What We Can Learn from the Policies of Susi Pudjiastuti

Susi Pudjiastitui (source: MMAF)

 

MARITIMEPOSTS.COM – For decades, much of Indonesia’s marine wealth was plundered by large vessels owned by corporations operating illegally.

Many of these ships lacked proper permits and used prohibited fishing gear. Most of them were formerly foreign vessels or originally foreign-owned ships that had been reflagged as Indonesian, with ownership transferred to Indonesian legal entities under foreign investment (PMA) or domestic investment (PMDN) schemes acting as foreign proxies.

According to data from the Task Force for Illegal Fishing Eradication (Satgas 115), there were 1,605 registered ex-foreign fishing vessels in Indonesia. In reality, however, the number of foreign-built vessels operating in Indonesian waters was far greater—estimated at up to 10,000 ships.

Many operators engaged in fraudulent practices by duplicating licenses, using one permit for 5 to 10 vessels. These actions were made possible through collusion with officials, authorities, and influential figures.

These ex-foreign vessels, mostly ranging from 200 to 400 gross tons, used banned trawl nets stretching tens of kilometers. They operated across Indonesia’s waters, including the Arafura Sea, Cenderawasih Bay, Sulawesi Sea, Natuna Sea, Malacca Strait, and the Indian Ocean west of Sumatra.

Each year, these vessels harvested millions of tons of tuna, skipjack, mackerel, snapper, shrimp, and other species. A single 100 GT vessel could generate profits of USD 2–2.5 million annually. This massive extraction led to overfishing in Indonesian waters, threatening marine ecosystems and risking the depletion of fish stocks—effectively leaving future generations with empty seas.

Even more concerning, not all of the fish caught in Indonesian waters were landed domestically. These vessels conducted transshipment at sea, transferring their catch to carrier ships that transported it to ports in China, the Philippines, and Thailand.

This situation explains why small-scale Indonesian fishers—using non-motorized boats or small vessels of 5–10 GT—have long struggled with poverty. Since foreign investment in capture fisheries was opened, small fishers have found it increasingly difficult to compete.

With thousands of large vessels depleting fish stocks, many were forced to venture farther offshore at great risk, while others abandoned fishing altogether.

Data from Indonesia’s Agricultural Census (BPS) for 2003–2013 shows that the number of fishing households declined by 44.9%, from around 1.6 million in 2003 to just 868,414 in 2013. As coastal catches declined, many micro and small enterprises tied to fisheries—fish traders, collectors, and small-scale processors—also collapsed. Even 115 domestic fish-exporting companies went out of business.

The presence of ex-foreign vessels brought little benefit to the state. Many evaded taxes and failed to pay non-tax state revenue (PNBP). Through transshipment, they effectively smuggled fish abroad, leaving no traceable revenue.

As a result, fisheries PNBP in 2013 stood at only IDR 227 billion. Indonesia ranked just third among ASEAN fish exporters—an underperformance for a country with the world’s second-longest coastline (95,181 km) and 5.8 million square kilometers of ocean.

Large-scale fishing businesses reliant on foreign investment and large vessels are fundamentally unsuited to Indonesia’s archipelagic waters. Vessels above 200 GT should operate in the high seas, not in Indonesia’s territorial waters.

Moreover, such vessels tend to process their catch abroad, depriving Indonesia of added value and stunting the growth of its domestic fish-processing industry. This model also creates unfair competition, undermining small fishers and micro, small, and medium enterprises (MSMEs).

Worse still, foreign-invested fishing operations have been linked to collusion, corruption, and money laundering. Officials who accepted bribes often failed to realize that their gains were negligible compared to the enormous profits generated. Indonesia’s marine resources are estimated to be worth thousands of trillions of rupiah annually.

President Joko Widodo has even stated that the potential value reaches IDR 19,000 trillion per year. Weak oversight and widespread malpractice turned the fishing industry into a shadowy and opaque sector, discouraging honest business participation.

In response, the government revoked fishing licenses held by corporations operating ex-foreign vessels under PMA and proxy PMDN schemes. This policy aimed to create a level playing field for all fisheries stakeholders, from MSMEs to large enterprises, and to return Indonesia’s marine wealth to its own fishers and legitimate businesses.

The revocation of these licenses has also helped reduce overfishing, allowing ecosystems and fish stocks to recover. With more abundant resources, small-scale fishers and honest businesses can once again operate sustainably.

Fish are now more accessible even in coastal areas, reducing the need for dangerous offshore journeys.

Evidence shows that since ex-foreign vessels ceased operations, local fishers’ catches have increased significantly. Landings at major fishing ports—such as Cilacap, Kendari, Kwandang, Pemangkat, Sibolga, Pekalongan, Prigi, Tanjungpandan, Ternate, and Kejawanan—have risen, particularly from domestic and traditional fleets. This is reflected in the Fishermen’s Terms of Trade (NTN), a key indicator of welfare, which has steadily improved.

Additionally, micro and small enterprises in fish trade and home-scale processing have re-emerged. Since local catches are landed domestically, they stimulate local economies and revive Indonesia’s fisheries industry. The number of fishers and fisheries entrepreneurs is expected to continue growing as fish stocks recover and governance improves.

Ultimately, more Indonesians can now benefit from the nation’s marine wealth. Even those living far from coastal areas can access fish at affordable prices. The success of the fisheries sector should not only be measured by tax and non-tax revenues but also by improvements in fishermen’s welfare, the growth of MSMEs, and broader public access to affordable fish.