Search Climate Insights Directory

Civil society organizations have issued a legal notice (somasi) to President Prabowo, urging the immediate declaration of a national disaster status following devastating floods and landslides in Aceh, North Sumatra, and West Sumatra. As of December 8, 2025, the BNPB reported 974 deaths and 298 missing persons, with tens of thousands displaced. The coalition argues that the disasters were driven by excessive and illegal private sector exploitation, categorizing these actions as 'Ecocide Crimes'. They demand central government intervention for reconstruction and a comprehensive investigation into the structural causes and corporate beneficiaries behind the environmental destruction.

The report argues that Indonesia's promotion of natural gas as a 'transitional fuel' and the continued financing of gas projects by Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs) lock the country into fossil fuel dependence and hinder its climate commitments. It highlights significant environmental, social, and governance risks associated with gas infrastructure, including methane emissions, corruption, and human rights violations, while calling for an immediate shift toward renewable energy.

The report argues that promoting LNG as a 'transition fuel' in Indonesia creates a long-term dependency on fossil fuels and contradicts climate commitments. It highlights that Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs), including the World Bank Group and ADB, continue to support gas infrastructure through technical assistance and policy loans despite their public Paris Alignment pledges. The document details numerous negative impacts of gas projects, including corruption in LNG procurement, human rights violations in Aceh, and environmental disasters such as the PHE ONWJ oil spill in Karawang. It concludes that gas is not a clean alternative due to high methane emissions and calls for an immediate shift to truly renewable energy.

The document details the legal actions taken by a coalition of civil society organizations, including Trend Asia, WALHI, and Greenpeace Indonesia, against the Indonesian government's National Electricity General Plan (RUKN) and the Electricity Supply Business Plan (RUPTL). It argues that these plans ignore the escalating climate crisis—exemplified by Cyclone Senyar—and instead lock the country into fossil fuel dependency through the extension of coal-fired power plants (PLTU) and the use of biomass co-firing, which the authors claim drives deforestation. The coalition alleges that these policies violate multiple national laws and international commitments, such as the Paris Agreement, by failing to provide a clear coal phase-out roadmap and ignoring cheaper renewable energy alternatives.

The report argues that Indonesia's biomass co-firing policy, led by PT Perusahaan Listrik Negara (PLN), threatens natural forests. To achieve 10% co-firing across 107 coal power plants, Trend Asia estimates a need for at least 2.33 million hectares of energy wood plantations. Based on historical data showing 38% of industrial timber plantations were established via deforestation, the report warns that this policy could increase annual deforestation rates from 630 thousand to 2.1 million hectares. It further highlights contradictions between the government's Enhanced NDC emission targets and its increasing deforestation quotas, while noting that biomass burning creates a 'carbon debt' rather than being carbon neutral.

The document analyzes fuel subsidies for Indonesia's marine fisheries, noting they are the most consistent form of central government support. It highlights risks of overfishing and inefficient distribution, suggesting that lessons from broader fossil fuel subsidy reforms could improve targeting and sustainability.

The report inventories fisheries support in Indonesia, noting that central government support ranges from USD 140 to 210 million annually, with 50% allocated to fuel subsidies. It warns that these subsidies may benefit boat owners over low-income fishers and encourage overfishing, while provincial support for vessel modernization often targets already unsustainable pelagic fisheries.

The report reviews public aid to Indonesia's marine capture fisheries, focusing on central government and three provinces: Aceh, Maluku, and North Sulawesi. It finds that while aid is significant—ranging from Rp 2.06 trillion in 2018 to Rp 11.01 trillion in 2019—it is often poorly targeted. Central aid is dominated by fuel subsidies and infrastructure, while provincial aid focuses on vessel and engine acquisition. The report warns that these 'input-based' subsidies can increase fishing capacity and pressure already overexploited fish stocks. It recommends deep-dive evaluations into five specific programs, including fuel distribution and vessel procurement, and calls for increased data transparency and a shift in success metrics from short-term production to long-term sustainable profitability.

The report assesses fisheries support in Indonesia, finding that central government spending focuses on fuel subsidies and infrastructure, while provincial support in Aceh, Maluku, and North Sulawesi emphasizes vessel and engine acquisition. It identifies fuel and fixed-cost supports as high-risk due to their potential to increase fishing capacity and effort in contexts where many fish stocks are already fully or overexploited.

The report concludes that the Batang Toru hydroelectric project is an unnecessary endeavor that threatens the Tapanuli orangutan with extinction. It finds that North Sumatra already has a power surplus and that planned gas, geothermal, and other hydroelectric projects render Batang Toru's peak and baseload power redundant. Furthermore, the report argues that the project's claims regarding CO2 emission reductions and balance of payments relief are significantly inflated or incorrect, while highlighting the operational risks associated with the contractor, Sinohydro.

The report analyzes Indonesia's shift from a high fiscal reliance on oil and gas revenues to a more diversified economy. It highlights a critical imbalance where government revenues from fossil fuel production are largely offset by inefficient consumption subsidies that disproportionately benefit wealthy households. The document warns of the risk of stranded assets valued between USD 200–300 billion and argues for phasing out fossil fuel subsidies to create fiscal space for renewable energy and social development.

Indonesia has successfully reduced its fiscal reliance on oil and gas production, but continues to struggle with inefficient fossil fuel subsidies that benefit wealthy households and hinder the growth of renewable energy. While the government has diversified its economy into manufacturing and finance, contradictory policies—such as maintaining price caps on fuels and prioritizing coal for electrification—create risks of stranded assets and environmental degradation. The report argues for the complete removal of fossil fuel subsidies, the implementation of consumption-based energy taxes, and the strategic investment of resource rents into social safety nets and renewable energy infrastructure to ensure a just transition.

The paper examines the governance of the water-energy-food (WEF) nexus, arguing that while integrated approaches are essential for climate compatible development, they are often hindered by siloed government structures, political contestation over mandates, and limited local capacity. Using evidence from Indonesia, Kenya, and the Amazon basin, it highlights that horizontal and vertical coordination are critical but can be undermined by power imbalances between central and local governments. The author suggests a pragmatic approach to nexus governance, focusing on strengthening the technical and administrative capacities of local government institutions rather than striving for an impractical ideal of total comprehensiveness.

The study finds that ethnic civil wars have indeed declined since the mid-1990s, supporting Ted Robert Gurr's projections. The authors demonstrate that this pacifying trend is associated with increased government accommodation, specifically through the granting of group rights, power-sharing, and democratization, which reduce the probability of conflict onset. Additionally, regional autonomy and peacekeeping operations are found to significantly increase the likelihood of conflict termination. Out-of-sample predictions show that a theory-driven model based on accommodative politics far outperforms a simple time-trend model in predicting the actual decline of ethnic conflict from 2000 to 2013.

The document provides a structured review of literature concerning the gendered aspects of DDR. It highlights a systemic tendency to view women primarily as victims or 'camp followers' rather than active combatants, which leads to their exclusion from DDR benefits. It also examines how hegemonic masculinity drives violence and how the lack of gender-sensitive planning in post-conflict settings—such as in Aceh or Sierra Leone—marginalizes female ex-fighters. Conversely, it notes more inclusive patterns in Latin American peace processes, such as those in Colombia and El Salvador.

The briefing examines the correlation between climate and political violence, noting that while conflicts cluster in dry and tropical zones, there is little evidence that climatic variability directly causes state-based violent conflict. Instead, the authors argue that climate change may increase conflict risk indirectly through three primary causal mechanisms: forced migration, food insecurity, and economic shocks. These effects are not universal but depend on 'scope conditions' such as poverty, poor governance, and political instability. The document concludes that the security challenges posed by climate change are essentially development challenges, and that investing in adaptation and good governance is critical to preventing a growing gap between stable, wealthy societies and those caught in a poverty and instability trap.

The document advocates for a shift in DDR processes from viewing gender as a challenge to treating it as an asset. It emphasizes that women are active combatants who gain skills and independence during conflict, while men can also be victims of violent masculinity and repressive regimes. The author argues that successful DDR requires increasing female participation in peace processes, 'disarming' violent masculinities, and accounting for the socio-economic and cultural contexts that affect reintegration.

The case study examines the impact of the Panglima Laot customary institution on the recovery of fishing communities in Aceh after the 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami. It finds that recovery interventions by NGOs and donors were more successful when they partnered with the Panglima Laot to assess needs and implement projects. However, the study also notes a disconnect between the official 'build back better' goal and the priorities of local fishing communities, who preferred returning to pre-tsunami conditions over long-term resilience efforts.

The document examines the 'Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation' (REDD) framework, highlighting how its implementation often prioritizes corporate profit and carbon market volatility over the rights of Indigenous Peoples and local communities. Through case studies in countries like Indonesia, Mexico, and Paraguay, it illustrates risks such as 'leakage', the displacement of forest-dependent populations, and the lack of genuine free, prior, and informed consent. The report concludes that REDD should be decoupled from carbon markets and instead focus on reducing demand for agricultural commodities and timber while rewarding those who have historically conserved forests.

The report critiques the REDD (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) framework, highlighting how its implementation often leads to the marginalization of indigenous communities and the privatization of forest resources. Through case studies in countries like Indonesia, Mexico, and Paraguay, it argues that REDD is being used by transnational energy companies to 'greenwash' their images while continuing fossil fuel extraction. The document warns that linking REDD to unstable carbon markets and allowing monoculture plantations may undermine actual emission reductions and exacerbate land conflicts.