Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Indonesia, with its vast tropical forests and the second highest biodiversity globally, faces significant challenges in balancing food security and environmental sustainability. The food estate policy, introduced to mitigate a national food crisis, has instead triggered issues such as peatland degradation, biodiversity loss, legal inconsistencies, and community exclusion. This research aims to provide a comprehensive review of the food estate policy in Indonesia by examining its environmental, legal, and social implications. It focuses on the policy’s intersection with forest governance, indigenous rights, and ecological integrity, while identifying governance and implementation gaps. Using a normative legal methodology, this research analyzes scientific literature, statutory regulations, policy documents, and legal doctrines. The findings reveal that across three presidential administrations, food estate initiatives in regions such as Central Kalimantan and Papua have consistently faced ecological and legal challenges. The conversion of protected forests and peatlands has led to deforestation, increased carbon emissions, and disrupted local ecosystems, often prioritizing political and corporate interests over sustainability.This research concludes that while food estates aim to strengthen national food security, their flawed implementation threatens environmental stability and legal order. A more integrated, community-inclusive, and ecologically informed policy approach is essential to ensure long-term resilience and justice in food governance.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ardiansah et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: