Category: MIL-OSI

Source: The Conversation – France (in French) – By Marshall, A., Visiting professor, Mahidol University

Alfred Russel Wallace was a British naturalist renowned for co-developing the theory of evolution alongside Charles Darwin – and for mapping out the biodiversity of the Indonesian Archipelago. However, his legacy extends far beyond science.

Wallace’s observations of social exploitation in Wales and the Archipelago compelled him to take a stand against the British establishment in his homeland and its colonial ventures abroad. He also recognised the ecological destruction caused by colonialism, making him one of the world’s first global environmentalists.

In the 19th century, Wallace’s observations were striking. British imperialism was at its zenith, and the Industrial Revolution was fueling a titanic amplification of human impact upon nature.

---

Baca juga:
Wallacea is a living laboratory of Earth’s evolution – and its wildlife, forests and reefs will be devastated unless we all act

---

Wallace’s observations are probably even more noteworthy today. While European colonialism has largely collapsed, the world is industrialising at breakneck speed, intensifying the environmental damage Wallace warned about.

Witness to poverty: Wales

Wallace was born in 1823, and his early life in Wales exposed him to 19th-century rural struggles.

Historians have noted that Wales was one of the first regions to suffer English colonisation, dating back to medieval times.

By Wallace’s time, industrialisation had reshaped the Welsh landscape, with factories, mines, and railways supplanting its pristine mountains and valleys. While displaced farmers found work in these industries, the jobs were poorly paid, perilous, and often dehumanising. Wallace saw the ongoing struggle of Welsh communities to protect their farming rights and preserve their language.

Young Wallace initially worked as a mapmaker. His employers were usually wealthy landlords who hired him to map their estates to determine how much their tenant farmers owed them in rent or taxes.

At work, he witnessed how British landlords in Wales were becoming ‘more commercially minded’ (in other words, more money-grubbing). They often evicted impoverished tenant farmers to make way for profitable livestock, or mining and railway projects. If they weren’t pushed off the land altogether, the tenants faced rising rents and heavier taxes. Whatever the situation, it was usually the tenant farmers who were distressed.

Wallace was sometimes sent to collect rent and taxes from tenants, many of whom lived in poverty and barely spoke English to understand the circumstances they were in.

Wallace felt anguished for being part of the wretched business.

Eventually, after the private estates in Wales were just about entirely mapped, he decided to leave his career as a mapmaker.

At this point, Wallace became a full-time naturalist, collecting insect specimens and selling them to museums.

This new role led him to travel all across the world – including to the Indonesian Archipelago – where he spent eight years immersing himself in local cultures and languages such as Malay.

Sympathy for the colonised: The Archipelago

Initially, Wallace perceived Dutch colonialism as less exploitative than British practices. For the most part, this was because Wallace was comparing the state-run enterprises that dominated the economy of the Dutch East Indies with the avaricious companies that dominated the economies of British India and British Malaya. This preference for state capitalism versus laissez-faire capitalism even led Wallace to sympathise with the Cultivation System (Cultuurstelsel) imposed by the Dutch government.

Under this system, local farmers grew cash crops for the Dutch East Indies government. In exchange, they received some small payments below the market rate.

Wallace acknowledged that Dutch middlemen and local chiefs sometimes abused the system, but it often provided the growers with a reliable income. As well, the Dutch overlords were often obliged to build infrastructure and schools.

The system was criticised as a form of monopolistic serfdom. But Wallace saw it as less brutal than the ‘dog-eat-dog’ economies of Britain’s overseas free-trade colonies.

However, his perspective evolved. In later writings, Wallace rallied against the premise that any nation in the tropics need be colonised. He also realised colonised peoples didn’t gain much from the deal, if ‘deal’ we might call it.

In his 1898 book summarising human achievement in the 19th century, Wallace declared that the worst aspect of the century was the way Europeans mistreated native peoples worldwide.

Wallace noted that colonised lands worldwide were usually gained in dubious manners, and various abusive labour practices maintained their economies. By the turn of the century, Wallace was calling for all colonies to be handed back to indigenous peoples.

At the same time, in his homeland, Wallace also became a leading figure in the land nationalisation movement. In an effort to address rural poverty in Britain, Wallace advocated the nationalisation of all farmlands.

Entrusted to the state, farming rights could then be distributed fairly and democratically among the entire national community of farmers. In this manner, every farming family could grow their own food, either for themselves or to sell, without being impoverished by taxes and rents claimed by the gentry.

Destruction of nature

As a naturalist deeply connected to the environment, Wallace also documented colonial ventures disastrous impact on wildlife. When European ventures established estates in the tropics, the native rainforests were swiftly cleared.

In his own words:

The reckless destruction of forests, which have for ages been the protection and sustenance of the inhabitants, seems to me to be one of the most shortsighted acts of colonial mismanagement—Wallace in The Malay Archipelago.

Wallace also condemned the environmental impact of colonial mining in the Archipelago, especially those targeting gold and tin, which he witnessed in Borneo and the Malay Peninsula:

The rapid degradation of fertile valleys and the poisoning of streams by mining waste serve as stark reminders of the greed of commerce unchecked by reason or compassion—Wallace in The Malay Archipelago.

These observations, penned in the late 19th century, clearly anticipated 21st-century environmental problems and their causes.

Wallace’s foresight was rare at his time, and his warning was even more striking. He believed that nature’s destruction could only be avoided by taking much more equitable approaches to resource use.

Life lessons

Modern historians and scientists hail Wallace as one of the bravest figures of the 19th century. He possessed enough physical courage to cross vast oceans and live for years away from home in remote, untamed forests. This courage allowed Wallace to explore the natural world deeply enough to uncover its hidden forces.

Equally impressive was Wallace’s moral courage. At a time when criticising the British elite or questioning imperialism was far from popular, Wallace did not shy away from challenging the status quo. Many of his books envision a better, fairer world.

Wallace’s moral courage is something we can all learn from today, especially as we realise that scientific knowledge alone is not enough to protect nature from relentless industrialisation.

Marshall, A. tidak bekerja, menjadi konsultan, memiliki saham, atau menerima dana dari perusahaan atau organisasi mana pun yang akan mengambil untung dari artikel ini, dan telah mengungkapkan bahwa ia tidak memiliki afiliasi selain yang telah disebut di atas.

– ref. Beyond Evolution: Alfred Russel Wallace’s critique of the 19th century world – https://theconversation.com/beyond-evolution-alfred-russel-wallaces-critique-of-the-19th-century-world-243372

Source: The Conversation – France (in French) – By Michaela Guo Ying Lo, Postdoctoral Researcher in Environment, Conservation, and Development, University of Kent

Indonesia produced nearly four times the amount of nickel in recent years compared to a decade earlier — following the global push for a low-carbon revolution that drives the mining for the mineral essential for electric vehicles, renewable energy technologies, and stainless-steel production.

This boom, however, takes a toll on nickel-rich regions like Sulawesi, threatening a one-of-a-kind biodiversity hotspot, known as ‘Wallacea’.

Our recent study raises questions about the sustainability of nickel mining practices as we highlight its environmental and social impacts in Sulawesi, based on data from 7,721 villages.

Sulawesi’s forests and biodiversity at risk

Our study shows that between 2011 and 2018, villages near nickel mines experienced deforestation at nearly double the rate of non-mining areas. The loss is attributable to land acquisition needed to mine the mineral.

Deforestation will not only worsen global warming but also destroy habitats and threaten wildlife populations. Among the species potentially affected are Sulawesi’s 17 primate species, such as Celebes crested macaque and Peleng tarsier—all of them are endemic to the island. If this trend continues, it could set back efforts to both mitigate greenhouse gas emissions and conserve biodiversity.

The costs and benefits to local communities

Our research reveals that unsustainable nickel mining practices have increased the pollution and the frequency of mining-related disasters, such as landslides and flash floods. They directly impact local communities that rely on agriculture, fishing, and other natural resource-based livelihoods.

The effects of nickel mining, however, are nuanced. Environmental damage and land acquisition have triggered conflicts.
But while social well-being declined in areas near nickel mines, the impact varied significantly across regions, and was positive in some areas.

This implies that communities across Sulawesi can experience both positive and negative impacts. In villages with high poverty levels, for example, the environmental and health impacts of mining have been particularly severe. In these villages, adverse health effects are more likely to occur due to limited resources and capacity to cope with pollution associated with mining activities.

However, our study also shows that these poorer regions have also gained the greatest benefits from mining, including improved infrastructure and living conditions. Revenue from mining has likely added to investments into public goods, such as improving water systems and transportation networks.

More information is needed to understand what is driving this variation, but it underscores the precarious balance posed by nickel mining. While it provides vital development opportunities, it also threatens vulnerable ecosystems and exposes communities to significant environmental and health risks. Achieving progress without deepening hardship remains a complex challenge for sustainable development in Indonesia and other nickel producing countries.

Towards sustainable nickel mining

Tackling these challenges requires a just and sustainable approach to nickel mining. If the harm continues, it could undermine efforts to conserve Sulawesi’s unique biodiversity. That’s why protecting its ecosystems is critical.

Several recommendations have been proposed by other academics and actors, three of which we emphasise through our mining evaluation:

1. Strengthening environmental and social standards

Governments and mining companies must follow strict environmental and social standards to minimise harm to ecosystems and communities. This includes strict regulations on deforestation and water management, along with protections for workers and affected communities.

For mining companies, frameworks like the OECD Due Diligence Guidelines can ensure that businesses carry out the necessary protocols to identify, prevent, and account for adverse impacts that result from their mining practices. At the same time, state actors should continue to fulfil their obligations to protect and respect the rights of those affected by mining.

2. Ensuring community participation

Local communities must be central to decision-making around mining projects. Inclusive consultation and consent processes can help mitigate harm and ensure that mining operations do not harm those who rely on the environment for their livelihoods.

Involving communities in decision-making helps mining companies build trust and share benefits. As one case study has shown in Sulawesi, engaging local populations in evaluating the nickel production process can lead to corrective actions. Community feedback can ensure that mining projects not only achieve compliance but also align with the aspirations and well-being of affected communities.

3. Establishing robust monitoring and accountability

Regular monitoring and evaluation of mining operations, from start to finish, is crucial — not just for nickel but other mining commodities too. Companies should be held accountable for environmental damage and social harm, while successful practices should be highlighted to serve as models for the industry. Independent oversight by NGOs and local groups can boost transparency, ensure accountability, and promote best practices.

Time is crucial. With the low-carbon transition speeding up, swift action is needed to prevent environmental and social harm worldwide.

By reforming nickel mining practices, Indonesia can play a vital role in building a just, sustainable, low-carbon future, and provide a model for other countries.

This is a chance to balance economic prosperity, environmental protection, and social equity — ensuring the green energy transition’s benefits outweigh its costs.

Michaela Guo Ying Lo received funding from the University of Kent Global Challenges Doctoral Centre.

Jatna is also a member of Indonesian Academy of Sciences (AIPI) and lecturer in University of Indonesia

Matthew Struebig received funding from Natural Environment Research Council UK and Leverhulme Trust UK.

– ref. Weighing the green cost: How nickel mining in Indonesia impacts forests and local communities – https://theconversation.com/weighing-the-green-cost-how-nickel-mining-in-indonesia-impacts-forests-and-local-communities-246259

Source: The Conversation – France (in French) – By Francesco Perono Cacciafoco, Associate Professor in Linguistics, Xi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool University

Shiyue Wu, a member of Francesco Perono Cacciafoco’s research team at Xi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool University (XJTLU), who is currently developing intensive fieldwork in Alor Island to document and preserve endangered languages, discovered and first documented Kape during a Language Documentation fieldwork in August 2024 and therefore actively contributed to this study.

---

As of 2025, more than 7000 languages are spoken across the world. However, only about half of them are properly documented, leaving the rest at risk of disappearing.

Globalisation has propelled languages such as English and Chinese into the mainstream, and they now dominate global communication.

Parents today prefer their children learn widely-spoken languages. Meanwhile, indigenous languages, such as Copainalá Zoque in Mexico and Northern Ndebele in Zimbabwe, are not even consistently taught in schools.

Indigenous people generally did not use writing for centuries and, therefore, their languages do not have ancient written records. This has contributed to their gradual disappearance.

To prevent the loss of endangered languages, field linguists – or language documentarists – work to ensure that new generations have access to their cultural heritage. Their efforts reveal the vocabulary and structure of these languages and the stories and traditions embedded within them.

My research team and I have spent over 13 years documenting endangered Papuan languages in Southeast and East Indonesia, particularly in the Alor-Pantar Archipelago, near Timor, and the Maluku Islands. One of our significant and very recent discoveries is Kape, a previously undocumented and neglected language spoken by small coastal communities in Central-Northern Alor.

Not only is the discovery important for mapping the linguistic context of the island, but it also highlights the urgency of preserving endangered languages by employing Language Documentation methods.

The discovery of Kape

In August 2024, while working with our Abui consultants, Shiyue Wu, my Research Assistant at Xi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool University, discovered a previously-ignored, presumably undocumented Papuan language from Alor, ‘Kape’.

At the time, she was gathering information about the names and locations of ritual altars known as ‘maasang’ in the Abui area, with assistance from our main consultant and several native speakers. In Central Alor, every village has a ‘maasang’.

During conversations about the variants in altar names across Alor languages and Abui dialects, some speakers mentioned the name of the ‘maasang’ (‘mata’) in Kape—a language previously unrecorded and overlooked in linguistic documentation.

‘Kape’ translates to ‘rope’, symbolising how the language connects its speakers across the island, from the mountains to the sea. Geographically and linguistically, it is associated with Kabola in the east and Abui and Kamang in Central Alor.

At this stage, it is unclear whether Kape is a distinct language or a dialect of Kamang, as the two are mutually intelligible. Much of Kape’s basic lexicon (the collection of words in one language), indeed, shares cognates (related words among languages) with Kamang.

However, Kape is spoken as the primary (native) language by the whole Kape ethnic group of Alor, and the speakers consider themselves an independent linguistic and ethnic community. This could serve as an element for regarding Kape as a language.

Kape also shows connections with Suboo, Tiyei, and Adang, other Papuan languages from Alor Island. The speakers, known as ‘Kafel’ in Abui, are multilingual, fluent, to some extent, in Kape, Kamang, Bahasa Indonesia, Alor Malay, and, sometimes, Abui.

So far, no historical records have been found for Kape, though archival research may reveal more about its origins. Based on its typology and lexical characteristics, Kape appears as ancient as other languages spoken in Alor. Like many Papuan languages, it is critically endangered and requires urgent documentation to preserve its legacy.

Documenting languages: An ongoing challenge

Language Documentation aims to reconstruct the unwritten history of indigenous peoples and to guarantee the future of their cultures and languages. This is accomplished by preserving endangered, scarcely documented or entirely undocumented languages in disadvantaged and remote areas.

External sources, like diaries by missionaries and documentation produced by colonisers, can help reconstruct some historical events. However, they are insufficient for providing reliable linguistic data since the authors were not linguists.

My research team and I document endangered languages, starting with their lexicon and grammar. Eventually, we also explore the ancient traditions and ancestral wisdom of the native speakers we work with.

We have contributed to the documentation of several Papuan languages from Alor Island, especially Abui, Kula, and Sawila. These languages are spoken among small, sometimes dispersed communities of indigenous peoples belonging to different but related ethnic clusters.

They communicate with each other mostly in Bahasa Indonesia and Alor Malay. This is because their local languages are almost never taught in schools and are rarely used outside their groups.

Over time, in addition to documenting their lexicons and grammars, we worked to reconstruct their place-names and landscape names, oral traditions, foundation myths, ancestral legends and the names of plants and trees they use.

We also explored their traditional medical practices and local ethnobotany, along with their musical culture and number systems.

Safeguarding Kape is not just linguistically relevant. Its preservation and documentation are not just about attesting its existence – they also contribute to revitalising the language, keeping it alive, and allowing the local community to rediscover its history, knowledge, and traditions to pass down to the next generations.

This journey has just begun, but my team and I – with the indispensable collaboration from our local consultants and native speakers – are prepared to go all the way towards its completion.

Francesco Perono Cacciafoco received funding from Xi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool University (XJTLU): Research Development Fund (RDF) Grant, “Place Names and Cultural Identity: Toponyms and Their Diachronic Evolution among the Kula People from Alor Island”, Grant Number: RDF-23-01-014, School of Humanities and Social Sciences (HSS), Xi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool University (XJTLU), Suzhou (Jiangsu), China, 2024-2025.

– ref. Finding ‘Kape’: How Language Documentation helps us preserve an endangered language – https://theconversation.com/finding-kape-how-language-documentation-helps-us-preserve-an-endangered-language-247465

Source: The Conversation – France (in French) – By Sigit Sasmito, Senior Research Officer, James Cook University

Protecting and restoring peatlands and mangroves can strengthen Southeast Asian countries’ efforts to combat climate change, according to new findings from an international team of researchers.

Carbon-dense peatlands and mangroves comprise only 5% of Southeast Asia’s surface. Protecting and restoring them, however, can reduce approximately 770±97 megatonnes of CO2 equivalent (MtCO2e) annually. This is equal to more than half of the carbon emissions from land use in the region.

Conserving offers larger mitigation potential through reduced emissions from ecosystem loss in the region compared to gains from restoration. If optimally implemented, restoration can still play an important role in nature-based carbon sequestration.

Having peatlands and mangroves included in the new climate pledges (Nationally Determined Contributions 3.0) can help countries set higher emissions reduction targets for 2030 and 2035.

More benefits to offer

The study reports extensive climate benefits from conserving and restoring peatlands and mangroves. Therefore, they make effective natural climate solutions for Southeast Asian countries.

Both ecosystems protect organic matter from decay under natural conditions, acting as net carbon sinks. This means that carbon uptake exceeds carbon loss.

Net carbon gains are mainly accumulated in their soils instead of their vegetation. More than 90% of carbon stocks in peatlands and 78% in mangroves are in their soils.

At scale, protecting and restoring both types of wetlands also supports other valuable co-benefits. These include biodiversity preservation, water quality improvement, coastal protection, food security and rural development for millions of coastal people across Southeast Asian countries.

Challenges remain

Despite the benefits, many challenges and risks persist in conserving and restoring peatlands and mangroves.

When peatlands and mangroves are disturbed – commonly due to land use change – they release large quantities of carbon into the atmosphere. This release can later exacerbate climate change.

The new estimates suggest that changes in their land use for the past two decades (2001-2022) had caused the release of approximately 691±97 MtCO2e of excess emissions.

Indonesia accounts for the largest portion of the region’s emissions, accounting for 73%. Malaysia (14%), Myanmar (7%), and Vietnam (2%) follow. The other seven Southeast Asian countries generate the remaining 4% of emissions.

In Southeast Asia, mangroves and peatlands are often treated as unproductive land. Still, they have long been subject to agricultural land expansion planning.

Moreover, unclear or multi-land ownership and lack of long-term participatory monitoring programs are critical challenges for prioritising and implementing restoration on the ground.

Despite these challenges, government and corporate interest in developing conservation and restoration-based carbon projects for peatlands and mangroves is rapidly increasing.

That is why now is a good opportunity to recognise their vital roles — not only for climate change mitigation — but also for people and nature.

Implications for national emissions reduction targets

The new study addresses a critical gap in climate policy for Southeast Asian by providing annual climate change mitigation potentials from peatlands and mangroves.

Climate mitigation potential for national land-use emissions varies widely between countries.

The findings suggest that it could reduce national land-use emissions by up to 88% in Malaysia, 64% in Indonesia, and 60% in Brunei. Other countries include Myanmar at 39%, the Philippines at 26%, Cambodia at 18%, Vietnam at 13%, Thailand at 10%, Laos at 9%, Singapore at 2%, and Timor-Leste at 0.04%.

Our study also shows that mitigation potential from peatlands and mangroves in Indonesia can fulfil country Forestry and Other Land-use (FOLU) Net Sink targets by 2030.

In its 2022 NDCs, Indonesia plans to reduce its annual emissions from FOLU by 2030 between 500-729 MtCO2e, depending on the level of external support. According to the study, this figure is within the same order of mitigation potential as peatlands and mangroves can collectively generate.

However, peatland and mangrove mitigation potentials are insufficient to avoid dangerous levels of climate change in the future.

Decarbonisation remains the most effective means of curbing climate change and its impacts, with peatland and mangrove protection enhancing these efforts.

Susan Elizabeth Page menerima dana dari University of Leicester, UK.

Dan Friess, David Taylor, Massimo Lupascu, Pierre Taillardat, Sigit Sasmito, dan Wahyu Catur Adinugroho tidak bekerja, menjadi konsultan, memiliki saham, atau menerima dana dari perusahaan atau organisasi mana pun yang akan mengambil untung dari artikel ini, dan telah mengungkapkan bahwa ia tidak memiliki afiliasi selain yang telah disebut di atas.

– ref. Peatlands and mangroves: Southeast Asian countries must protect these major carbon pools to boost climate ambitions – https://theconversation.com/peatlands-and-mangroves-southeast-asian-countries-must-protect-these-major-carbon-pools-to-boost-climate-ambitions-247570

Source: The Conversation – France (in French) – By Wira A. Swadana, Climate Action Senior Lead, World Resources Institute

Indonesia has developed several climate documents as pathways to curb climate change and adapt to its impacts. These impacts influence many elements of life, including displacement, the spread of infectious diseases, and even fatalities.

Some of these documents include Enhanced Nationally Determined Contributions, Long-Term Strategy for Low Carbon and Climate Resilience 2050 (LTS-LCCR), and Low Carbon Development Indonesia (LCDI).

As a scholar in social development and environmental policy, I conducted a descriptive analysis of more than five Indonesia’s climate documents to learn how the concept of a just transition is being integrated into Indonesia’s climate policies. My analisis reveals that the current narrative in those documents is limited to the outcomes of climate-related approaches.

I found that these climate documents have failed to adequately address the social and environmental aspects that are fundamental to a ‘just transition’ — a global effort to combat climate change and shift towards a sustainable economy while improving the condition of people and the environment.

Indonesia’s climate action is important because the country is home to vast tropical forests and extensive peatlands, which act as important carbon sinks. Yet, it remains one of the world’s largest emitters.

Indonesia’s just transition is essential as it supports global efforts to mitigate climate change while ensuring that the shift is more sustainable and inclusive. Neglecting these factors in the transition can risk equity, justice, and inclusion for affected communities and ecosystems in Indonesia’s climate actions.

The risks it posed

So far, Indonesia’s just transition narrative concentrates mainly on the energy sector. For instance, the government’s white paper on just transition, released in September last year, centres solely on the energy aspect.

Additionally, the use of the word just in the Just Energy Transition Partnership (JETP) — an international partnership aiming at speeding Indonesia’s renewable energy development and coal phase-out — has helped popularise the notion.

A just transition should include broader efforts to limit and adapt to climate change, given these changes directly impact communities. Despite its increasing recognition in the energy sector, just transition remains a long way from being completely integrated into Indonesia’s climate initiatives.

In the forestry sector, Indonesia’s strategy to apply Sustainable Forest Management (SFM) practices, which includes selective logging practices to minimise damage, may lead to the prohibition of traditional slash-and-burn farming in some areas. This threatens local communities that have long practised controlled burning as a sustainable land management method.

Similarly, under FOLU Net Sink 2030 — Indonesia’s plan to reduce emissions from forestry and land-use — the government has introduced community forestry initiatives to improve livelihood. However, the strategy does not yet address the potential consequences for people who rely on forests for their livelihoods and cultural heritage, which could be jeopardised by by SFM practices.

Moreover, Indonesia’s climate resilience strategies for coastal communities overlook the socio-cultural importance of fishing as a key source of income. For example, the government plans to provide business development training to assist fishing families in diversifying their income in response to extreme weather conditions. However, without acknowledging the deep cultural and economic ties these communities have to fishing, such initiatives risk being ineffective.

The cost we bear

The lack of justice in Indonesia’s transition agenda has backfired, with negative consequences for both people and the environment.

For example, the energy shift demands Indonesia to exploit more of its abundant nickel resources for EV batteries, particularly in central and eastern Indonesia. To assist nickel mining and processing, the government has implemented several policies.

While the nickel boom has helped resource-rich provinces like North Maluku and Central Sulawesi boost their economic growth, it has also had serious impacts. Indonesia’s greenhouse gas emissions climbed by 20% between 2022 and 2023, owing to the dependency on coal for nickel processing facilities.

Beyond emissions, nickel mining has also led to deforestation and pollution, affecting local communities who rely on natural resources for their livelihoods and cultural preservation, while also harming biodiversity in mining areas.

The expense of the nickel rush demonstrates how an unjust energy transition can exacerbate challenges faced by vulnerable communities and further degrade the environment.

Next steps

To integrate just transition principles effectively, Indonesia must first redefine the term ‘just transition’ within its own context. Currently, the term has not been properly incorporated into any of Indonesia’s climate-related documents.

A clear and context-specific definition will allow Indonesia to pursue a transition that is both equitable and inclusive.

To accomplish this, the government must engage a wide range of stakeholders in defining and planning the transition to all climate-related initiatives. This encompasses, but is not limited to, all sectors. The goal is to secure broad participation — not only from the public and private sectors, but also from local communities, vulnerable groups including women and Indigenous peoples, as well as other key actors.

A more defined concept and well-structured plan will make it easier to implement, monitor, and evaluate the change. Simultaneously, this inclusive strategy should ensure a fair and equitable distribution of both benefits and burdens. All actors must be able to participate in decision-making and take action prior to and during the transition process.

Indonesia must also have a robust monitoring and evaluation mechanism in place to support its climate actions. The country can learn from Scotland, which has developed a just transition framework with clear outcomes and measurable indicators while ensuring participation and continuous learning from all stakeholders.

Drawing on insights from existing literature and reports will help Indonesia develop a framework that is well-suited to its unique context.

Wira A. Swadana tidak bekerja, menjadi konsultan, memiliki saham, atau menerima dana dari perusahaan atau organisasi mana pun yang akan mengambil untung dari artikel ini, dan telah mengungkapkan bahwa ia tidak memiliki afiliasi selain yang telah disebut di atas.

– ref. Lack of justice in Indonesia’s climate plan may backfire, harming people and environment – https://theconversation.com/lack-of-justice-in-indonesias-climate-plan-may-backfire-harming-people-and-environment-249246