Environmental Issues: From Defending Local Living Spaces to Global Advocacy

(In the Context of Contemporary Indonesia)

Amidst the tide of development that increasingly disregards environmental ethics and human spatial order, advocacy is no longer a matter of choice but a necessity. It is real work to resist injustice, to question harmful policies, and to fight for a future that is fair and sustainable. At a time when forests are relentlessly cleared for palm oil plantations, Indigenous peoples’ lands are seized for mining, and rivers are poisoned by toxic waste, advocacy becomes the voice that keeps our living spaces alive. The question, then, is this: if not us, who will save our living space?

Advocacy: More Than Just Criticism

Advocacy is often misunderstood as mere resistance. In reality, advocacy is a deliberate and systematic effort to influence policies, practices, and public opinion. It is not empty criticism, but a deliberate strategy to ensure that people are not treated as passive objects of development but as subjects—engaged and protected. Advocacy demands the courage to ask critical questions: Who benefits from a policy? Who bears the costs? And what pathways toward justice can we forge?

The Grim Portrait of Mining

Indonesia, blessed with abundant natural resources, often falls into the paradox of plenty: vast wealth brings calamity to its people. Ahead of elections, government promises to grant mining licenses to community organizations seemed hopeful. Yet reality tells a different story—these policies overwhelmingly favor large corporations over ordinary citizens.

Data compiled by WALHI (the Indonesian Forum for the Environment) shows that more than 61% of Indonesia’s land is controlled by plantation, forestry, mining, and oil and gas corporations. This inequality is worsened by 2013 statistics from Indonesia’s Central Bureau of Statistics (BPS), which recorded a land ownership Gini ratio of 0.68—meaning that just 1% of the population controls 68% of the nation’s land.

Such disparity is expressed in evictions, agrarian conflicts, and the marginalization of local communities. Promises of prosperity from mining have proven illusory. The Mining Advocacy Network (JATAM) stresses that mining is not a sector that empowers people. It is capital-intensive, technology-driven, land-hungry, water-hungry, and utterly unsustainable.

Destroyed Environment, Threatened Health

The impacts of mining extend beyond land inequality. Ecologically, the damage is systemic. Acid Mine Drainage (AMD) contaminates rivers with heavy metals. The Mahakam River is a striking example, now laden with mercury, arsenic, and cadmium. Ecosystems collapse, food chains are disrupted, and local livelihoods face existential threats.

This ecological destruction has a direct impact on human health. Miners and nearby residents are exposed to fine dust that causes black lung disease. Heavy metal exposure increases the risks of lung, skin, and stomach cancers. Migrant miners also bring social consequences, including the rise of prostitution and a spike in HIV/AIDS cases.

Ecology and health are inseparable. Forests, home to countless species, are destroyed; hydrological cycles are disrupted; fish die en masse in rivers. These realities prove that the short-term profits of mining come at the cost of long-term, immeasurable losses.

Corruption and Dependency

Corruption compounds the destruction. Cases involving Abdul Ghani Kasuba (Governor of North Maluku) and Supian Hadi (Regent of East Kotawaringin) illustrate how mining permits are often issued unlawfully, accompanied by bribery. While the state suffers losses worth trillions of rupiah, it is the people who ultimately bear the burden. Meanwhile, communities dependent on mining live in uncertainty. When coal prices collapse or mines shut down, they are trapped in cycles of poverty. The promise of prosperity dissolves into myth, leaving behind social wounds: impoverishment, dependency, and intercommunal conflict.

Advocacy Strategies: From Local to Global

Given the complexity of Indonesia’s environmental, social, and resource governance crises, advocacy cannot be sporadic or emotional. It must be a long-term, strategic effort grounded in civic politics, global diplomacy, and strong knowledge bases. At least three interconnected pathways are essential.

First, defending living spaces. Civic politics must be the foundation of advocacy, affirming that citizens are not passive recipients of development but rightful holders of dignified living spaces. Defense of living spaces can take legal or collective action. Jakarta residents’ lawsuit over air pollution shows how legal advocacy can compel the state to uphold constitutional rights to a healthy environment. Similarly, protests over Palembang’s flooding highlight the solidarity of civil society in demanding structural solutions to ecological disasters. Defending living space is not merely about land or rivers—it is about upholding the basic human right to live healthily, safely, and with dignity in one’s homeland.

Second, global citizenship. Climate crises, deforestation, and marine pollution cannot be solved within national borders. Advocacy must move beyond local and national levels toward global arenas. The climate lawsuit from Pari Island—where locals held European corporations accountable for carbon emissions—demonstrates how local struggles can become tools of international diplomacy. Advocacy diplomacy builds cross-national alliances, connects grassroots movements to global legal and political mechanisms, and pressures transnational corporations that hide behind weak regulations in developing countries. Global citizenship asserts Indonesia’s rightful place in the international community, demanding climate justice.

Third, knowledge production. Without solid data, research, and documentation, advocacy loses its impact. Knowledge production is a vital weapon to expose the paradoxes of development. For example, geothermal projects in Sumatra and Nusa Tenggara, branded as “green energy,” have in fact caused environmental destruction and the criminalization of residents. Such facts must be systematically recorded, analyzed within academic frameworks, and amplified through reports, publications, and policy forums. Knowledge is not supplementary—it is a source of legitimacy that grants advocacy moral and intellectual authority in the eyes of the public, media, and policymakers.

These three strategies—defending living spaces, global citizenship, and knowledge production—are interdependent. Local roots give strength, global solidarity broadens reach, and knowledge provides argumentative ammunition. Together, they can transform advocacy into a true engine of change rather than symbolic resistance.

Notes: This article provides an analytical review of the presentation by David Efendi, M.A., Secretary of LHKP PP Muhammadiyah, on Advocacy Strategies and Action Agenda delivered during the Muhammadiyah Diplomacy Training held at Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta on Saturday, August 25, 2025.