Indonesia’s Agricultural Trade Reforms: Towards Global Competitiveness

Indonesia is one of Southeast Asia’s most significant agricultural economies, yet its path toward global competitiveness has never been straightforward. With over 280 million people to feed and an agricultural sector that employs roughly 29% of the national labor force, the country faces a dual challenge: protecting domestic food security while opening its markets enough to grow, compete, and earn from global trade. Over the past three decades, Indonesia has pursued a series of agricultural trade reforms – reducing tariffs, dismantling non-tariff barriers, signing free trade agreements, and promoting investment in farm productivity. Understanding these reforms means understanding how a nation balances national interest with global integration.

Indonesia’s agricultural trade policy: from protection to liberalization 🔗

For much of the 20th century, Indonesia maintained a tightly controlled agricultural economy. The government used import monopolies, licensing restrictions, and high tariff walls to shield domestic producers from foreign competition. Trade liberalization only began in earnest in the 1990s, following Indonesia’s commitments under the WTO and the ASEAN Free Trade Area (AFTA). These agreements required the country to reduce tariffs and dismantle some of the more overt trade barriers that had long been embedded in its agricultural policy.

The most significant shift came after the 1997-98 Asian financial crisis. Under pressure from the IMF, Indonesia undertook sweeping reforms – removing BULOG’s monopoly rights over most staple foods (except rice), relaxing export and import restrictions, and reducing the effective rate of protection across multiple sectors. These reforms were designed to restore market confidence and integrate Indonesia more firmly into the global trading system. However, the momentum proved short-lived. As economic conditions stabilized, the government gradually reasserted control over agricultural imports, particularly for politically sensitive commodities like rice and beef.

Current tariff structure and non-tariff barriers 🔗

Today, Indonesia maintains a moderately open but selectively protective trade regime. The average MFN applied tariff rate stands at around 8.1%, with agricultural products averaging 8.7%. While these headline figures appear reasonable, the picture is more complex beneath the surface. Indonesia has bound 96.1% of its tariff lines at the WTO, with an average bound rate of 37.3% – meaning there is significant room for the government to raise applied tariffs without breaching its international commitments. In agriculture specifically, more than 1,300 tariff lines are bound at or above 35.5%.

Non-tariff barriers have increasingly become the more consequential obstacle to agricultural trade. Indonesia restricts trade of strategic commodities – rice, maize, soybeans, sugar, and beef – that are tied to its self-sufficiency targets. Food imports for these items are only permitted when domestic production falls short, and exports are only allowed after national reserve and consumption needs are met. Additionally, importers of animals and processed food products must obtain a Ministry of Trade approval, a Ministry of Agriculture recommendation, and a formal Import Approval – all issued on a quarterly basis. These requirements create significant unpredictability and cost for both domestic food processors and foreign suppliers.

The role of sanitary and phytosanitary barriers 🔗

Beyond licensing regimes, Indonesia has long applied sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) requirements that have functioned as hidden tariffs – raising costs, delaying market entry, and protecting domestic producers without the transparency of formal duties. Halal certification requirements, duplicative inspections, and inconsistent testing standards have all been flagged by trading partners as unnecessary barriers. Removing or harmonizing these measures is increasingly seen as an economic priority, with an impact equivalent to a significant tariff reduction.

Free trade agreements and regional integration 🔗

Indonesia’s engagement in regional and bilateral free trade agreements has been a cornerstone of its trade reform agenda. As part of ASEAN, duties on imports from ASEAN countries generally range from zero to 5%, excluding certain product categories. Indonesia has also concluded agreements with Japan, China, South Korea, Australia, India, New Zealand, and the European Free Trade Association (EFTA). The ASEAN-China FTA in particular opened up thousands of tariff lines to duty-free access from China, deepening regional trade integration.

On the sustainability front, Indonesia’s most ambitious trade agreement in terms of environmental provisions is the Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA) with the EFTA, which entered into force in November 2021. It includes conditional preferential tariffs and tariff rate quotas tied to sustainability compliance – a signal that Indonesia is beginning to link trade access with environmental governance. More recently, a landmark trade agreement with the United States, announced in early 2026, committed Indonesia to eliminating tariff barriers on over 99% of U.S. products, including all agricultural goods – a historically significant market-opening step that reflects Indonesia’s recognition that global competitiveness requires reciprocal openness.

Food self-sufficiency: the enduring policy objective 🔗

Despite its trade liberalization efforts, Indonesia’s agricultural policy has consistently prioritized one overriding goal: food self-sufficiency. This objective has driven policy since independence, and it remains politically central today. Over the past 30 years, the main priorities of Indonesia’s agricultural policy have been food self-sufficiency, food diversification, value addition, competitiveness, and farmers’ welfare. President Prabowo Subianto, who took office in October 2024, has set an ambitious target of achieving full food self-sufficiency within four to five years, forming a new Coordinating Ministry for Food to drive this agenda.

One of the most notable government programs toward this goal was Upsus Pajale (2015-2019), a food self-sufficiency initiative targeting three strategic commodities: rice, maize, and soybeans. The program provided farmers with one-time subsidies for seeds, fertilizer, chemicals, and machinery, and deployed extension officers and agricultural researchers to provide technical field assistance. While the program achieved meaningful productivity gains in the short run, questions have been raised about its long-term sustainability and the extent to which it supports genuine market efficiency rather than dependence on government inputs.

The tension between self-sufficiency and trade openness 🔗

Self-sufficiency policy and trade liberalization are often in tension. Import restrictions on rice, for example, protect domestic producers but raise consumer prices and reduce diversification incentives. Research by the FAO found that reducing the rice tariff from 30% to zero would increase rice imports from 0.8 to 2 million tons, reduce supply for domestic farmers, but significantly improve purchasing power for all households. This trade-off – between protecting producers and benefiting consumers – sits at the heart of Indonesia’s agricultural policy debate. Political leaders have repeatedly cited self-sufficiency to justify policies that raise domestic food production and restrict food imports, even when such policies are at odds with poverty reduction and food security goals.

Supporting smallholder farms and capital-intensive technologies 🔗

Indonesia’s agricultural sector is overwhelmingly small-scale. Experts at IPB University estimate that 99% of Indonesia’s food production comes from smallholder agriculture, with around 14 million small-scale farmers among the country’s 28 million farming families. This structure has enormous implications for how trade reforms and productivity programs are designed and delivered.

Recognizing this, the government has paired its trade policy with targeted support for smallholder productivity. Programs under President Prabowo’s administration include raising agricultural productivity through increased support for smallholder farmers, integrated food technology, agricultural mechanization, digital farming, and improving governance of agricultural value chains. The shift toward capital-intensive technologies – from mechanized planting and harvesting equipment to drone-assisted monitoring and IoT-enabled irrigation – is seen as essential to closing the yield gap between Indonesia’s smallholders and the more productive farms of competitor nations.

Digital platforms have also begun transforming how smallholders access markets and finance. Fresh produce e-commerce platforms like Sayurbox demonstrate how shortening supply chains can increase farmers’ margins and enhance consumer access to high-quality products, while agri-fintech mechanisms mobilize capital for smallholders who are often excluded from formal credit systems. These innovations are gradually integrating Indonesia’s fragmented smallholder sector into more efficient and competitive value chains.

Palm oil: Indonesia’s agricultural export engine 🔗

No discussion of Indonesia’s agricultural trade reforms is complete without addressing palm oil. Indonesia is the world’s largest palm oil exporter, and palm oil is the country’s second-largest export overall, worth approximately USD 31 billion annually and representing around 13% of total export revenue. The industry directly employs millions, particularly in rural Sumatra and Kalimantan, and is a critical source of foreign exchange earnings that support Indonesia’s trade balance.

However, Indonesia’s palm oil export competitiveness faces real challenges. The share of crude palm oil in Indonesia’s total exports has declined significantly, partly due to inconsistent sustainability standards and increasing competition from Malaysia. International buyers – especially in the European Union – are demanding certified sustainable palm oil, and Indonesia’s domestic certification scheme, the Indonesian Sustainable Palm Oil (ISPO), has faced criticism for limited international recognition. All Indonesian palm oil producers are now required to obtain ISPO certification, though the scheme is not yet fully accepted in global markets in the way the internationally recognized Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) standard is. Bridging this gap is central to Indonesia’s long-term export competitiveness.

The road ahead: market efficiency and sustainable competitiveness 🔗

Indonesia’s agricultural trade reforms have produced real progress – lower tariffs, more bilateral agreements, improved farmer support programs, and a growing openness to investment. But significant structural challenges remain. Non-tariff barriers continue to raise prices for Indonesian consumers and reduce the competitiveness of Indonesian firms, particularly in sectors where import licensing and discretionary permits persist. The tension between self-sufficiency policy and market efficiency is unlikely to be resolved by either extreme; what Indonesia needs is a calibrated approach that protects the livelihoods of its smallholder majority while creating genuine incentives for productivity and export growth.

Producer support as a share of gross farm receipts in Indonesia declined to 7.5% in 2022-24 after peaking at 26.5% in 2015 – a trend that reflects a policy environment increasingly focused on market-oriented outcomes. Yet the composition of that support still skews heavily toward market price interventions and input subsidies, which are among the most distorting forms of agricultural support. Redirecting expenditure toward research and development, extension services, rural infrastructure, and market access would yield more sustainable productivity growth – and better equip Indonesian agriculture to compete in an increasingly demanding global market.

What do you think? Indonesia has long tried to balance food self-sufficiency with agricultural trade openness – but can a country truly achieve both at the same time? And as smallholder farmers make up nearly the entire base of Indonesia’s food production, are current trade reforms doing enough to bring them into competitive global value chains?

References

1. https://ap.fftc.org.tw/article/3862
2. https://www.lowyinstitute.org/publications/trade-protectionism-indonesia-bad-times-bad-policy
3. https://citi.uph.edu/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/Indonesia-Policy-on-Food-Security.pdf.pdf
4. https://www.trade.gov/country-commercial-guides/indonesia-import-tariffs
5. https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/agricultural-policy-monitoring-and-evaluation-2025_a80ac398-en/full-report/indonesia_1b0c1bfb.html
6. https://thediplomat.com/2026/03/inside-the-u-s-indonesia-reciprocal-trade-agreement-a-quiet-reordering-of-economic-relations/
7. https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/2014%20NTE%20Report%20on%20FTB%20Indonesia.pdf
8. https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2025/07/fact-sheet-the-united-states-and-indonesia-reach-historic-trade-deal/
9. https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/2025/10/agricultural-policy-monitoring-and-evaluation-2025_354e7040/full-report/indonesia_1b0c1bfb.html
10. https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/13/6/1257
11. https://www.fao.org/agrifood-economics/publications/detail/en/c/120741/
12. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00472336.2019.1617890
13. https://www.ipb.ac.id/news/index/2025/04/ipb-university-expert-99-percent-of-indonesias-food-production-is-peoples-agriculture/
14. https://en.antaranews.com/news/331165/attaining-food-self-sufficiency-in-indonesia
15. https://www.indonesiapalmoilfacts.com/facts-sheets/
16. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666154325004351
17. https://www.indonesia-investments.com/business/commodities/palm-oil/item166