographical Intelligence
Forest and land fires are never merely a matter of flames. Behind a single hotspot lies a much broader landscape of issues: weather changes, drought, soil characteristics, peat conditions, vegetation cover, land use, human activity, concessions, road networks, spatial governance, and the state’s capacity to read threats before they escalate into disasters.
This is why forest and land fires (karhutla) should be viewed as a test of the nation’s geographical intelligence sensitivity. The question is not simply whether the state can deploy water-bombing helicopters once thousands of hectares have burned. The more important question arises much earlier: is the state capable of knowing where risks are forming, why certain areas are becoming more vulnerable, who controls and utilises that space, where fire and smoke are likely to move, and what actions must be taken before the fire spreads?
This question becomes increasingly relevant at the end of August 2026. On 28 August 2026, monitoring by the Ministry of Forestry’s SiPongi system, using NASA Terra/Aqua, SNPP, and NOAA-20 satellites, detected 18,065 hotspots nationally—the highest in daily monitoring throughout 1–28 August 2026. Central Kalimantan recorded 7,703 hotspots, followed by West Kalimantan with 3,384, South Kalimantan with 1,354, South Sumatra with 1,036, Jambi with 272, and Riau with 191.
This data must be interpreted carefully. A hotspot does not automatically signify a fire event. The Ministry of Forestry emphasises that a hotspot is merely an indication of surface temperature anomalies obtained through satellite remote sensing, which still requires verification or ground checks on the ground. It is precisely in the gap between the indication from the sky and the reality on the ground that the quality of geographical intelligence is tested.
Reading Fire Before it Grows
Geographical intelligence is not merely the ability to create maps. In a more substantive sense, geographical intelligence is the ability to collect, integrate, analyse, and translate various location-based information to answer at least five questions: what is happening, where is it happening, why is it happening in that location, how is it developing, and what are the implications for national and community interests.
Regarding the issue of forest fires, the instruments to answer these questions are actually quite abundant. These include hotspot data and satellite imagery, rainfall and dry-day information, wind direction and speed, the Fire Weather Index, surface fuel drought levels, peat conditions, forest cover, river and canal networks, concession boundaries, land use, settlement density, and records of previous fire locations.
BMKG even provides a forest fire warning system that processes various meteorological parameters such as the Fine Fuel Moisture Code, Duff Moisture Code, Drought Code, Build Up Index, Initial Spread Index, and Fire Weather Index. Through SPARTAN, BMKG can provide information regarding weather conditions that support the occurrence and spread of fires.
When all these layers of information are overlaid, the state should no longer merely possess a hotspot map, but rather a threat probability map. From there, it can be determined which areas should be patrolled first, which peatlands require wetting, which locations are prone to recurring fires, the nearest water sources, the fastest access routes to locations, threatened settlements, and the potential direction of smoke movement.
With the rapid development of remote sensing technology, Geographic Information Systems (GIS), artificial intelligence, and spatial data analysis, such capabilities are no longer futuristic. However, our problem is shifting: it is not merely a lack of data, but the ability to connect data into knowledge, and knowledge into decisions.
Who is Responsible?
This is the vital question to answer. Within the Indonesian government structure, the term ‘geographical intelligence’ in the context of forest fires does not reside under the sole authority of one agency, but is more accurately understood as a cross-institutional analytical function. Therefore, responsibility must be viewed as a chain.
At the most fundamental layer is the Geospatial Information Agency (BIG). Based on Presidential Regulation Number 128 of 2022, BIG is a non-ministerial government agency responsible for geospatial information tasks, including basic geospatial information, thematic geospatial information, and geospatial information infrastructure. BIG also holds a strategic function in the integration and synchronisation of national geospatial information.
Thus, BIG holds a vital position as the architect of national spatial standards and interoperability. BIG ensures that maps from various ministries and local governments do not use different coordinate systems, standards, scales, and references. Without that foundation, the integration of forest fire data could easily result in erroneous analysis. However, BIG is not the commander of fire suppression.
At the next layer are ministries and agencies acting as producers of thematic information. BMKG is responsible for providing meteorological and climatological analysis: drought, rainfall, wind direction, surface fuel conditions, and fire hazard indices.
The Ministry of Forestry, through SiPongi, the Directorate of Forest Fire Control, Manggala Agni, and the forestry structures in the regions, plays a direct role in hotspot detection, ground checks, patrols, prevention, and fire control in forested areas and related landscapes. During the August 2026 operations, the government even mobilised 12,880 personnel, involving Manggala Agni, the TNI (Military), Polri (Police), BNPB, BPBD, local governments, businesses, and volunteers.
Meanwhile, the Ministry of Environment/Environmental Management Agency (KLH/BPLH) provides…