Abstract
Since the country gained independence in 1945, food self-sufficiency through import restrictions has been a feature of Indonesian trade policy, particularly concerning rice as most Indonesians’ staple food. Domestic production has been prioritised, and food imports are allowed only if the government deems domestic production insufficient to meet consumption needs, and only if the interests of domestic farmers are safeguarded.
Although food self-sufficiency is a continuous theme in Indonesian politics, it has received renewed attention since the most recent administrations. The central research question of this thesis is Why did the Indonesian government prefer pursuing a food self-sufficiency agenda through import restrictions during the administrations of Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono (2004 to 2014) and Joko Widodo (2014 to the present)? Their administrations promulgated three laws on food self-sufficiency: the Food Law 18/2012, the Farmers Law 19/2013, and the Job Creation Law 11/2020 (JCL).
Using theories of trade-policy preference formation, a close study of Indonesian documents on food self-sufficiency, and insights gained from one-on-one semi-structured interviews, this thesis traces the promulgation of those three laws. It analyses the opinions of the political elites and their staff, the representatives of business interests’ associations and farmers’ organisations, as well as academia regarding Indonesian food self-sufficiency and the deliberation process that preceded the passing of those laws.
Three sets of findings stand out. Firstly, both material and ideational factors played significant roles in forming domestic actors’ preferences. The material factors came from political advantages for the politicians and financial benefits sought by business interests. Meanwhile, the ideational factors took shape in the form of ideas and beliefs that as a free, independent, and sovereign nation with a pronounced anti-colonial spirit, Indonesia should avoid dependency on foreign countries by using food self-sufficiency through import restrictions as its strategy. The interplay of these factors, mediated by the Indonesian domestic political system (presidential central executive, proportional representation electoral system, and moderate multiparty system), all contributed to the promulgation of the Food and Farmers laws and the JCL.
Secondly, the executive branch exercised decisive authority in pushing the food self-sufficiency agenda. While the legislature had a significant involvement throughout the deliberation process of the Food and Farmers laws and the JCL, the president or one of his close ministers were the key actors who pushed the bills and ensured their passing into law. Nevertheless, the JCL case shows that the ideational factors of food self-sufficiency could transcend this political configuration. As a result, when the executive branch decided not to push a food self-sufficiency agenda, it was the legislature who did so instead, and the two branches had to reach a compromise.
Third and finally, the international trade regime did not significantly impact the Indonesian government’s trade-policy preferences in the food and agricultural sector. While the regime forced the government to revise the Food and Farmers laws by enacting the JCL, it did not change the government’s preference for food self-sufficiency through import restrictions.
By highlighting the role of ideational factors that complemented the material interests of the domestic actors, and the mediation role of the domestic political system, this thesis contributes to the discourse on the Indonesian government’s food self-sufficiency agenda beyond the political and financial benefits typically argued for in the existing literature. In addition, by exploring the mix of material and ideational factors, this thesis also contributes to the growing body of scholarly work on the political economy of trade which emphasises the role of ideas in forming trade-policy preferences.