Food Estate Program and the Path to Food Sovereignty
Images: Unsplash
Recently, several farmers in Pulang Pisau, Central Kalimantan experienced severe crop failure due to drought. Some complained that the land was cracked and pests had arrived, causing crop failure. Not only that, the yield was also low with a total yield of 10 kg from 100 kg of planted seeds.
Meanwhile, in Gunung Mas Regency, a number of farmers complained about the same thing. Because, the cassava plantations planted by a number of farmers experienced crop failure due to infertile land conditions. It is not impossible that the land planted is not suitable for growing horticultural crops such as cassava because the land conditions are sandy so that the cassava harvested is of poor quality. The harvested cassava tastes bitter and is small and bantet.
The stories above are just a few of the problems experienced by farmers and planters who are members of the national food barn or food estate program that was worked on during the Joko Widodo administration. This program has also been included in the 2020-2024 National Strategic Program. The implementation of this program is carried out in several provinces in Indonesia, such as North Sumatra, West Kalimantan, Central Kalimantan, East Kalimantan, East Nusa Tenggara, Maluku to Papua.
The food estate program works with two main mechanisms, namely land intensification and extensification. Intensification means increasing agricultural production, while extensification refers to the opening of new lands, especially peatlands with soil fertilization programs. This is done to increase agricultural production output such as rice, corn, soybeans and other agricultural products.
Meanwhile, global and national food price indices continue to skyrocket, especially in the 2022-2023 period. In September 2023, for example, the price of rice, a staple food, rose by 5.61 percent. This is certainly worrying considering that Indonesia's malnutrition rate is already among the three highest in Southeast Asia. Furthermore, in Papua, a hunger epidemic has claimed 23 lives in 13 villages from Amuma District, Yahukima, Mountainous Papua during October 2023. This illustrates the food crisis as a threat that needs attention.
Food Estate and Food Securitization
Nevertheless, the food estate program has been implemented as part of a comprehensive strategy to ensure food security through food sovereignty. The allocation of special areas is done to sustain national food both in the long and short term. The food estate strategy undertaken by the Indonesian government is part of the government's comprehensive strategy in downstreaming agricultural production. Last August, Jokowi appointed Prabowo and more specifically related agencies such as the Ministry of Defense (Kemhan) to oversee the strategic logistics reserve (Cadangan Logistik Strategis/CLS) which falls within the scope of Indonesia's food estate strategy.
Prabowo's appointment as Minister of Defense to secure strategic food reserves is part of food securitization in Jokowi's presidency. Securitization is part of the process of transforming a subject that was originally a political issue into a security issue. This is shown through the intersubjective framing of an issue into an existential threat (Buzan, 1998). In this case, the prospect of the food crisis becoming a national threat requires an extraordinary mechanism in the form of the inclusion of military elements in handling it. Food, in this case, is a critical issue that concerns the livelihood of many people. Thus, the prospect of a food crisis threat justifies the use of military elements.
Thus, the issue of food is constructed into an issue of food 'security', thus justifying military means to resolve the ongoing food crisis. Food security implies asymmetrical power relations over food, which is in the public interest and concerns the livelihood of ordinary people. Handing over the task of food affairs to the military is tantamount to agreeing to asymmetrical control over food, instead of giving control over food to the people democratically and ensuring that food is evenly distributed.
Implication towards Indigenous Communities
In order to rethink about the very idea of food securitization we need to rethink about the implications of the food estate program on marginalized communities, especially indigenous peoples. Can food estate programs, or other food protection programs really bring benefits to the indigenous?
For example, the Marind People who have inhabited the Merauke area for many years have a gastro identity consisting of a carbohydrate diet in the form of sago. For centuries, they have gathered their own food by searching for sago trees as well as spreading palm seeds. This illustrates the balance of the ecosystem that is embodied in the local wisdom of indigenous peoples.
Meanwhile in Manggarai, East Nusa Tenggara, the local wisdom expressed in beliefs, songs, cuisine, and complex cultivation practices are associated with the community's agricultural style. Such wisdom has been passed down for generations describes the genetic diversity of their staple food.
Food policy formation since the New Order has often focused on the security of the strategic staple food of rice. The problem is that this ignores the diversity of staple foods such as cassava, sago or sorghum that have been consumed by Indonesian people for generations. Agricultural monoculturization not only threatens the local wisdom of indigenous peoples, but also ecological balance, especially in areas outside Java. This can be seen in some of the cases described above.
Furthermore, findings from Greenpeace found that there are land grab practices that color the food estate program. Protected forests that have been used by indigenous peoples and local communities for generations are converted through the Forest Area for Food Security (KHKP) scheme for the agricultural industry. The use of military elements also limits local communities' access to forests that have been part of their lives for generations.
Conclusion
Thus, we need to revisit, what is the true meaning of Food Sovereignty? Are the various programs and policies implemented actually appropriate in dealing with the food crisis and the various problems that arise? Thus, the author offers the need for a paradigmatic shift in food policy-making in Indonesia. Conventional methods involving protectionist policy instruments and wasteful budget programs that are not well-targeted need to be reconsidered. The existing policy paradigm frames food issues as an existential threat that requires state control mechanisms over daily meals. The problem that occurs is that the control over food exercised by the state often creates a tendency for the use of excessive methods such as the use of military elements or by homogenizing food that ignores genetic diversity and local wisdom that has been passed down from generation to generation by indigenous peoples. By not achieving food sovereignty, in our opinion, it is necessary to reconsider the paradigm of state-centered food policy.