Skip to main content
  • News
  • Events
  • Blog
  • Search

Natural Resource Governance Institute

  • Topics
    Beneficial ownership
    Economic diversification
    Mandatory payment disclosure
    Revenue sharing
    Civic space
    Energy transition
    Measurement of environmental and social impacts
    Sovereign wealth funds
    Commodity prices
    Gender
    Measurement of governance
    State-owned enterprises
    Contract transparency and monitoring
    Global initiatives
    Open data
    Subnational governance
    Coronavirus
    Legislation and regulation
    Revenue management
    Tax policy and revenue collection
    Corruption
    Licensing and negotiation
  • Approach
    • Stakeholders
      • Civil society actors
      • Government officials
      • Journalists and media
      • Parliaments and political parties
      • Private sector
    • Natural Resource Charter
    • Regional knowledge hubs
  • Countries
    NRGI Priority Countries
    Colombia
    Guinea
    Nigeria
    Tanzania
    Dem. Rep. of Congo
    Mexico
    Peru
    Tunisia
    Ghana
    Mongolia
    Senegal
    Uganda
    OTHER COUNTRIES
  • Learning
    • Training
      • Residential training courses
        • Executive
        • Anglophone Africa
        • Francophone Africa
      • Online training courses
        • Advanced
        • Negotiating Contracts
        • Massive open online course (MOOC)
        • Interactive course: Petronia
      • Trainers' modules
        • (empty)
    • Primers
    • Glossary
  • Analysis & Tools
    • Publications
    • Tools
    • Economic models
  • About Us
    • What we do
      • 2020-2025 Strategy
      • Country prioritization
    • NRGI impact
    • Board of Directors
    • Emeritus Board Members
    • Advisory Council
    • Leadership team
    • Experts and staff
    • Careers and opportunities
    • Grant-making
    • Financials
    • Privacy policy
    • Contact us
  • News
  • Events
  • Blog

You are here

  1. Home
  2. Analysis & Tools
  3. Publications

Assessing Mineral Licensing in a Decentralized Context: The Case of Indonesia

21 November 2015
Author
Varsha Venugopal
Download
Assessing Mineral Licensing in a Decentralized Context: The Case of Indonesia (PDF 1.33 MB)
Topics
Licensing and negotiationRevenue sharingSubnational governance
Countries
Indonesia
Stakeholders
Civil society actorsGovernment officials
Precepts
P3 P5 P7 What are Natural Resource Charter precepts?
Social Sharing
Selected aspects of natural resource management have been transferred (or decentralized) to subnational governments in at least 60 countries. Decentralized authority can include power to decide local land uses or to collect and manage fees and taxes from the extraction of oil, gas, and minerals. While in most countries licensing is still vested with national authorities, a small number of countries have transferred mineral licensing powers to subnational governments. These governments can assign, manage, and terminate the right to search for and extract minerals from the ground. Some of the developed countries with a decentralized mineral licensing system are Australia, Canada, and the United States. Developing countries with decentralized mineral licensing include Argentina, China, India, Indonesia, and the Philippines.

The decentralization of mineral licensing is driven by the wish to improve development outcomes by letting the people directly affected by extractive projects make decisions about the exploration and development of mineral deposits. However, the decentralization process can raise unforeseen political, fiscal, and administrative challenges.

This paper reviews primarily the case of Indonesia, where the proliferation of district-licensed mining permits has catalyzed a host of natural resource governance problems: a weak investment climate, pollution, increased rates of corruption and illegal mining, and inadequate revenue collection systems. While many countries with central government licensing face similar problems, a decentralized licensing system can exacerbate them. If not well conceived or designed, a decentralized system can suffer from poor information sharing and coordination among different levels of government. Also, implementation and enforcement of licensing rules may be severely undermined by weak capacities of subnational governments or a lack of mechanisms that keep governments accountable to citizens.

This paper reviews the attributes of a mineral licensing system, as well as the pros and cons of decentralizing licensing as found in the case of Indonesia. Mineral licensing was decentralized in Indonesia in 2001. NRGI initiated field research in 2012 in two districts (Bangka and Kukar). Field research is ongoing; this paper discusses preliminary findings and proposes some reforms.

Related content

Natural Resource Federalism: Considerations for Myanmar

23 January 2018
Sebastian SahlaAndrew BauerNatalie Kirk

Close to Home: The Critical Importance of Subnational Governance in Oil, Gas and Mining

Daniel KaufmannRebecca Iwerks
27 September 2016

Developing a Strong Mining Divestment Rule in Indonesia

24 February 2017
David ManleyEmanuel Bria

It Takes a Village: Routes to Local-Level Extractives Transparency

18 February 2016
Rebecca IwerksVarsha Venugopal

Can We Reverse the Resource Curse at the Local Level in Indonesia?

Hasrul HanifEmanuel Bria
5 July 2016
Helping people to realize the benefits of their countries’ endowments of oil, gas and minerals.
Follow on Facebook Follow on Twitter Subscribe to Updates
  • Topics
    Beneficial ownership
    Civic space
    Commodity prices
    Contract transparency and monitoring
    Coronavirus
    Corruption
    Economic diversification
    Energy transition
    Gender
    Global initiatives
    Legislation and regulation
    Licensing and negotiation
    Mandatory payment disclosure
    Measurement of environmental and social impacts
    Measurement of governance
    Open data
    Revenue management
    Revenue sharing
    Sovereign wealth funds
    State-owned enterprises
    Subnational governance
    Tax policy and revenue collection
  • Approach
    • Stakeholders
    • Natural Resource Charter
    • Regional knowledge hubs
  • Priority
    Countries
    • Colombia
    • Dem. Rep. of Congo
    • Ghana
    • Guinea
    • Mexico
    • Mongolia
    • Nigeria
    • Peru
    • Senegal
    • Tanzania
    • Tunisia
    • Uganda
  • Learning
    • Training
    • Primers
  • Analysis & Tools
    • Publications
    • Tools
    • Economic models
  • About Us
    • What we do
    • NRGI impact
    • Board of Directors
    • Emeritus Board Members
    • Advisory Council
    • Leadership team
    • Experts and staff
    • Careers and opportunities
    • Grant-making
    • Financials
    • Privacy policy
    • Contact us
  • News
  • Blog
  • Events
  • Search