This week, Indonesia’s Forestry Minister Raja Juli Antoni met with Norwegian Ambassador Rut Kruger Giverin to discuss enhancing collaboration to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the forestry sector. The talks are framed as a meaningful step forward in global climate action, strengthening Indonesia’s international partnerships to tackle deforestation and emissions. However, a closer look raises questions: Is this a genuine push for progress, or yet another instance of political spin?

At Kaltimber, we pay close attention to developments in forestry management and climate action, hoping for news that will better protect Indonesia’s invaluable forests. Unfortunately, we often see a stark gap between promises and action. While we focus on using 100% reclaimed wood and replanting trees through CSR initiatives, there’s only so much we can do without systemic change. Let’s delve into the substance of this renewed dialogue between Indonesia and Norway.

The Context: Indonesia’s Climate Commitments

Indonesia’s Enhanced Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) aim for a 31.89% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 through domestic efforts, with an additional 43.2% reduction contingent on international support. Forestry, which accounts for a significant share of Indonesia’s emissions due to deforestation and peatland degradation, is a central focus of these targets.

Norway has been a long-standing partner in Indonesia’s climate efforts, particularly through the REDD+ (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) framework. However, past cooperation hasn’t been without its challenges. A $1 billion deal signed in 2010 ended prematurely in 2021, with Norway citing "unmet expectations" and Indonesia claiming bureaucratic delays on Norway’s side.

Skepticism: Real Action or Political Spin?

1. Deforestation Data vs. Political Claims

While Indonesia has made strides in reducing deforestation rates—with the Ministry of Environment and Forestry reporting a significant decline in 2022—independent analyses suggest the progress is fragile. Environmental watchdogs have criticized the government for overlooking large-scale deforestation caused by palm oil plantations, logging concessions, and infrastructure projects.

The political narrative often touts success without addressing the nuanced reality: deforestation is declining from historically high levels but remains concerning.

2. Carbon Trading and Accountability

One area of focus in the recent talks was carbon trading. Indonesia is exploring mechanisms to monetize its vast forest resources through carbon credits, a strategy that has drawn both interest and criticism. Critics argue that poorly regulated carbon markets can become vehicles for greenwashing, where companies and countries claim emission reductions on paper without substantive changes on the ground.

3. Funding Gaps and Broken Promises

Norway’s $1 billion pledge in the original REDD+ partnership was seen as groundbreaking but faced bureaucratic hurdles. Only $56 million was disbursed before the agreement’s collapse. This history raises questions about whether new pledges will result in tangible outcomes or repeat the cycle of overpromising and under delivering.

The Broader Picture: Why It Matters

Indonesia’s forests are critical not just for global carbon storage but also for biodiversity and indigenous communities. Yet, the government has often prioritized economic development over environmental protection. Policies such as the Omnibus Law on Job Creation, which weakened environmental safeguards, reveal an inherent conflict between industrial growth and sustainability.

Similarly, Norway’s record of supporting climate initiatives globally has drawn criticism for its reliance on oil exports. This duality—pushing for emissions reductions abroad while benefiting from fossil fuel revenues—adds complexity to its role as a “climate champion.”

Conclusion: Hope with Caution

The meeting between Raja Juli Antoni and Rut Kruger Giverin underscores the importance of international collaboration in addressing climate change. However, the history of unfulfilled promises and the gap between political statements and ground realities call for skepticism. For this partnership to succeed, both nations must ensure transparency, hold each other accountable, and prioritize substantive actions over rhetoric.

Indonesia and Norway have an opportunity to reset their partnership on a stronger footing—but whether they rise to the challenge remains to be seen.