For the Indigenous women of Papua, the forest is far more than a collection of timber or a site for commodity extraction; it is the fundamental infrastructure of their existence. It serves as a pharmacy, a pantry, a classroom for ancestral knowledge, and the bedrock of their cultural identity. When these forests are cleared, the entire scaffolding of their society begins to collapse, stripping them of their autonomy and their future. This profound connection between land and survival took center stage during the PAPEDA Summit 2026 in Sorong, Southwest Papua, where the tension between national development goals and the rights of traditional landholders reached a critical inflection point.
The PAPEDA Summit 2026 was designed as a high-level forum intended to foster dialogue on sustainable development in the Land of Papua. It gathered a diverse array of stakeholders—government officials, Indigenous leaders, civil society organizations, academics, private sector representatives, and youth activists. The goal was to align the development trajectory of Papua with modern sustainability standards. However, the discussions frequently deviated from technical presentations, shifting toward the stark realities faced by local communities whose ancestral territories have been systematically transformed by decades of industrial encroachment.
The Moi People and the Legacy of Industrial Exploitation
The case of the Moi people, represented by Barbalina Osok, Chairperson of the Kwongke Kaban Salukh Moi of Southwest Papua, provided a harrowing look at the human cost of development. Since the early 1990s, the Moi territory has been subject to large-scale forest concessions. These government-sanctioned logging operations were, in many instances, subsequently converted into vast palm oil plantations.
For the Moi, these concessions represent a violation of ancestral stewardship. Barbalina Osok articulated the frustration of a community that has seen its primary source of sustenance and heritage systematically drained, with virtually no tangible economic benefits flowing back to the original owners of the land. According to existing regulatory data, these forest exploitation permits remain valid until 2032 or 2033, creating a long-term impasse that leaves local communities feeling marginalized in their own territory. The core of the grievance is not merely an opposition to investment or economic growth, but the profound lack of free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC). The communities are rarely involved in the initial decision-making processes regarding how their land is used, nor are they beneficiaries of the wealth generated from their natural resources.
The Feminine Perspective on Environmental Governance
Marlince Siep, a prominent activist for Indigenous women, provided a poignant reminder of the gendered impacts of environmental degradation. In many Papuan societies, women are the primary providers of food security and the custodians of indigenous knowledge—knowledge that is passed down through generations regarding plant medicine, sustainable harvesting, and spiritual ecology.
“Tanah itu Mama” (The land is Mother), Siep stated during the summit. Her appeal to the government was clear: the remaining healthy forests and ecosystems must be preserved as an inheritance for future generations of Indigenous Papuan women. Siep argued that the current model of development, which is often dictated by the central government in Jakarta, lacks the necessary nuance to protect the complex social and ecological fabric of Papua. She urged policymakers to center the voices of Indigenous communities as the primary foundation for any future development planning, ensuring that human rights, cultural preservation, and ecological health are prioritized over short-term fiscal gains.
Chronology and the Status of Customary Forests
The issue of legal recognition for customary territories (hutan adat) formed a central pillar of the summit’s agenda. To understand the current friction, one must look at the slow progress of national land reform policies. Nationally, the government has reported the realization of 8.41 million hectares of social forestry programs out of a 12.7 million-hectare target. However, the implementation in Papua has been notably slower.
Currently, only 12 Indigenous legal communities in Papua have received official government recognition of their customary forest status. Dozens of other applications remain stuck in a bureaucratic cycle of verification and validation. This legal limbo leaves communities vulnerable to land grabbing and illegal encroachment.
During the summit, Elisa Kambu, the Governor of Southwest Papua, acknowledged these systemic challenges. He expressed a formal commitment from the provincial government to assist in the mapping of customary lands and to accelerate the process of forest status recognition. Kambu emphasized that formalizing these land rights is the only way to provide Indigenous communities with the legal leverage required to manage their own territories effectively against external corporate interests.
Tensions and the Reality on the Ground
Despite the rhetoric of cooperation and the promises made within the air-conditioned halls of the summit, the reality on the ground remains volatile. The final day of the PAPEDA Summit was prematurely cut short following public protests held near the venue. Demonstrators, representing various civil society groups and indigenous rights activists, staged a protest against several projects classified under the government’s Proyek Strategis Nasional (National Strategic Projects).
The protesters highlighted the contradiction between the summit’s themes of sustainability and the actual impact of these large-scale infrastructure and industrial projects. The demonstration served as a blunt reminder that for many Papuans, the loss of land and forest is not a theoretical debate, but a daily struggle. The premature conclusion of the event underscored the widening gap between the government’s top-down development agenda and the grassroots demand for the recognition of sovereign rights over ancestral lands.
Analysis: Implications for Sustainable Development
The implications of the PAPEDA Summit are significant. The failure to reconcile state-led industrialization with Indigenous land rights suggests a mounting crisis of legitimacy for development projects in the region. If the government continues to prioritize industrial extraction without securing the tenure of Indigenous communities, it risks perpetual conflict and long-term environmental degradation.
From an economic perspective, the current model of resource extraction in Papua faces growing scrutiny from global markets and international investors, who are increasingly sensitive to Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) criteria. The inability of local authorities to secure land rights for indigenous communities creates a "high-risk" investment environment, where projects are susceptible to social unrest, legal challenges, and reputational damage.
Furthermore, the environmental cost is mounting. The forests of Papua represent one of the last major frontiers of biodiversity in Southeast Asia. The ongoing conversion of these forests to monoculture plantations threatens not only local livelihoods but also contributes to regional carbon emission targets. Scientific consensus indicates that the preservation of primary rainforests is essential for climate stability, a fact that the Papuan government must balance against the pressure for economic modernization.
The Path Forward
The success of the PAPEDA Summit 2026, or any similar future initiative, cannot be measured by the number of agreements signed or the intensity of the commitments made in conference halls. Instead, it will be measured by the rate at which customary land titles are legally recognized and the extent to which local communities are empowered to govern their own environments.
For the women of the Moi tribe, and indeed for all Indigenous peoples of Papua, the forest is not a commodity to be liquidated but a heritage to be protected. The path forward requires a fundamental shift in the development paradigm—from one that views Papua’s land as an empty resource bank for national growth, to one that recognizes it as a sovereign territory with its own, distinct social and cultural value system.
As the summit concluded under the shadow of protest, the message to the central government was unequivocal: justice for the Indigenous people of Papua is not a gift to be granted, but a right to be respected. Without a tangible transition toward inclusive, rights-based land management, the gap between the administration and the people of Papua will only continue to widen, jeopardizing the very stability that the government seeks to foster through its development projects. The future of Papua’s forests, and the generations that depend on them, remains in a delicate state of transition, awaiting a transformation that moves beyond words and into the soil itself.
