Indonesia’s commitment to achieving Forestry and Other Land Use (FOLU) Net Sink by 2030 is a central pillar of its national climate strategy. This initiative aims to ensure that Indonesia’s forests absorb more carbon dioxide than they emit, with a targeted emissions reduction of 140 million tons of CO₂ equivalent by 2030. The FOLU Net Sink 2030 roadmap forms a core component of Indonesia’s Enhanced Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC), which targets a 32% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions through domestic efforts, and up to 43% with international support.
To meet these ambitious goals, Indonesia has established partnerships with several countries, particularly Norway and the United Kingdom. Norway has become one of the largest contributors to Indonesia’s climate initiatives through a Results-Based Payment (RBP) scheme. These funds are disbursed based on verified achievements in reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation.
This collaboration has progressed through multiple phases, with the fourth phase (RBP-4) launched on December 10, 2024, granting Indonesia USD 60 million for verified emission reductions achieved between 2019 and 2020. Previous payments included USD 56 million (RBP-1), USD 46 million (RBP-2), and USD 50 million (RBP-3), bringing the total received to over USD 212 million.
The governance structure of the FOLU Net Sink 2030 program is built on three main pillars: Sustainable Forest Management, Environmental Governance, and Carbon Governance. This framework is designed to promote sustainable practices, strengthen regulatory oversight, and effectively manage carbon emissions within the forestry sector. However, despite the program’s environmental importance, controversy has recently emerged regarding governance practices—specifically allegations of nepotism within the Operational Management Office (OMO/KMO).
A recent report by The Jakarta Post revealed allegations of nepotism in the FOLU Net Sink 2030 program, particularly concerning the appointment of individuals linked to the Indonesian Solidarity Party (PSI). The most prominent figure in this controversy is Raja Juli Antoni, Minister of Forestry, who also serves as Secretary-General of PSI. Public concern over these appointments is not unfounded. Given the substantial international funding involved, governance decisions should be grounded in meritocracy and transparency—not political affiliation.
Minister Raja Juli defended the appointments by stating that FOLU Net Sink funding originates from international sources rather than Indonesia’s state budget.
However, this argument is weak. Although the funds do not come from Indonesian taxpayers, they remain public funds—originating from taxpayers in donor countries such as Norway and the United Kingdom. Public funds, regardless of their source, must be managed with full accountability and transparency.
One issue that further intensifies the controversy is the claim that the OMO/KMO structure is temporary. This information, reportedly conveyed by Norwegian officials and published in the Norwegian outlet Development Today, has not been formally documented in Indonesia. If Presidential Decree (Keppres) No. 32/2025 indeed establishes OMO/KMO as a temporary body, this must be explicitly stated in the decree. Otherwise, under legal principles, the decision will be considered permanent unless replaced by another decree. This lack of clarity raises serious concerns regarding administrative certainty and transparency, further eroding public trust.
Transparency and accountability in climate finance management are not merely administrative requirements—they are the foundation of credibility and effectiveness in environmental initiatives. MADANI Berkelanjutan emphasizes that Indonesia must ensure climate funds are governed according to the highest standards. Our analysis of Norway’s RBP program for FOLU Net Sink indicates that these funds must be protected from conflicts of interest and political interference. A lack of transparent and inclusive decision-making in fund allocation risks undermining climate mitigation efforts. Furthermore, our research identifies gaps in monitoring and evaluation mechanisms, which could lead to inefficiencies or misallocation of resources. Without a robust accountability system, Indonesia will struggle to maintain international confidence in its climate policies. Failure to address these issues could damage Indonesia’s global reputation and jeopardize future climate finance opportunities.
This 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 form of mismanagement threatens to erode that trust. Norway and the United Kingdom, as major donors, should reassess the governance of this program and encourage stricter oversight mechanisms to ensure funds are used effectively and transparently.
The Indonesian government must act swiftly to restore public confidence in the FOLU Net Sink 2030 program. First, an independent review of all OMO/KMO appointments is necessary to ensure adherence to meritocratic principles and professional qualifications. Second, Presidential Decree No. 32/2025 should be revised to explicitly clarify the temporary nature of OMO/KMO, if that is indeed the case. Third, Indonesia must implement a strong monitoring system with mandatory public reporting to ensure full transparency in climate fund utilization.
Indonesia has the opportunity to become a global leader in forest governance. However, this can only be realized if the country upholds transparency, accountability, and sound governance principles. The controversy surrounding FOLU Net Sink must serve as a wake-up call. If Indonesia fails to address these concerns now, it risks not only losing critical climate funding but also undermining its own credibility in the fight against deforestation and climate change.
