Food Estate, Farmers, and the Illusion of “Helping the Poor”
I listened to the Indonesian president’s speech on 20 May 2026 for almost one and a half hours. The longer I listened, the more conflicted I became.
┻━┻ ︵ヽ(`Д´)ﾉ︵ ┻━┻
There were numbers. Growth targets. Nationalism. Food security. Promises.
But somewhere between the speeches about sovereignty and prosperity, I kept asking myself:
Why does Indonesia keep repeating the same pattern?
We say we want to help farmers, strengthen food security, and build the nation. Yet many of our policies still feel disconnected from the actual ecosystem needed to make people truly independent and capable.
One example is the “food estate” project.
(╯°□°）╯︵ ┻━┻
At first glance, food estate sounds visionary: large-scale agricultural projects to secure Indonesia’s food future.
But once you look deeper into the history of food estates in Indonesia, the story becomes far more complicated.
The Mega Rice Project in Central Kalimantan during the Suharto era failed disastrously after massive peatland conversion damaged ecosystems and underperformed agriculturally. Later came MIFEE in Merauke under SBY, followed by Jokowi’s modern food estate initiatives spread across multiple provinces.
Different administrations. Different branding. But often similar criticism: top-down planning, environmental concerns, weak local participation, and questionable sustainability.
Sources:
- Kompas: https://money.kompas.com/read/2024/01/24/062356926/deretan-food-estate-yang-dianggap-gagal-di-indonesia
- Kompas Nasional: https://nasional.kompas.com/read/2024/01/15/11070281/program-food-estate-jokowi-dulu-dikritik-pdi-p-kini-ditentang-anies-cak-imin?page=all
- Kompas Lestari: https://lestari.kompas.com/read/2024/01/10/150000786/-food-estate-dianggap-tidak-menjamin-tercapainya-ketahanan-pangan
And honestly, I keep wondering: Are we solving the wrong problem?
Indonesia does not lack land. Indonesia does not lack farmers. Indonesia does not lack natural resources.
What we lack is ecosystem quality.
We keep treating farmers as “poor people who need assistance” instead of economic actors who can become modern producers, entrepreneurs, and regional pioneers.
(╯︵╰,)
Farmers are not merely recipients of aid. They are businessmen. They manage land, risk, production, labor, and distribution.
But many government programs still operate with a top-down mindset: subsidies, short-term aid, ceremonial projects, and centralized planning.
Indonesia does not only need more land expansion. Indonesia needs smarter agricultural mapping and long-term planning.
Not every region should be forced into the same model. Not every productive land should eventually become palm oil, biodiesel, or tourism infrastructure.
We are basically one of the most naturally blessed countries in the world. Beyond rice alone, Indonesia already has local food ecosystems: sago, corn, cassava, sweet potatoes, and generations of agricultural knowledge adapted to each region.
Why not strengthen what already naturally works?
Why not invest in:
- modernize irrigation systems, localized agricultural research, soil and climate mapping,
- help villages develop local food processing,
- create cooperative-owned storage facilities,
- strengthen logistics,
- improve digital market access,
- support branding of local products,
- and train younger generations to see agriculture as innovation instead of backward labor?
Why are we obsessed with mega-projects but weak in maintaining local capability?
Food security is about building capable people, resilient systems, and communities that can sustainably grow their own future.
(｡•́︿•̀｡)
I also think about Bali.
Rice fields continue turning into villas. And yes, investors play a role. But we also need honesty: many locals sold their land willingly because tourism money looked like instant salvation compared to uncertain farming income.
Then years later, people say: “Investors ruined Bali.” (ノ°益°)ノ
But what really failed first? Was it only the investors? Or was it the absence of systems that made agriculture profitable, modern, and respected enough to survive?
If farmers had:
- stronger bargaining power,
- profitable agricultural ecosystems,
- youth involvement,
- modern tools,
- and long-term support,
would they still feel forced to surrender their land?
Maybe this is the deeper frustration.
Indonesia often talks about helping the poor. But real empowerment is different from dependency.
A truly strong country does not only distribute aid. It builds capability.
Education. Nutrition. Infrastructure. Transparency. Critical thinking. Institutional trust.
These are slow investments. They are not politically glamorous. But they are the foundations of countries that successfully transformed themselves.
Sometimes I wonder whether we are too addicted to visible projects and short-term optics while neglecting the harder work of institution-building.
And perhaps the hardest question is this:
After decades of repeating similar patterns, how do we break them?
How do we stop building systems that centralize power and instead create systems that distribute capability?
How do we create villages where young people no longer feel farming is a dead end?
How do we make local products something Indonesians genuinely take pride in using, consuming, and exporting?
How do we stop operating on autopilot?
I do not think Indonesia is hopeless. Far from it.
In fact, maybe the reason many young Indonesians feel angry is because we can already see the country’s unrealized potential.
We are rich in resources. Rich in culture. Rich in human creativity.
But potential alone means nothing without execution, discipline, and institutional maturity.
Much concerned,
A frustrated yet hopeful citizen (｡•́︿•̀｡)っ
*Do you have other perspectives? Or wanna talk and discuss about this? Kindly reach me out at postcardsfrombali18@gmail.com