By: Nadia Hadad, Executive Director MADANI Berkelanjutan
Indonesia’s commitment to achieving a Forestry and Other Land Use (FOLU) Net Sink by 2030 is a crucial component of its climate strategy. This initiative aims to ensure that the country’s forests absorb more carbon dioxide than they emit, targeting a net reduction of 140 million tons of CO₂-equivalent emissions by 2030. The FOLU Net Sink 2030 plan is a cornerstone of Indonesia’s Enhanced Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC), which aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 32% through domestic efforts and up to 43% with international support.
To achieve these ambitious goals, Indonesia has partnered with various countries, particularly Norway and the United Kingdom. Norway has been one of the most significant contributors to Indonesia’s climate initiatives through its Results-Based Payment (RBP) scheme. This funding is tied to Indonesia’s success in reducing deforestation and forest degradation emissions.
The collaboration has gone through multiple phases, with the fourth phase (RBP-4) launched on December 10, 2024, providing Indonesia with USD 60 million based on its verified deforestation reduction from 2019 to 2020. Previous payments included USD 56 million (RBP-1), USD 46 million (RBP-2), and USD 50 million (RBP-3), bringing the total funding to over USD 212 million.
The governance of the FOLU Net Sink 2030 program is structured around three key pillars: Sustainable Forest Management, Environmental Governance, and Carbon Governance. These frameworks are designed to promote sustainable practices, enhance regulatory oversight, and effectively manage carbon emissions within the forestry sector. However, despite its environmental significance, the program is now embroiled in controversy due to governance concerns, particularly regarding nepotism in its Operational Management Office (OMO).
A recent report by The Jakarta Post revealed allegations of nepotism within the FOLU Net Sink 2030 program, specifically concerning the appointment of individuals linked to one of Indonesian political parties, that is the Indonesian Solidarity Party (PSI). The most high-profile figure of this controversy is Raja Juli Antoni, the Minister of Forestry himself, who happens to be PSI’s Secretary-General. The public uproar over these appointments is not without reason. Given the substantial international funding involved, governance decisions must be based on merit and transparency, not political affiliations.
Minister Raja Juli defended these appointments by stating that the funding for FOLU Net Sink comes from foreign sources rather than Indonesia’s state budget.
However, this argument is deeply flawed. While the money does not originate from Indonesia’s taxpayers, it is still public money—sourced from the taxpayers of donor countries like Norway and the UK. Public funds, regardless of origin, must be managed with full accountability and transparency.
A key issue adding to the controversy is the claim that the OMO structure is only a temporary arrangement. This information, which reportedly came from a Norwegian government official and was covered in Norwegian media outlet Development Today, has not been officially documented in Indonesia. If Presidential Decree (SK) No. 32/2025 indeed establishes the OMO as a temporary institution, this should be explicitly stated in the decree itself. Otherwise, the decision will legally be considered permanent unless another decree replaces or revokes it. The absence of such clarification raises concerns about administrative certainty and transparency, further undermining public trust.
Transparency and accountability in climate funding are not just procedural requirements—they are fundamental to the credibility and effectiveness of environmental initiatives. Madani Berkelanjutan emphasizes that Indonesia must ensure that climate funds are managed with the highest standards of governance. Our analysis of Norway’s RBP program for FOLU Net Sink highlights that these funds must be safeguarded from conflicts of interest and political interference. The absence of transparent and inclusive decision-making in fund allocation risks weakening the effectiveness of climate mitigation efforts. Furthermore, our research has found that there are gaps in monitoring and evaluation mechanisms, which could lead to inefficiencies or misallocation of resources. Without robust accountability measures, Indonesia may struggle to maintain international confidence in its climate policiesFailing to do so risks damaging Indonesia’s international reputation and jeopardizing future funding opportunities.
The situation also raises broader concerns about Indonesia’s commitment to good governance in climate action. The international community has entrusted Indonesia with substantial financial support to combat deforestation, and any mismanagement threatens to erode that trust. Norway and the UK, as primary donors, should reassess the governance of the program and push for stricter oversight mechanisms to ensure that the funds are used effectively and transparently.
The Indonesian government must take immediate steps to restore public confidence in the FOLU Net Sink 2030 program. First, it should conduct an independent review of all OMO appointments to ensure they adhere to principles of meritocracy and professional qualifications. Second, it must revise SK 32/2025 to explicitly state the temporary nature of the OMO, if that is indeed the case. Third, Indonesia should implement a robust monitoring system with public reporting requirements to ensure full transparency in the use of climate funds.
Indonesia has an opportunity to lead by example in global forest governance, but this can only happen if it upholds principles of transparency, accountability, and good governance. The controversy surrounding the FOLU Net Sink program serves as a wake-up call. If Indonesia fails to address these concerns now, it risks not only losing vital climate funding but also undermining its own credibility in the fight against deforestation and climate change.
