Indonesia generates approximately 91,324.49 tons of waste daily, equating to around 33,333,439.86 tons annually, with this figure continuing to rise each year. Nationally, waste in Indonesia is primarily composed of food waste (39.83%), plastic (17.25%), wood (14.01%), and paper (11.98%). The largest contributors to this waste are households (46.07%) and traditional markets (22.19%) (Wulan Romianingsih, 2023).
This situation underscores the severity of the waste management crisis in Indonesia. In response, the government has enacted various regulations to promote effective waste management policies, including Law No. 18 of 2008, Law No. 30 of 2007, and Law No. 32 of 2009, along with additional regulations issued by the President and various ministries. Furthermore, the government is initiating Waste to Energy (WtE) projects to convert waste into renewable energy at 30 sites across Indonesia by 2029, which is an ambitious yet challenging endeavor (Qonitan et al., 2021).
Despite having a solid legal framework and ambitious plans, Indonesia currently operates only one pilot Waste-to-Energy (WtE) facility with a capacity of 100 tons per day in Bantargebang. Plans are underway for a commercial incinerator with a capacity of 2,200 tons per day in Sunter. This situation begs the question: why is the waste management agenda in Indonesia unclear?
Economic incentives
The concept of incentives may explain the lack of success in waste management initiatives in Indonesia. According to economic theory, individuals act for a reason—each decision is motivated by an incentive, often tied to economic benefits (Gaus & Thrasher, 2021).
Managing waste is both time-consuming and costly. Individuals are unlikely to invest resources in organizing waste unless it serves their tangible or intangible interests. On a micro level, while individual waste producers may want to manage their waste, many resort to open dumping, which involves disposing of waste in public areas, burning it, or burying it (Wikurendra et al., 2023).
Most waste producers do not prioritize economic circularity, WtE, or preventive measures that require them to sort organic and inorganic waste before disposal (Aprilia, 2021). This issue is even more complicated for major waste producers, like fisheries and plastic factories, due to the high costs associated with waste management.
This scenario indicates that effective waste management requires more than just awareness of environmental sustainability; it fundamentally hinges on economic incentives. As Karl Marx noted, it is not ideology or religions but rather economic structures that shape people’s consciousness (1859).
Political economy incentives
The absence of economic incentives could potentially be mitigated by strong political will. Governments, either in authoritarian or democratic systems, can mandate waste management through policies. While it may be easier for authoritarian leaders to push their subjects to address waste issues, democratic countries pose a greater challenge, especially newly developing ones like Indonesia.
In democracies, elected officials must be accountable not only to high state agencies (horizontal accountability) but also to their electorate (vertical accountability). This balance generally functions effectively in developed countries such as those in Western Europe, Japan, Taiwan, and South Korea.
However, many developing democracies face significant challenges. Politicians in these contexts often prioritize short-term electoral gains over the long-term public interest, focusing more on their electability and chances of reelection rather than addressing foundational issues like waste management.
Consequently, waste management in Indonesia remains stagnant primarily because elected officials lack both political and economic incentives. Why would politicians invest energy, time, and resources into costly and time-consuming waste management projects if such actions do not enhance their chances of reelection?
Other factors, such as potential corruption, a lack of expertise and resources, potential detrimental impact on environment and society, and other intangible consequences of waste management, further complicate implementation. Nonetheless, these factors are interconnected and influenced by economic and political incentives, which are at the core of the issue. Therefore, it is crucial for Indonesians to find ways to fulfill these incentives to achieve successful waste management.
One of the actionable strategies to encourage waste management is to shift this issue from a public issue to a political issue. Waste management has been a concern for many Indonesians for years. However, they are never converted into a serious political issue that has the power to compel politicians to fight for its implementation.
As a political issue, waste management has its niche in electoral politics. Thus, it can capture politicians’ attention and interest in addressing the issue. In simple terms, politicizing waste management means elevating it to be a critical and valuable demand in politics. This shift encourages politicians to prioritize waste management in their campaign agendas, leading to competition over who can most effectively address this issue throughout the supply chain.
