Anti-Environmental Politics Disguised as Budget Efficiencies
Monday, February 17, 2025
Budget cuts threaten the conservation and climate crisis mitigation agendas. Prabowo’s policies ignore the environment.
arsip tempo : 174256790592.
IF you want to know about the direction of President Prabowo Subianto’s environmental policy, just look at how the budget cuts have been applied to a number of ministries related to natural resources. The latest fiscal policy shows even more clearly that the Prabowo administration’s policies are not on the side of the climate crisis mitigation and conservation agenda.
On Wednesday, February 12, the House of Representatives (DPR) completed its deliberations of the budget cuts proposed by the government. The budgets of all ministries and institutions were reduced. The target for efficiencies in state spending did not change, remaining at Rp306.7 trillion.
The changes—which the government refers to as efficiency reconstructions—only reduced the size of the budget cuts in a number of ministries. For example, the Forestry Ministry’s budget was only cut by Rp1.22 trillion, rather than the original Rp1.5 trillion. On the other hand, budgets for 17 ministries and other institutions that were initially exempted from the efficiency policy, such as the Defense Ministry and the National Nutrition Agency, were eventually reduced.
These budget cuts, which were not transparent within the government and for which the deliberations at the DPR last week were perfunctory, violate the key principle of state financial management: accountability. The public was unable to assess the basis for the decisions about why one work unit had its budget cut more than another. Without accountability, fiscal policy is not only prone to the infiltration of political interests of the government, but also sacrifices the public interest.
Signs of this are apparent in the budget efficiencies at the Forestry Ministry. The largest reduction in funding afflicted the Conservation of Natural Resources and Ecosystems (KSDAE) Directorate-General, a work unit that manages, monitors, and protects 564 conservation areas and the biodiversity within them. These cuts will force the KSDAE work unit to stop patrols and enforcement of forest regulations, wildlife monitoring, fire prevention, and restoration of ecosystems, all of which had been initially funded by the official travel budget.
The ending of various programs also has the potential to worsen the performance of the management and oversight of conservation areas. According to an analysis carried out by environmental foundation Auriga Nusantara, during the Jokowi administration, deforestation in conservation areas reached 287,600 hectares—an increase of 29 percent over the 10 years of the previous administration. After the cuts to the travel budget of KSDAE officials, deforestation could become worse.
Moreover, the budget efficiencies at the Energy and Mineral Resources Ministry are also rather strange. For instance, the budget for the New and Renewable Energy and Energy Conservation (EBTKE) Directorate-General, which is tasked with overseeing the energy transition agenda—abandoning fossil fuels—was cut by more than half. Previously, the EBTKE Directorate-General managed the largest budget in the Energy and Mineral Resources Ministry, but now the Oil and Natural Gas Directorate-General and the Mineral and Coal Directorate-General will be dominant.
Furthermore, the way these budget cuts are being carried out is really concerning. The Prabowo administration is making it even more clear that it considers nature as nothing more than an economic resource. Many people will have to face disaster as a result of these government policies that continue to ignore the importance of natural conservation and addressing climate change.
