Papua’s Special Autonomy Needs a Bottom-Up Governance Overhaul, Study Argues

After more than two decades of Indonesia’s Special Autonomy policy, the Papua region continues to lag behind the rest of the country in development, and a new study argues that the problem is not merely weak administration but a deeper institutional failure that demands transformation. The research, published in Frontiers in Political Science on 20 October 2026, proposes a radical restructuring of how the region’s six provinces work together: a horizontally organized, bottom-up cross-provincial agency that would replace the predominantly top-down arrangements that have shaped governance in Papua since 2001.

The study, led by researchers from Indonesia’s National Research and Innovation Agency (BRIN) together with colleagues from Universitas Nasional, the Institute for Regional Autonomy, and WRI Indonesia, examines why the first phase of Special Autonomy (2001–2021) failed to translate Papua’s enormous natural resource wealth into meaningful welfare gains for Indigenous Papuans. Drawing on qualitative methods, including literature review, semi-structured interviews, and focus group discussions with traditional leaders, academics, business figures, NGO activists, and local government representatives conducted between April and May 2024, the authors diagnose a governance system fragmented across sectors, levels of government, and administrative boundaries.

The socioeconomic data underpinning the argument are stark. According to figures compiled from Statistics Indonesia and analyzed by the authors, poverty in West Papua Province stood at 18.68 percent in 2025, down from 27.13 percent in 2014, while Papua Province recorded 18.39 percent, down from 30.05 percent. The national rate, by contrast, had fallen to 8.07 percent. At current compound annual growth rates, the authors estimate it would take roughly 26 years for West Papua to reach today’s national poverty level and about 20 years for Papua Province. In per capita expenditure, West Papua would need approximately 14 years to catch up to the current national figure. A 2025 snapshot of the Human Development Index across the six Papuan provinces reveals further disparities, with Papua Highlands at 54.91, Central Papua at 60.64, West Papua at 68.48, and South Papua at 69.54, all below the national value of 75.9.

The environmental picture compounds the welfare deficit. Citing a 2026 report by WALHI Papua, the study notes that approximately 770,000 hectares of natural forest were lost between 2024 and 2025, and that over the past decade Papua has accounted for roughly 70 percent of total national deforestation. The report attributes this loss to the expansion of oil palm and sugarcane plantations, mining, oil and gas activity, nickel mining, forestry concessions, and large-scale development projects entering customary territories. A separate study by Mumbunan and colleagues, cited in the paper, estimates that Papua’s forest cover loss has reached 17 percent, projected to result in 3.5 gigatons of carbon emissions and threatening Indonesia’s 2030 Nationally Determined Contribution targets.

The institutional context is equally complex. Special Autonomy was introduced in 2001 under Law No. 21 of 2001, and the region was reorganized into Papua and West Papua in 2003. Following the 2021 reform under Law No. 2 of 2021, and four laws enacted in 2022, the region now comprises six provinces: Papua, West Papua, Central Papua, Papua Mountains (Highland Papua), South Papua, and Southwest Papua. The central government reports that from 2001 to 2021, IDR 1,092 trillion was allocated in special autonomy funds, including IDR 702.2 trillion in transfers to the regions and IDR 251.29 trillion in line ministry expenditures. Yet the authors note that after nearly 20 years, significant outcomes in economic development and public welfare have not been achieved.

Why has so much funding produced so little convergence? The paper identifies six normative problems in the implementation of the Special Autonomy Law, drawn from earlier scholarship: provisions subject to multiple interpretations stemming from political compromises between Jakarta and Papua; elements of the law that have become outdated; numerous provisions that remain unrealized; national policies misaligned with the law’s philosophy; a lack of stakeholder commitment and understanding; and persistent distrust between Papua and Jakarta. A widely cited Papua Road Map study further documents that the policy has been perceived more as a means of conflict resolution aimed at suppressing independence aspirations than as a welfare solution, and categorizes the core issues as contested integration, human rights violations, marginalization and discrimination of Indigenous Papuans, and shortfalls in education, health, and economic empowerment.

The empirical heart of the study lies in what stakeholders told the researchers. Focus group discussions in Southwest Papua revealed that joined-up policy coordination had amounted largely to disseminating information about planning, protection, and community empowerment, while the deeper processes of shared understanding had not materialized, mainly because of the dominance of sectoral interests such as education, health, and infrastructure. West Papua had already issued a Special Regional Regulation on Sustainable Development in 2018, but the disconnect between the regulatory framework and implementation at provincial and district levels meant that joined-up policy integration never took hold; local governments, NGOs, and the private sector continued to operate in isolation. Stakeholders consistently emphasized the need for a forum where state and societal actors could collaborate inclusively on both coordination and integration.

The proposed solution is the Joined-Up Cross-Provincial Government Agency in Papua, an association delivery unit under the Association of Governors across the Land of Papua, established by joint decision of the six governors and acknowledged by the Minister of Home Affairs. The agency would be chaired by one of the Papuan governors, with a provincial regional secretary as secretary and a head of a provincial development planning agency as executive chair, and its membership would include provincial government representatives, academics from across Papua, and development partners. Crucially, eight authorities would be delegated to the agency while remaining legally under each provincial government’s jurisdiction: a Papua-wide basic data and information system, special autonomy fund management, spatial planning, protection of Indigenous communities and customary territories, environmental protection and disaster management, education and health, strengthening the people’s economy, and monitoring and evaluation.

What distinguishes the proposal from existing arrangements, the authors argue, is its horizontal, bottom-up orientation. Existing bodies such as the Steering Committee for the Acceleration of Development of Special Autonomy for Papua (BP3OKP), created under Presidential Regulation No. 121 of 2022 and chaired by the Vice President, operate primarily from a top-down perspective emphasizing policy coordination, so central government directives may not reflect grassroots aspirations. The new agency is designed as a partner to BP3OKP rather than a competitor, and it goes beyond coordination to emphasize policy integration, social inclusion, and the incorporation of local wisdom, guided by four principles of what the authors call proper governance: developmental orientation, democratic governance, social inclusiveness, and sensitivity to local cultural and historical context. The region’s diversity, some 250 distinct indigenous ethnic groups across seven customary territories, and indigenous leadership systems ranging from the territorially concentrated Ondoafi structure to the more dispersed Big Man system, make this contextual grounding essential, the authors contend.

The researchers are candid about the risks. The implementation of cross-provincial collaboration entails a substantial risk of elite capture, in which political and administrative elites shape strategic decisions according to their own interests, potentially reproducing patterns of dominance the reform is meant to break. Mitigation measures drawn from recent scholarship include encouraging political elites to recognize their own biases and engaging in community consultation to understand how citizens evaluate policy choices. The authors also outline a three-step operationalization: strengthening the governors’ association as a political umbrella with formal legal registration, establishing the agency as an accountable delivery unit funded through state and regional budgets, and developing a collaborative action plan spanning data systems, fund management, spatial planning, Indigenous territory recognition through participatory mapping and legal decrees, forest and environmental protection, regional health referral systems, education cooperation, and joint monitoring. The research process itself fed into policy: preliminary findings were discussed at the Papua Governors Association meeting in Wamena in April 2024, validated in workshops in Manokwari and Jakarta, and contributed to a joint agreement among all six governors on collaboration for sustainable development, adopted in Manokwari on 12 February 2026. Whether the proposed institutional transformation can convert two decades of unfulfilled promises into inclusive welfare for Indigenous Papuans will now depend on political commitment, adaptive leadership, and sustained trust between the state and the communities it serves.

Subject of Research: Governance reform and institutional transformation of Indonesia's Special Autonomy policy across the six provinces of Papua

Article Title: Rethinking collaborative governance in Papua: toward institutional transformation

Article References: Hidayat, S., Sambodo, M. T., Djohan, D., Kardoyo, H., Samadhi, T. N., Wijaya, A., Kalmirah, J., & Karafir, M. T. (2026). Rethinking collaborative governance in Papua: toward institutional transformation. Frontiers in Political Science, 8, Article 1964653. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpos.2026.1964653

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.3389/fpos.2026.1964653

Keywords: Papua, Special Autonomy, collaborative governance, joined-up government, Indonesia, institutional transformation, Indigenous Papuans, decentralization, deforestation, human development index, intergovernmental coordination, local wisdom