Most of the 2.1 billion strong workforce in Asia and the Pacific are denied access to decent jobs, health care and social protection but there is an array polices and tools that governments can use to remedy these deficiencies and ensure that the rights and aspirations of these workers and their families are upheld and that they remain the engine of economic growth for the region. 

A new report released today, the Social Outlook for Asia and the Pacific: The Workforce We Need, offers tangible solutions to immediately address alarming trends that both preceded the new coronavirus and were exacerbated by the pandemic. 

While 243 million new people were pushed into poverty during the COVID-19 pandemic, half of all people in our region already had been surviving without cash, a third without necessary medicine or treatment and a quarter had gone without enough food to eat. This can lower productivity, which has fallen below the global average, but also tax revenues and future economic output. 

With two-thirds of all workers in the region being employed informally, often with low wages, in hazardous working conditions and without a contract, half of our workforce are at the brink of poverty. People in our region are also at a higher risk of being pushed into poverty by health spending than anywhere else in the world, causing inequalities to further widen. With more than half of all people being excluded from social protection, pandemics, disasters economic downturns, or normal life events, such as falling ill, becoming pregnant or getting old often have detrimental impacts on households’ wellbeing and life prospects.

The reality is harsh: our workers are generally ill-equipped to unlock new opportunities, fulfill life aspirations for themselves and their families but also to face ongoing challenges emanating from megatrends of climate change, ageing societies and digitalization. 

Climate-induced natural disasters cause businesses to relocate and jobs to disappear, disproportionately affecting rural communities. Digital technologies are bringing disruptive change to the world of work and the digital gap is intensifying inequalities in opportunities, income and wealth. Population ageing means that the number of older people will double by 2050, making policies to support active and healthy ageing ever more urgent.

None of these vulnerabilities are inevitable. With the right policies, our region’s workforce can become more productive, healthier and protected. 

First, active labour market policies, through life-long learning and skill development, can support a green and just transition into decent employment and improve access to basic opportunities and adequate standards of living. Harnessing synergies between active labor market policies and social protection can help workers upgrade their skills and transition into decent employment while smoothing consumption and avoiding negative coping strategies during spells of unemployment or other shocks.

Second, extending social health protection to all can significantly improve workers’ health, income security and productivity. COVID-19 demonstrated the weakness of a status quo in which 60 per cent of our workers finance their own health care and receive no sickness benefits. A focus on primary health care as well as curative health protection is needed, also to support healthy and active ageing. People who are chronically ill or live with a disability must be included in health care strategies. Given the large informal economy across the region, extending social health protection is the key policy instrument for achieving universal health coverage in our region.

Third, building on the ESCAP Social Protection Simulator, a basic package of universal child, old age and disability social protection schemes, set at global average benefit levels, would slash poverty in our region by half. Our analysis also shows that social protection helps increase access to opportunities particularly for furthest behind groups. This income security would improve the workforce’s resilience. Extending social protection to all means increasing public spending by between 2 and 6 per cent of GDP, an investment well-worth its cost. The Action Plan to Strengthen Regional Cooperation on Social Protection in Asia and the Pacific can guide action towards broadening social protection coverage. 

With this information at hand, there is a long overdue need for action. The policy recommendations set out in the Social Outlook are a priority for most countries in the region. These require bold but necessary reforms. For most countries these reforms are affordable but may require a reprioritization of existing expenditures and tax, supported by tax reform. Decent employment for all and an expansion of social protection and health care should form the foundations of a strong social contract between the State and its citizens. One where mutual roles and responsibilities are clear and where our workforce is given the security to fulfil their potential and be the force for achieving the 2030 Agenda on Sustainable Development in Asia and the Pacific.

*******

Armida Salsiah Alisjahbana is an Under-Secretary-General of the United Nations and Executive Secretary of the Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP)

By Hans Nicholas Jong in Jakarta

Experts have warned that a slate of sweeping deregulation planned by the Indonesian government could prove disastrous for the environment and create even more conflicts over land and resources.

The administration of President Joko Widodo is preparing to submit to Parliament two bills containing more than 1200 proposed amendments to at least 80 existing laws.

The government says these provisions are all aimed at easing the investment climate in Indonesia in a bid to boost economic growth beyond the 5 percent pace it has been stuck at since 2014.

READ MORE: Scrapping of criminal charges against business people who commit environmental violations

But the so-called omnibus bills threaten to dismantle already tenuous protections for the environment, while the process of drafting them has been opaque and rushed, according to Hariadi Kartodihardjo, a forestry researcher at the Bogor Institute of Agriculture (IPB).

“The process [to discuss] the substance [of the bills] is still long,” he said. “But it seems like the politicians want it to be fast. I hear the omnibus bills will be passed in May or June by Parliament.”

President Widodo’s ruling coalition controls three-quarters of seats in Parliament, making it likely that any bill introduced by the government will pass relatively unchanged. The government says it expects the bills to pass within 100 days of submitting them.

But rushing through so many deregulatory provisions in such a short time leaves virtually no room to consider them properly and still maintain some semblance of environmental regulation, according to Laode Muhammad Syarif, the executive director of the NGO Kemitraan Partnership.

“How do you make a law in 100 days? Impossible,” he said. “If officials at the government support that, where did they go to school?”

Hariadi said that when legislation is rushed, risks arise.

“And who will bear the risks? It’s actually investors themselves,” he said.

End of environmental assessments
One of the most contentious points in the bills is the easing of requirements for businesses and developers to carry out an environmental impact analysis, known locally as an Amdal. Under current law, an Amdal is required to obtain an environmental permit from either the environment ministry or local authorities, depending on the scope of the project.

The environmental permit is itself a prerequisite to obtaining a business permit, which will then allow the project to go ahead.

The omnibus bills call for revising or revoking 39 existing articles on environmental permits, including articles in the 2009 law on environmental protection and the 1999 law on forestry.

In effect, environmental permits will no longer be a prerequisite for a business permit. And the environmental impact assessments that underlie them will only be required for projects deemed high risk, according to Bambang Hendroyono, Secretary-General of the Environment Ministry.

“Amdal is only [needed] if [the projects] are heavy and have a large impact on the environment,” he said. “[In that case], it will need public communication.”

He said environmental protections would remain robust despite this because companies were, as a principle, considerate of environmental conservation.

“So there’s nothing to be worried about because Amdal is a moral message,” he said. “In businesses, environmental principles have to be paid attention to.”

High risk criteria
Another ministry official said the government was still discussing what kinds of projects would be designated as high risk and therefore still required to have an environmental impact assessment.

Even then, companies will still be able to obtain a business permit before carrying out the assessment, according to Mahfud MD, the coordinating minister for legal and security affairs. He said the safeguard to ensure their projects were environmentally sound would be an audit carried out after they had both secured the business permit and carried out the Amdal.

“If the permits are issued after the Amdal, it’s going to take a long time,” Mahfud told local media. “People will run out of money [before the permits are issued].”

Forestry researcher Hariadi said revoking the requirements for an impact assessment and an environmental permit, all for the sake of facilitating investment, would be disastrous for a country that is already prone to natural disasters.

He cited the floods and landslides at the start of the year that hit Jakarta and surrounding areas, killing at least 67 people and displacing more than 173,000.

Environmental activists have attributed the severity of the disaster to deforestation and environmental damage in upstream areas. These include residential and commercial developments built in flood plains and water catchment areas, in violation of zoning and environmental regulations.

Hariadi said things could get even worse if the omnibus bills discount environmental protections entirely, noting that many such protections were in place for good reason.

‘You can’t get rid of wheels’
“What about the articles that indeed prevent investment in certain sectors for environmental reasons?” he said. “The problem is you can’t throw these articles away.

“Let’s say you want to make a car. The car has to have wheels, but the wheels are expensive. If you get rid of the wheels, then you won’t have a car, right?”

Hariadi said the current high cost and long wait for an Amdal to be carried out and environmental permit issued was not because of onerous requirements for due diligence and scientific surveys, but rather because of the myriad opportunities for corruption in the process by bureaucrats.

He cited a study carried out by his university that identified at least 32 stages within the process that could either be abused by officials to solicit bribes or gamed by applicants to bypass regulations.

Henri Subagiyo, former executive director of the Indonesian Center for Environmental Law (ICEL), said another factor was the lack of environmental data, such as the carrying capacity of the country’s rivers.

Each time a company wants to set up a factory near a river, for example, it has to collect its own data from scratch to determine how much waste it can discharge safely into the river.

“Environment data can’t be made in an instant, it has to be measured over a long period of time,” Henri said. “But the problem is that these data are often not available because our government doesn’t have them.

“We never know how much waste we can discharge into rivers, and yet permits keep being issued.”

Not an investment roadblock
Subagiyo also said environmental protections, including the requirement to carry out an Amdal, should not be seen as a roadblock to investment. Instead, it’s an integral part of safeguarding investors against future uncertainty, he said.

“Amdal isn’t merely an administrative document. It’s guidance for businesses to protect the environment,” Subagiyo said. “If it’s ignored, then there will be environmental risk for the businesses themselves. Amdal actually protects businesses from legal threats.”

He noted that similar requirements were in place in other Southeast Asian countries seen as friendlier to investors, indicating it was not the environmental regulations keeping them away from Indonesia.

Mas Achmad Santosa, a maritime expert from the Indonesia Ocean Justice Initiative, said Indonesia risked being an outlier among its peers in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).

“Environmental impact assessments are practiced universally, especially in developed countries,” he said. “All 10 ASEAN countries require it and the trend is actually toward strengthening it, not weakening it.”

There are other worrying provisions in the bills being drafted, Hariadi said. One crucial amendment is the scrapping of criminal charges for businesspeople who commit environmental violations. The proposed maximum punishment will instead be a revocation of their business permits.

Conflicts over land, resources
The bills also call for limiting public participation in the permit application process, as a means of speeding up their issuance. Hariadi said this would prevent the public from being properly informed about projects that affect them, and could trigger conflicts over land and other resources.

“In order to issue permits swiftly, all [public] participation will be stopped as long as [the projects] are in line with zoning regulations,” he said. “There will be [environmental and zoning] problems of such big magnitude, but public participation will be limited. Won’t that create conflicts? Instead of the quality of public participation being improved, it’s being ditched just like that.”

The Environment Ministry’s Bambang said the public would still have a chance to participate — but again only in the case of high-risk projects.

Another proposed amendment is to curtail the process by which an area is designated a forest area. This would be an important change, as forest areas are currently off-limits to oil palm plantations, one of the leading drivers of deforestation in Indonesia. As with the limiting of public participation, this change in designating forest areas also has the potential to spark land conflicts, Hariadi said.

The designation process currently requires the approval of indigenous and forest communities, but will bypass these largely marginalised groups if the government has its way. The subsequent mapping process will be carried out electronically, using satellite imagery to speed up the process, Bambang said.

Hariadi said this would only deepen the divide between the forest communities, on one hand, and the government and businesses eyeing their land, on the other, who would be more likely to have access to the technology for drafting the electronic maps.

Most of the existing conflicts over land in Indonesia center around disputed boundaries, and communities without access to electronic maps would be hugely disadvantaged in staking their claim to the land, Hariadi said.

“Just imagine them having to rely on the local government and the private sector, who have possession of the electronic maps,” he said. “An area has social and cultural functions, it’s not just a commodity on paper.”

Forest areas amendment
Also related to forest areas is a proposed amendment to scrap a requirement for all regions to maintain a minimum 30 percent of their territory as forest area.

Muhammad Iqbal Damanik, a researcher with the environmental NGO Auriga Nusantara, said this would allow mining and plantation companies currently operating illegally inside forest areas to whitewash their crimes. The companies, under the proposed change, would be able to request that the forest status of the land be revised to non-forest area, thereby legalizing their operations, Iqbal said.

“So the perspective [of the omnibus bills] is exploitation,” he said. “There’s no conservation perspective.”

Anggalia Putri, a researcher at the NGO Madani, said the government should actually be pushing to increase the threshold above 30 percent, especially for regions like Papua in Indonesia’s east, which still has a lot of intact natural forest.

Maintaining minimum forest area in Papua of 30 percent would effectively greenlight a massive spate of deforestation, she said.

Despite the significance of the changes being proposed in the omnibus bills, the public still has not been able to see the drafts.

President Widodo in December ordered his officials to make the drafts available to the public for the sake of transparency. That still has not happened, prompting labour unions to stage protests against the bills amid speculation about sweeping cuts to worker welfare and job security regulations.

Ombudsman left out of loop
The office of the national Ombudsman has also been left out of the loop; when it requested a meeting with the office of the chief economics minister to discuss the bills, it was rejected.

Ombudsman Ahmad Alamsyah Saragih said this was the first time his office had been denied a meeting by a government institution. Instead, the minister’s office told the Ombudsman to submit a written recommendation about the bills.

“How can we give a written recommendation if we’ve never received the drafts?” Alamsyah said. “We’ve also seen NGOs [ask for a meeting with the minister’s office] and receive the same response.”

Laode from Kemitraan Partnership, who until recently served as a commissioner with the national antigraft agency, the KPK, said the lack of transparency indicated the omnibus bills were ridden with problematic articles.

He likened them to the controversial anticorruption bill drafted by the government and passed by Parliament in similarly lightning fashion last year, with the KPK left out of the deliberations.

While the government insisted the bill would strengthen the agency’s fight against corruption, the reality is that, once passed, the law has severely curtailed the KPK’s ability to carry out investigations.

In the cases of both the anticorruption law and the omnibus bills, the deliberations have been carried out behind closed doors, civil society groups have been shut out, and the government has pushed for speedy passage. If the government has nothing to hide and the omnibus bills truly serve the greater good, then why the secrecy, Laode asked.

‘What’s being hidden?’
“What’s being hidden such that the drafts aren’t being shared [with the public]?” he said.

Hariadi also called on the government to be more transparent about the bills.

“Don’t limit participation,” he said. “Don’t let the bills become legal and yet illegitimate by failing to involve the public in the deliberations.”

He said public participation was important because neither the bills nor prevailing legislation adequately addressed the real problems hindering greater investment in Indonesia, including corruption and land conflicts.

“The roadblocks [for investors] are actually caused by abuse of authority,” Hariadi said.

“The government and lawmakers have to see the facts on the ground in order to solve the problems that the omnibus bills are supposed to solve. The problems on the ground are so many and they’re very complicated. They can’t just be simplified.”

If anything, he said, the bills are a potential minefield for investors, threatening to create more of the problems — environmental degradation and land conflicts, among others — that already deter investors from coming to Indonesia.

Bills ‘actually counterproductive’
Dzulfian Syafrian, an economist with the Institute for Development of Economics and Finance (INDEF), agreed that the bills “are actually counterproductive in attracting investors.”

He said loosening environmental protections would harm investors because environmental damage would lead to more problems.

“From the economic perspective [businesses and the government] are looking for short-term gain and profit,” Dzulfian said. “They don’t see sustainability as something important for the development of their businesses.”

The kinds of investment that would be encouraged by the bills are those in hydrocarbons, he added, which won’t serve Indonesia’s emissions reduction goals or its long-term plans for sustainable growth.

“With the relaxation of environmental regulations, these businesses will be happy,” Dzulfian said. “But investors who are pro-environment will have doubts.”

Banner image: Gold mining tailing pond near Mandor in West Kalimantan, Indonesia. Image by Rhett A. Butler/Mongabay.

This article is republished from Mongabay under a Creative Commons licence.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Op-Ed By Armida Salsiah Alisjahbana and Natalia Kanem

Ministers and senior policymakers across Asia and the Pacific are gathered in Bangkok this week to focus on population dynamics at a crucial time for the region. Their goal: to keep people and rights at the heart of the region’s push for sustainable development. They will be considering how successful we have been in balancing economic growth with social imperatives, underpinned by rights and choices for all as enshrined in the landmark Programme of Action stemming from the 1994 International Conference on Population and Development, or ICPD.

In the Programme of Action, diverse views on population, gender equality, sexual and reproductive health, and sustainable development merged into a remarkable global consensus that placed individual dignity and human rights at the heart of development.

Truly revolutionary at the time, ICPD remains all the more urgent and relevant a quarter-century later, in this era of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, with its Sustainable Development Goals.  Without ICPD we would not have the SDGs, and indeed they go hand in hand. The ICPD is a dedicated vehicle through which we can – and will – address, achieve and fulfill the SDGs.

How well have we responded to trends such as population ageing and international migration? How successful have we been in ensuring optimal sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights for all, including the right to choose when or whether to get married and when or whether to have children, and how many? How well have we done in strengthening gender equality and women’s empowerment, and upholding the rights of the most vulnerable among us? Where should our efforts be refocused to leave no one behind?

Asia and the Pacific has much to celebrate. The region remains the engine of global growth and at the forefront of the global fight against poverty. It is now home to half the world’s middle class. The share of the population living in poverty has dropped considerably although it is still unacceptably high. People are living, longer healthier lives. Rights-based family planning has contributed to considerable economic success and women’s empowerment. And we are on track to achieve universal education by 2030.

Yet for all this growth, considerable injustices remain. On its current trajectory, the region will fall short of achieving the 2030 Agenda. In several areas we are heading in altogether the wrong direction. Inequalities within and between countries are widening. Some 1.2 billion people live in poverty of which 400 million live in extreme poverty. Lack of decent job opportunities and access to essential services are perpetuating injustice across generations.

At the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP) and the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), we are keen to shine the spotlight on three key issues where regional commitment is vital.

First, we need to respond to the unprecedented population changes unfolding across the Asia-Pacific region. Many countries are facing a rapidly ageing population. The proportion of people above the age of sixty is expected to more than double by 2050. Effectively meeting the needs of an ageing society and ensuring healthy and productive lives must be a priority. This requires a life cycle approach – from pregnancy and childbirth, through adolescence and adulthood, to old age – ensuring that all people are allowed to fulfil their socioeconomic potential, underpinned by individual rights and choices.

Equally, there is a strong case for strengthening Asia-Pacific’s response to international migration. Migrants can, when allowed, contribute significantly to development. However, we know that migrants are vulnerable to exploitation and abuse. So, our ambition is for discussions this week to build further momentum in support of safe, orderly and regular migration to fully harness its development benefits. 

Second, there is clear evidence the region must spend more on social protection, as well as on health care and education. Today, social protection is the preserve of a few, rather than a right for all. As a result, 60 per cent of our population are at risk of being trapped in vulnerability or pushed into poverty by sickness, disability, unemployment or old age, often underpinned by gender inequality. The “Social Outlook for Asia and the Pacific: Poorly Protected”, which ESCAP will publish later this week, sets out why expanding social protection is the most effective means of reducing poverty, strengthening rights and making vulnerable groups less exposed. Many women, migrants, older persons and rural communities would also benefit. Our evidence suggests it could even end extreme poverty in several countries by 2030.

Third, we need to invest in generating disaggregated data to tell us who is being left behind to ensure our response to population dynamics is targeted and credible. Availability of data on social and demographic issues lag far behind anything related to the economy. Millions of births remain unregistered, leading to the denial of many basic rights, particularly to women and girls. Of the 43 countries which conducted a census between 2005 and 2014, only 16 have reliable data on international migration. With the 2020 round of censuses upon us, we will be redoubling our efforts to close these data gaps by strengthening new partnerships for data capacity and working with governments and other partners to translate data into policy and action. 

The Midterm Review of the Asian and Pacific Ministerial Declaration on Population and Development as well as the Committee on Social Development provide the region with an opportunity to speak with one voice on population and development issues. ESCAP and UNFPA stand united in their commitment to supporting their Member States to build and strengthen a regional response to issues that will shape the future for generations to come.

We look to this week’s discussions to galvanize countries behind the ambition and vision that link ICPD and the SDGs and accelerate work to leave no one behind in Asia and the Pacific.

—

Ms. Armida Salsiah Alisjahbana is United Nations Under-Secretary-General and Executive Secretary of the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP)

Dr. Natalia Kanem is United Nations Under-Secretary-General and Executive Director of the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA)

ANALYSIS: By David Robie in Yogyakarta

In May, President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo of Indonesia raised eyebrows across the archipelago when he inspected the Trans-Papua highway while trail blazing with a motorbike.

Tempo magazine, Indonesia’s most authoritative news magazine, remarked that he did this while “wearing only a thick jacket without a bullet proof vest”. Mentioning this lack of a flack jacket was tacit acknowledgement of the uncertain situation given an exponential rise of pro-independence sentiment in Indonesia’s two most eastern-most provinces of Papua and West Papua.

But Jokowi’s unconventional style of launching infrastructure projects didn’t just end there. Earlier this month he cruised along in a four-wheel drive vehicle on the recently completed Becakayu toll road, which had been languishing uncompleted for 18 years until his presidency gave the project a hurry up.

Last month, while giving a speech at Diponegoro University’s 60th Dies Natalis in Semarang, Central Java, Jokowi declared that infrastructure development was vitally important for the future in Indonesia. He wanted the country to become more competitive than its neighbours, such as Malaysia and Singapore.

“Why is our infrastructure being built?,” he asked rhetorically about the rapid pace and emphasis that he and Vice-President Jusuf Kalla have given the strategy – a marked contrast with other presidencies.

“The answer is that we want our competiveness to be better than other countries. Our global competiveness must be improved,” he said. “This year is pretty good as we have soared from 41st to 36th among 137 countries.”

The latest edition of Tempo magazine has devoted 38 pages to its cover story on infrastructure projects, headlining the fairly comprehensive report “Devil in the details”.

Few environmental reports
But absent from the range of quality articles was any serious report on the state of the environment in Indonesia — or environmental journalism, given that 2000 of the country’s 17,000 islands and 42 million households in a population of 261 million are at risk of “drowning” by 2050, according to a Listening Post report on Al Jazeera last month.

As Al Jazeera reported, “when you look at the [Indonesian] mainstream media, it is hard to find stories that go beyond catastrophes like forest fires or mudslides, examining who and what is behind them.”

A leading environmental journalism advocate has blamed lack of climate change and environmental reporting skills in Indonesian newsrooms for the lack of coverage.

“It is easier for journalists to cover sports or the economy, because they have scores and numbers,” Harry Surjadi, head of the Indonesian Society of Environmental Journalists, told Listening Post. “Those stories are much easier to write than environmental stories, where journalists have to understand biology, ecology, waste and chemistry.”

Nevertheless, Jokowi was praised by The Jakarta Post in a recent editorial for both his development policies and his concern for the poor of the country with his popularity  climbing.

“His overwhelming attention to the basic needs of the people has made him rather obsessive with the objective of keeping the prices of food and other basic necessities stable, thereby keeping inflation below 4 percent,” the Post noted.

However, in its special development edition, Tempo said in an editorial that the Widodo administration was “racing against time” after three years in government to complete its raft of planned infrastructure projects costing an estimated RP4,197 trillion (NZ$415 billion) between 2014 and 2019.

Many ambitious projects with an emphasis on developing the regions, especially eastern Indonesia — including Papua, are being worked on at the same time.

Projects’ sustainability
“All these activities spark public excitement, but also raise questions about the projects’ sustainability,” the magazine said.

“Jokowi’s choice to develop infrastructure is certainly not misplaced. Several studies show that infrastructure development in Indonesia was relatively backward in comparison with neighbours. Even worse: previous administrations spent more on fuel subsidies compared to physical construction,” Tempo commented.

In his Semarang speech, Jokowi said: “Why must we build? Because our country is an archipelago state, the marine foundation base is a must. Airport development was equally important as many islands could not be serviced by ship.

“So, on the remote islands of Natuna, Miangas, we are building an airport. This is just one example because we are building lots of small airports,” Jokowi added.

Tempo seemed to agree with this view by stating in its editorial: “In order to reach a healthy and growing economy, Indonesia needs new roads, bridges, power stations, airports and ports. This in turn requires massive funding.”

Some 42 percent of the required funding — the budget from the 2017 year has been almost tripled from RP177 trillion in Jokowi’s first year in office in 2014 to RP 4011 trillion this year — depends on allocations from the state budget, the magazine noted, plus money from state-owned businesses and private partnerships.

Tempo praised Jokowi for cutting back on energy subsidies, saying this was the right move to make – especially over fuel costs.

Sounding a warning
While also complimenting Jokowi on the boost for several jumbo projects that had stalled in recent years to ensure they get completed, Tempo also sounded a warning.

“Jokowi is racing against time. Infrastructure construction generally takes a while, and its economic benefits are only felt three to five years after construction begins: a time span which does not align with our five-year political cycle,” the magazine said.

“The government should avoid giving the impression that it is impatient to reap its rewards from the projects, especially once the cycle of political succession comes around. Good governance must not be abused for the sake of earning points for the next general elections [in 2019].”

Infrastructure highlights:

National: RP1,320 trillion (two programmes and 12 projects).

Bali and Nus Tenggara: RP11 trillion (15 projects, including the North Timor border crossing and supporting facilities).

Java Island: RP1,065 trillion (903 projects, including the 81km Serang-Panimbang toll road, MRT underground in Jakarta and public trains/railway).

Kalimantan: RP564 trillion (24 projects, including border crossings and facilities and the Serang-Balikpapan-Samarinda toll road).

Maluku and Papua: RP444 trillion (13 projects, including development of the Tangguh Train 3 LNG plant and the Palapa ring broadband).

Sulawesi: RP155 trillion (27 projects, including the Manado-Bitung toll road).

Sumatra: RP638 trillion (61 projects, including five sections of the Trans-Sumatra toll road).

According to a breakdown chart published by Tempo, partnerships with private companies would provide more than half the projected budget – 57.5 percent, with SOEs providing 30 percent and the balance of 12.5 percent from the state budget.

In a four-page interview with the magazine, Jokowi said that after touring across the country, from Sabang to Merauke, “I saw for myself how grave the inequality was”, and he was convinced that an expanded infrastructure would help reduce the gap.

“This is a matter of equality and justice. Besides, our infrastructure development has lagged far behind our neighbours,” he said.

“Infrastructure is a foundation for tackling the problem of inequality. If we want it easy, we just have to allocate the budget for subsidies and increased social assistance, so purchasing power will increase and the public is happy.

“But do we want to continue this kind of strategy? I took the risk by not resorting to this kind of political move, and instead diverted resources to infrastructure development.”

Yet surprisingly nothing in this otherwise comprehensive report addressed climate change and environmental issues, a critical component of sustainable development in Indonesia.

Forest fire devastation
Al Jazeera’s Listening Post report stressed how in 2015 huge fires swept through Indonesia’s rainforests. About 2.6 million hectares of forest was set ablaze to make way for palm oil plantations.

“The fires produced – in just three weeks – more greenhouse gases than Germany does in an entire year,” Listening Post said.

“Forest fires have become an annual occurrence in Indonesia, and still, the country’s media seldom devote the column centimetres and airtime needed to explore the causes behind them.”

Merah Ismail, campaign manager for the mining advocacy network JATAM, was quoted as saying: “When [the media] do cover forest fires or the effects of mining, they leave out “subjects like ‘water poisoned due to toxic waste or air pollution’ because they don’t know enough about those subjects”.

While Jokowi had announced in September 2015 that Indonesia would cut the growth of greenhouse gas emissions by 29 percent by 2030, the nation’s news media have reported little on the progress, or lack of it, over this pledge — even with global debate on climate change at COP23 ongoing in Bonn this month.

With little media exposure or debate, the issue of the future of the rainforests has been framed as a tough choice – between the economy and the environment.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz