Development and Peace in Papua: Assessment of the impact of the Jokowi administration in extractive zones

Papua is one of the most strategic and complex regions in Indonesia, particularly due to its wealth of natural resources, notably the mining sector. On the other hand, this region also has a long history of social, political and economic conflicts. Since beginning his term in 2014, President Joko Widodo has made Papua a national development priority through an approach that emphasizes accelerating infrastructure, increasing prosperity and regional integration.

However, the relationship between development and peace is not always linear. In the context of extractive zones, development can potentially trigger new tensions if not managed in an inclusive manner. It is therefore important to assess whether development interventions carried out during the Jokowi era actually contributed to reducing conflict and crime in Papua.

This research uses the Longitudinal Village Potential Data (PODES) for the period 2008-2024 to identify changes in conflict and crime dynamics. The Difference-in-Differences (DiD) approach was used to compare conditions before and during Jokowi’s administration, focusing on differences between mining areas (treated group) and non-mining areas (control group) in six provinces in Papua. This method allows for a more precise estimation of policy impacts by controlling for general trends occurring in the two groups of regions, so that observed changes can be better attributed to policy interventions during the government period.

Impact on the conflict

The results of the analysis show that Jokowi’s government has contributed significantly to reducing conflicts in mining areas. This decline has not only occurred globally, but also in various specific forms of conflict, such as inter-community conflict, inter-village conflict, government conflict, student conflict, and ethnic conflict. Conceptually, these results indicate that economic and infrastructural development can function as an instrument of social stabilization. Increased accessibility, connectivity between regions and new economic opportunities can potentially reduce social frictions previously triggered by isolation and inequality.

However, this research also highlights that it is not easy to identify a single mechanism that would be the main cause. The observed impacts are likely the result of complex interactions between development policies, extractive sector regulations and local social dynamics over a decade.

Impact on crime

Unlike conflict, this research did not find a significant impact on crime rates. This shows that crime in the extractive region of Papua has more structural characteristics and tends to be resistant to policy interventions in the medium term.

Criminal activities in mining areas are often linked to informal and illegal economic networks, including resource trading, rent-seeking practices, as well as non-state actors with economic interests. This situation creates a criminal ecosystem that cannot be easily changed simply by infrastructure development or increased investment. Thus, a reduction in conflict is not automatically accompanied by a reduction in crime, which highlights the need for a more specific and targeted policy approach.

Although development has shown a positive impact on reducing conflict, a number of unintended consequences must be considered. The expansion of the mining sector can worsen environmental degradation, deepen social inequalities and trigger the marginalization of indigenous communities if it is not accompanied by fair and participatory governance.

Furthermore, development imposed from above without the active participation of local communities can create new discontents that could become a source of conflict in the future. Therefore, short-term success in reducing conflict should not be interpreted as a permanent solution.

Political implications

These results provide several important implications for policy formulation. First, infrastructure and economic development have been shown to have potential as an instrument of peace, particularly in the context of conflict zones. Second, combating crime requires a more comprehensive strategy, including strengthening legal institutions, eradicating the illegal economy and increasing the capacity of law enforcement officials. Third, it is important to ensure that development is inclusive and sensitive to the local context, notably by involving indigenous communities in decision-making processes. This approach not only increases political legitimacy, but also strengthens the sustainability of peace.

Relevance to the global agenda

This research is directly relevant to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly Goal 16 which emphasizes the importance of peace, justice and strong institutions. Papua is a concrete example of how development can contribute to social stability, but also shows its limits when not accompanied by structural reforms.

Author: Yessi Rahmawati, SE, M.Ec.

Details of this article can be found at: https://scholar.unair.ac.id/en/publications/did-development-bring-peace-unintended-consequences-of-jokowis-ad/