Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto’s free meal program aims to reduce food insecurity and improve child nutrition across Indonesia. The initiative promises millions of free meals to schoolchildren, but logistical inefficiencies, corruption risks, and budgetary strain threaten its success. China’s growing role in funding and implementation adds further complications.

Indonesia and China signed an agreement to fund the Food Supplementation and School Feeding Programme in Indonesia during Prabowo’s visit to Beijing on November 9, 2024. He met with Chinese President Xi Jinping, and they finalized seven bilateral agreements, including financial support for the meal program. However, the details of China’s funding remain unclear. Indonesia’s National Nutrition Agency has not confirmed how the financial structure will work, and the presidential team has yet to receive specifics on China’s contributions.

In January, Chinese Ambassador Wang Lutong met with Maniza Zaman, UNICEF’s representative in Indonesia, to discuss China–UNICEF cooperation on the program. Wang emphasized that a December 2024 agreement between the China International Development Cooperation Agency and UNICEF China marked China’s first cash-based aid project with UNICEF in Indonesia. He described the initiative as part of the China-Indonesia comprehensive strategic partnership. UNICEF welcomed the collaboration, stating that it could help improve child nutrition and food security. However, its effect on Indonesia’s policy and program execution remains uncertain. UNICEF has expressed the need for transparency in how the program will be implemented to ensure it aligns with Indonesia’s long-term development goals.

Chinese involvement sounds promising but will bring serious complications

Financing remains a major concern. The program’s estimated cost, reaching hundreds of trillions of rupiah, could strain Indonesia’s fiscal health. The government has allocated 71 trillion rupiah ($4.3 billion) from the state budget for the first phase, but additional funding sources remain uncertain. If the program depends heavily on foreign loans or subsidies, it could increase national debt and limit future social spending.

Indonesia’s geography presents logistical challenges, particularly in reaching remote areas. Without efficient infrastructure, urban centers may benefit more than rural communities where food insecurity is most severe. Procurement processes add another risk, as rushed purchases and reliance on centralized suppliers could lower food quality.

If China becomes a major supplier, concerns will arise over food safety, sourcing, and the impact on local farmers. Indonesian producers may struggle to compete with Chinese imports, undermining domestic agriculture. While China’s infrastructure development could improve logistics, reliance on Chinese companies and supply chains could weaken Indonesia’s food security.

Corruption risks remain high. Indonesia’s history of large-scale social programs shows that centralized distribution often leads to inefficiencies and financial losses. Research from the Center for Economic and Law Studies warns that a highly centralized system could result in significant budget mismanagement. China’s role could add further opacity, as state-backed enterprises and procurement agreements may limit transparency and oversight.

A decentralized approach could improve efficiency and reduce corruption. Schools and local governments, rather than a national bureaucracy, could oversee procurement and distribution. This model would allow communities to address their specific nutritional needs and improve resource management. However, if China remains heavily involved, centralization may persist, prioritizing foreign partnerships over local solutions.

Indonesia and China must ensure the program remains sustainable and transparent

Indonesia must prioritize decentralization, transparency, and sustainability to ensure the program’s success. The government should publicly disclose all funding agreements, including China’s contributions and any loan conditions, to prevent financial mismanagement. Strengthening local supply chains would support domestic farmers and food producers while reducing reliance on imports. Schools and local governments should manage food distribution to better meet students’ nutritional needs.

Indonesia must also enforce strict oversight mechanisms. Given past financial leakages in social programs, independent audits and clear monitoring systems are essential. Foreign investment should not compromise national sovereignty or economic sustainability. Clear guidelines for China’s involvement should ensure that Indonesian interests take precedence over foreign control.

China must ensure that its participation benefits both nations. Transparency in funding structures and procurement agreements would prevent speculation about hidden agendas. Supporting local sourcing rather than prioritizing Chinese exports would demonstrate a commitment to Indonesia’s development rather than economic dominance. Collaboration with Indonesian authorities must respect the country’s autonomy and policy goals.

China should also promote accountability. Encouraging transparent procurement and anti-corruption safeguards would build trust and ensure ethical governance. If China wants to establish itself as a responsible development partner, it must prioritize long-term cooperation over short-term economic gains.

Prabowo’s free meal program could improve child nutrition and education, but only if managed responsibly. Without careful planning and strict oversight, it risks becoming another costly and ineffective initiative.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.