The establishment of the National Park Management Financing Innovation Task Force has sparked serious concerns about the direction of environmental governance. Behind the buzzword "financing innovation" lie risks of conflicts of interest, as well as a push for the commercialization of conservation areas, which could potentially undermine the protection mandate.
The task force was established through Presidential Decree No. 8/2026, signed by President Prabowo Subianto on April 16. The decree serves as a framework for new conservation funding schemes, ranging from multi-stakeholder partnerships to result-based payment mechanisms. The policy's objectives sound ideal: strengthening species protection, maintaining the ecological functions of national parks, and supporting the 2030 Forestry and Other Land Use Net Sink target.
However, its institutional design creates problematic loopholes. It is hard to ignore that appointing Hashim Djojohadikusumo as task force chair raises a potential conflict of interest. Hashim is a businessperson with numerous ventures, including in the forestry sector. His role as task force chair gives him access to critical data, including information on carbon credit potential. Amid the burgeoning carbon economy, such data is not only an administrative component but also a commercially valuable commodity.
Moreover, business entities affiliated with Hashim, such as the Arsari Group, are major players in the forestry and carbon trading sectors – further heightening potential conflicts of interest. Without independent oversight mechanisms, it is difficult to ensure that the task force's policies do not conflict with private interests. Moreover, as the task force chief, Hashim reports directly to the president – his own brother – thereby limiting the scope for checks and balances.
Even before the task force was formed, there were already signs of commercialization. A report by Tempo revealed zoning changes in Way Kambas National Park, Lampung, which opened up opportunities for carbon trading and tourism. The changes reportedly involved Karen Brooks, a consultant with close ties to the political inner circle. The case illustrates how power and economic interests infiltrate conservation policies.
Beyond potential conflicts of interest, the existence of the task force also creates institutional overlap. The Environmental Fund Management Agency (BPDLH) has been responsible for mobilizing and managing environmental funds. As a public service agency under the Ministry of Finance, the BPDLH has a more accountable oversight system than an ad hoc task force. Therefore, it is hard not to suspect that the task force has a function to shift funding control to a more fluid structure subject to minimal oversight.
The combination of a lax institutional framework and major economic interests makes the government's conservation narrative incongruous. Rather than strengthening protection, the task force-based governance risks turning national parks into commodities. In the long term, the threat is not merely ecological degradation, but also a shift in the area's function – from a protected space to a commercial arena.
If these mechanisms are not corrected, Indonesia risks losing its national parks as bastions of biodiversity. Conservation areas that should be protected as ecological heritage could instead become commodities for commercial gain.
– Read the complete story in Tempo English Magazine
Source: https://en.tempo.co/read/2103681/commercialization-masked-as-conservatio