- The Indonesian Ministry of Environment (KLH) has introduced a new concept for the prestigious Adipura Award by incorporating evaluation criteria based on final waste disposal site (TPA) management.
- Based on this more stringent standard, a new category—“Dirty City”—will be introduced to publicly identify cities with the poorest environmental performance. Of the country’s total waste output, an estimated 10.8 million tons—or nearly 20%—is plastic waste, yet the national recycling rate remains at just 22%, far below expectations.
- The “Dirty City” label is meant to serve as a mirror—perhaps painful, but necessary—for cities to reflect upon their environmental governance, something long missing from policy-making frameworks.
PELAKITA.ID – The Adipura Award has undergone a significant transformation. No longer focused solely on the aesthetics of urban parks and green spaces, the updated criteria now emphasize comprehensive waste management, particularly the operation of TPAs.
KLH has restructured the awards into four categories: Adipura Kencana, Adipura, Adipura Certificate, and Dirty City. This shift aims to promote data- and technology-driven environmental management in urban areas.
The changes reflect harsh realities—national plastic recycling rates remain low (22%), with Java leading at 31%, followed by Bali–Nusa Tenggara (22.5%), Sumatra (12%), and Eastern Indonesia lagging significantly behind.
Under the new Adipura scheme, 50% of the score is based on waste and sanitation systems, 20% on local government budgets and policies, and the remaining 30% on human resources and supporting infrastructure.
KLH is also revising a Presidential Regulation to accelerate the construction of Waste-to-Energy (PSEL) facilities, supported by state budget allocations, streamlined permits, and guaranteed electricity buy-back schemes.
The “Dirty City” Label: Painful but Necessary
Amid this framework, KLH is taking a bold and unprecedented step: publicly assigning a “Dirty City” status to areas that fail to manage their environment properly.
This move sends a strong message: environmental recognition is no longer about image, but accountability.
Historically, awards like Adipura, Proper, Adiwiyata, and Kalpataru were often seen as symbolic—ceremonial gestures with no real fiscal impact or structural reform. Local leaders would return home with trophies, but these accolades didn’t necessarily reflect on-the-ground realities.
Illegal dump sites proliferated, rivers became open sewers, and many TPAs across Indonesian cities were overcapacity and still relied on open dumping methods (KLHK, 2023; Waste4Change).
Under the leadership of Hanif Faisol Nurofiq, KLH is now attempting to rebuild public trust with a more honest and transparent approach. There is no more room for environmental window dressing.
Yet, labels alone are not enough. Without tangible incentives and penalties, this policy risks falling flat.
Expert Insight: Link Budget Incentives to Environmental Performance
According to M. Taswin Munier, an environmental planner and academician from Halu Oleo University in Kendari, this initiative must be supported by a clear budgetary framework.
“Poor-performing cities should not only receive this ‘award’ but also face funding cuts, such as reduced allocations from the Special Allocation Fund (DAK) for environmental sectors,” Taswin told Pelakita.ID on June 25, 2025. “Meanwhile, progressive cities should receive additional funding, either in the form of DAK increases or Performance-Based Incentive Funds (DID).”
He also emphasized the need to integrate environmental scores into the national performance evaluations of mayors and regents—particularly through supervision by the Ministry of Home Affairs.
In addition, he urged for a regular, public release of environmental performance indices per city. “That way, environmental management becomes part of governance accountability—not just a trophy race at the end of the year.”
Corporate Voices: “Being Green Is Expensive”
Pelakita.ID also noted criticism of the current environmental awards system coming from the private sector.
During a regulatory field test for the Carbon Economic Value (NEK) framework in the marine and fisheries sector, conducted with the Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries (KKP) and the Ministry of Law (Kemenkum), industry representatives in the Benoa region voiced serious concerns.
Achieving and maintaining a high PROPER (Corporate Environmental Performance Rating Program) score, they argued, was financially burdensome—a cost center rather than a profit driver.
Beyond operating expenses (Opex), companies are also forced to allocate capital expenditure (Capex) budgets to adopt new waste management technologies, conduct environmental and energy audits, produce ESG (Environmental, Social, Governance) reports, and obtain various certifications—all without fiscal support from KLH or related ministries.
It’s no surprise that most mid-sized companies remain at the blue PROPER level (77.7% or 1,454 companies, KLHK 2018), rather than striving for green or gold status.
“Doing the right thing for the environment feels like a financial burden,” lamented one environmental professional active in Maritime Talks.
A Call for Fiscal Synergy
This situation makes it imperative for KLH to partner with the Ministry of Finance, particularly the Directorate General of Taxation, to design environmental performance-based tax incentives, including annual tax breaks and relaxed export duties.
The Ministry of Trade should also be engaged to revise export policies in favor of sustainable companies—especially exporters committed to environmental stewardship.
This would mark a concrete shift toward sustainability as an integrated part of the economy, rather than an isolated cost.
By aligning fiscal policy with environmental goals, Indonesia can move from moral appeals to systemic change—ensuring that environmental compliance is rewarded, not penalized.
Editorial Team, Pelakita.ID
