Living Culturally: The Pillar of Sustainable Development of the Multi Ethnic Country of Indonesia

Abstract

Indonesia as a multi-ethnic country faces challenge to embrace many standards for development as every ethnic community adopts their own cultural values. There were cases by which government, on behalf of equalizing standard, create national policy and regulation to develop communities by the way of national standard. It was at that time that cultural values ​​were considered by the government as a factor inhibiting development and wellness. Recently, critical awareness has emerged at the national level regarding the climate crisis, resulting in the emergence of a new paradigm in development. Modernization that leaves a large carbon footprint is no longer the only approach in development. A cultural way of life that is naturally more environmentally friendly at this point is interpreted as more ideal development because it is oriented towards sustainable prosperity. Various examples of culture-based life that represent a sustainable way of life will be presented.

1. Introduction

Indonesia in this decade has carried out massive development in various fields. Development in infrastructure and human are an important part of Indonesia’s development, as Indonesia is transforming from developing to developed country. Because modernity is considered a characteristic of developed countries, physical developments such as housing and infrastructure are planned and standardized based on a modern perspective. Modern standards for buildings and infrastructure include brick, steel, and cement, among others. Anything beyond that, such as from wood or bamboo, is considered a building that does not meet the standards. Apart from being applied to aspects of modernity, standardization is also applied to other aspects such as health and welfare. In terms of health standards, housing must be exposed to sunlight and have access to fresh air, as well as basic needs such as the availability of toilets and clean water. For welfare, house construction is focused on building quality for comfort and the ratio of occupants to building area.

The implementation of housing quality standardization is aimed at the good of humanity, namely so that people can adapt to the progress of civilization and maintain the quality of their health and welfare. Unfortunately, under the umbrella of modernization, the increasing focus on human interests diverts human attention to environmental interests. In fact, not only are they distracted from thinking about environmental interests, they even consider people, groups, or communities who preserve the natural environment where they live as unmodern, backward, and traditional. Often their culture, which prioritizes nature over modernization, is considered an obstacle to development.

Living on the archipelago consisting of more than 13,400 islands, the Indonesian nation counts almost 276 million population [1] comprising over 300 ethnic groups. According to the 2010 Population Census, Indonesia has 1340 tribes with categories of ethnic names, sub-tribe names, and sub-names of sub-tribes [2]. Those various ethnic groups live in 34 provinces. Indonesia is the most populous Muslim country in the world, but has six official religions, including Islam, Christianity, Catholicism, Hinduism, Buddhism, and Confucianism, and also acknowledges indigenous faith. The proportion of religious adherents in Muslim is 87.2%, Christian 6.9%, Catholic 2.9%, Hinduist 1.7%, Buddhist 0.7%, and Confucius 0.05% [3].

Bhinekka Tunggal Ika (Unity in Diversity) is the Indonesian national’s motto and refers to the true sense of unity (Indonesianness) among the multiculturality of the society [4]. The existence of bahasa Indonesia as a language of unity is an external representation of the value of respecting differences. Indonesia has around 750 regional languages [5] ​​that are used when people communicate within their ethnic groups, but it is easy for them to communicate across ethnic groups because every Indonesian citizen can speak bahasa Indonesia.

Blessed with a tropical climate and because of its geographical location, Indonesia has an extremely high level of biodiversity and endemicity [6]. As of May 2020, access of 4,147,875 hectares (out of targeted 12.7 million hectares) of social forestry (Adat Forests) has been distributed to 6620 forest farmer groups. The access has enabled the creation of 7311 social forestry business groups across country, which are successfully increasing the productivity and value of on-farm and off-farm commodities and of village small-scale industries. Adat Forests are defined as forests located within territories over which Adat communities hold traditional rights (Adat). Access to these forests will enable indigenous peoples to fulfill most of their living needs, not only using forests as a source of food, but also raw materials for making houses and other facilities.

2. Settlement culture

Communities that have local wisdom to cultivate the use of natural materials in building settlements are spread across various traditional communities in Indonesia. They build their traditional houses from natural materials without going through the fabrication process. The natural ingredients used are those available in the surrounding area. For example, the use of bamboo (Bambusoideae) to build houses, barriers between land, river crossing bridges, and rafts for water transportation. Indonesia’s geographical location allows bamboo to grow in many areas. Data on Indonesia.go.id shows that although there is no valid data regarding the area of ​​bamboo land in Indonesia, it is estimated that the area covered by bamboo reaches more than 1 million ha. Indonesia is a country that has around 176 types of bamboo, out of around 1439 types of bamboo known in the world, and around 50% of them are endemic. As an endemic plant, the availability of bamboo is relatively close to communities in various regions in Indonesia. Thus, in the value change and supply chain aspects, using bamboo for buildings and facilities will leave a much smaller carbon footprint compared to construction using fabricated materials. Moreover, it is stated in the portal that the total biomass that bamboo plants can store is around 87.35 tons per ha, so bamboo has an important ecological role in facing environmental threats and the negative impacts of climate change [7].

Bamboo is an excellent alternative material for construction substitutes such as iron, concrete, or bricks for several reasons, including the fact that the bamboo plant itself is a significant CO₂ (carbon dioxide) absorber during its growth, bamboo as an organic material can be recycled, and the manufacturing process uses less energy and water than other industries used in wood, metal, and concrete construction [8]. In “modern society”, bamboo is not frequently used as a permanent building material, but it is in villages and indigenous communities. Bamboo plant development conserves soil, water, and biodiversity while also collecting CO₂. Thus, bamboo can reduce water and energy consumption, boost CO₂ absorption (the conversion of CO₂ into organic matter), and be used to create houses and structures [9]. Ecological, economic, and social advantages of the usage of raw materials derived from bamboo plants can help local people develop sustainably. Based on this sustainability value, instead of conceptualizing it as unmodern, it should instead be claimed as modernization, because of its alignment with nature and sustainability (Figure 1).

Figure 1.

Traditional settlement made of bamboo in Temanggung, Central Java, Indonesia (photo by Hammad Zahid Muharram).

Traditional indigenous communities certainly do not have formal scientific knowledge about bamboo, but they have cross-generational knowledge from their ancestors who respect nature and its sustainability [10]. Unfortunately, the collective values ​​that constitute local wisdom regarding the culture of building housing and public facilities are faced with defining the quality of housing in favor of the use of fabricated materials, thus positioning their culture as “low quality” or “unfit” or “not meeting standards”. Thus, community groups who try to maintain local wisdom are often marginalized at the national policy level as obstacles to development and modernization. Therefore, community groups who try to maintain local wisdom are often marginalized at the national policy level and are considered to be an obstacle to development and modernization so that they are considered worthy of being “regulated” with national regulations which often ignore the uniqueness of indigenous communities [11]. This pressure was the trigger for the struggle of indigenous communities to obtain collective rights to manage their communities and customary lands [12].

In fact, the idealism of top-down based development is an attempt to colonize the knowledge and awareness of traditional communities, so that they realize that they are wrong and therefore need to adapt to the national or universal standards [13]. Through this colonialization of thought, indigenous people’s life space buildings and infrastructure are treated as tourism artifacts, while for residential purposes and living facilities, communities must change their residential culture to follow new standards that are framed as high quality, decent, and in accordance with health and welfare standards.

In line with the transition of national leadership in Indonesia and the increasing ecological awareness of society, development in Indonesia is undergoing a transformation that provides space for the culture and customs of the community to grow and develop [14]. This is an opportunity to decolonize, so that traditional culture in society is not considered an obstacle to development, but instead culture must be part of development itself. Because the culture of society and many indigenous communities in Indonesia is traditional and very close to nature, a paradigm that gives space to culture will be able to increase the ecological value and sustainability of development. Because the culture of society and many indigenous communities in Indonesia is traditional and very close to nature, a paradigm that gives space to culture will be able to increase the ecological value and sustainability of development. The idea of ​​prioritizing indigenous technology is in line with Vernacular Architecture [15], namely native and unique building construction that is produced without the need for imported components or processes.

In dealing with the difficulties of climate change and environmental sustainability, comparing traditional and modern houses is critical. Table 1 compares the carbon chains of traditional and modern communities, spanning the complete product life cycle, from raw material manufacture to construction, usage, and demolition or recycling.

	Bamboo		Bricks and concrete
	Carbon emissions	Environmental impact	Carbon emissions	Environmental impact
Production	Low, as bamboo can grow quickly and be replanted.	Minimal, as bamboo grows naturally and requires few inputs.	High, as cement production involves burning limestone and fossil fuels.	High, as limestone and clay mining can damage ecosystems.
Processing/construction	Low, as bamboo production requires less energy	Low, as bamboo can be obtained at low cost and requires minimal processing	Medium to high, as bricks and cement tend to be heavy and require large amounts of energy during construction.	High, as brick and cement production has left a large carbon footprint.
Usage/maintenance	Low, as bamboo is lightweight and requires little energy during construction	Low, as bamboo is strong and durable	Depends on repair and maintenance needs.	Depends on the use of chemical materials and products in maintenance.
Disassembly/replacement	Low, as bamboo can be recycled or decomposed naturally.	Minimal, as bamboo leaves no toxic waste.	High, as demolition of brick and cement buildings can generate toxic waste.	High, as construction waste can contaminate soil and water.

Table 1.

Carbon emission comparison of traditional and modern buildings.

Table 1 shows that in terms of production, bamboo produces less carbon emissions (low) compared to the carbon emissions produced by brick and concrete (high). This is because as a building material, bamboo is obtained through harvesting bamboo plants. To produce bamboo, the production process is planting seeds while the regeneration of the plant is through bamboo shoots. One mature bamboo clump can produce 10–20 stems each year [16] and grows quickly, reaching 30–90 cm per day [17]. Through this natural production process, bamboo not only produces low carbon emissions, and it can even bind carbon during the production process, namely when it is growing as a bamboo plant. In contrast, brick and concrete are building materials produced by factories. It is stated that the cement industry in Indonesia emits 0.833 tons of CO₂ for every ton of concrete [18]. In terms of environmental impact, because bamboo is a product of nature and is used directly, there is no production waste as produced by factories, so bamboo has a much lower environmental impact than the impact of brick, cement, and concrete production.

Compared to the construction aspect, bamboo uses less energy because all the supporting components are also natural from bamboo, such as pegs and ties, so there is no need for factory-made components. There is also no need for heavy equipment like constructing a house using brick, cement, and concrete, so bamboo house construction produces a very low carbon footprint compared to brick houses. As an illustration, building a small to medium house in Indonesia emits 22,179 kg of CO₂, equivalent to 22 tons of carbon [19]. Through these figures, it can be estimated the impact of damage to the environment, for the construction of many modern houses in just one community.

In terms of maintenance, bamboo is quite durable, generally able to last between 15 and 40 years [20]. Meanwhile, modern properties require maintenance at least once every five years. It is estimated that carbon emissions from house maintenance will reach around 46 tons within 25 years [19]. In the process of replacing buildings with waste, when bamboo is no longer used it will produce organic waste, while the remains of damaged concrete structures will pollute the soil. Thus, it can be said that as a building material bamboo is more sustainability-oriented.

Bamboo trees, with their high nitrogen consumption, can assist minimize water pollution by absorbing excess nutrients from agriculture, industrial, livestock, and sewage treatment. Bamboo clumps may absorb up to 12 tons of CO₂ per hectare, making them an effective fresh air recharger [20]. In addition to being an ecologically beneficial building material, bamboo is currently regarded as a low-cost alternative material. Bamboo has a great ability to absorb shocks, making it ideal for home construction materials that can withstand high winds and seismic pressures such as earthquakes [20].

Bamboo is becoming increasingly popular as a building material in the tourism industry. Bamboo resorts are growing as an appealing option, not only to fulfill the needs of modern travelers, but also to reduce negative environmental repercussions. Bamboo is a plentiful native resource in Indonesia, grows quickly, and requires little processing effort. Bamboo resorts decrease reliance on traditional building materials like concrete and steel, which have a bigger environmental impact.

The production and construction process of bamboo resorts has a lower carbon footprint compared to conventional construction. Bamboo grows fast and can be obtained at low cost, reducing carbon emissions associated with the production and transportation of building materials. In addition, the lightweight construction requires less energy during the building process.

Bamboo resorts, as an eco-friendly tourism alternative, can serve as an inspiration for tourist sites around the world. By continuing to develop and implement sustainability principles, Indonesia can preserve its natural beauty while also contributing positively to global sustainability and inspiring future environmental action.

The development described above only involves infrastructure development and the use of natural bamboo materials. However, in reality cultural involvement in development is much broader than just “infrastructure development” or just “bamboo use”. In terms of development, if we talk about “development in all fields”, then what is meant by development is not just the provision of housing, but also includes the provision of clothing and food.

3. Clothing culture

In terms of development, when we talk about “development in all fields”, what is meant by development is not just the provision of housing, but also includes the provision of clothing and food. When the provision of clothing is aimed at fulfilling desires, not needs, then discussing clothing from a functional perspective, namely as body covering, is certainly not enough. The clothing industry includes fabric production, designing models, selecting designers, and tailors, whose goal is not to make clothes that fulfill functional aspects, but rather to make them based on “what people want”. It is at this stage that providing clothing in a modern format will become a human activity that leaves a massive carbon footprint, as occurs in the modernization of settlements.

In contrast to providing clothing in a modern format, indigenous communities in Indonesia still maintain their culture in providing clothing. For example, the traditional clothing of the people of Nusa Tenggara is called tenun ikat [21]. Tenun ikat is made from natural materials that are taken and processed manually, woven with hand-operated wooden tools (Figure 2), and colored with natural dyes such as tree bark or flowers [22]. The plants needed to make cloth and to provide color grew around them. Another example is the Javanese, Madurese, Sundanese, and Betawi communities on the islands of Java and Madura. Their traditional clothes, called batik, are not only made and colored with natural materials that grow around them, and they do not even wash them using soap but a type of stone called lerak [23]. To smooth clothes, they do not use an iron, but hang them by placing a weight on the edge of the cloth so that the cloth is pulled down. The indigenous Papuan people on Papua Island and the indigenous Dayak people on Kalimantan Island have their own culture in terms of settlement. In Papua, there are even bags called noken which are made from part of a kind of trees [24]. All of them use natural ingredients and traditional processes that save carbon footprint. Maintaining these cultures instead of “modernizing” them is a choice that will contribute to the sustainability of natural resources and the climate. The condition is not to colonize indigenous peoples by framing their culture as backward and not modern so that it must be replaced with another culture that is “more in line with civilization”.

Figure 2.

Process of making tenun ikat in Kupang, Nusa Tenggara Timur, Indonesia (photo by Hammad Zahid Muharram).

4. Food culture

Indonesia’s geographical location makes it a country that has a climate that supports abundant food availability throughout the year, on land, rivers, and in the sea. With such a climate there is no need for food preservation technology because food sources are available in abundance throughout the year. However, traditional food preservation technology develops uniquely in each region. This need is not related to climatic conditions, but rather because the abundant harvest exceeds needs, so the food needs to be preserved so that it can be stored longer for later consumption.

The most popular food preservation is meat preservation. The main reason is because hunting produces large animals such as buffalo or cows which produce enough meat to last one day’s food, whereas in the past there were no refrigerators to store food. An example of preserving meat in the indigenous communities of Nusa Tenggara is by burning it using wood over low heat and for a long time, resulting in ready-to-eat dried meat called “se’i” [25] and can be stored for quite a long time without needing a refrigerator. Meanwhile, in traditional Malay communities, meat is preserved by cooking it into a dish called “rendang” [26] which allows the food to be stored for a long period of time at room temperature. The difference between “se’i” and “rendang” is that “se’i” developed in areas with minimal spice plants so it takes the form of marinated dried meat, while “rendang” comes from areas rich in spices so it takes the form of meat cooked using lots of spices.

As a country whose sea area is wider than land, Indonesia also has traditional fish preservation technology which is popular in almost all coastal communities throughout Indonesia. The fish product is called “ikan asin” (salted fish). Salting fish is done by drying the caught sea fish in the sun in an open area for days or even several weeks depending on the quality of sunlight exposure in each area. Through drying, sea fish dries out, leaving behind dried salted fish flesh containing sea salt. “Se’i”, “rendang”, and “salted fish” are three examples of foods in Indonesia that are often stored for a long time without needing to be refrigerated. The traditional food preservation industry is very diverse according to the local culture of the community, but they all have one thing in common, namely that they do not require preservatives and fabrication processes that consume large amounts of energy due to the use of machines, electricity, and fuel.

5. Village revitalization and circular economy

In early 2013, a bamboo bicycle model named spedagi was developed, using Petung bamboo (Dendrocalamus asper) as the main material, one of the strongest and most abundantly available bamboo species in rural Indonesia. This large-diameter, thick-walled bamboo is not only strong but also allows for the manufacture of bicycle frame rods of uniform size. The construction of bamboo slats “usuk bamboo”, the roof frame of a rural house, is a source of inspiration to increase the stiffness of bamboo culms. The combination of oval-section slats and metal lugs resulted in a frame design that is not only beautiful and distinctive, but also strong and comfortable to use.

The Spedagi bamboo bike is produced at Studio Magno in Kandangan Village, Temanggung, Central Java [27]. Magno’s artisans have been trained to produce products with high-quality craftmanship. This capital is required in the manufacture of the Spedagi bamboo bike frame. The Spedagi bamboo bicycle is made from local Petung bamboo that has come of age. The bamboo is cut and split to size, then cured and dried using an oven. Next, the bamboo is shaped into bamboo sticks of a certain size and assembled with metal joints (lugs) produced by local craftsmen. The final process is finishing and coating to protect the bamboo from water or other materials that could damage it. It takes at least 60 hours of labor to produce 1 Spedagi bamboo bike frame.

Spedagi bamboo bicycle is not just a means of transportation made from sustainable materials (bamboo), Spedagi is a trigger, an icon, and a symbol of a social movement that focuses on the issue of village revitalization [28]. The Spedagi bamboo bike is a metaphor of village revitalization itself. Made from bamboo, which has been perceived as an ancient, cheap, weak, and easily damaged material, through serious efforts can be made into a product that is not only beautiful, functional, and comfortable, but also has a high selling value (Figure 3).

Figure 3.

Spedagi bamboo bike (photo by Hammad Zahid Muharram).

Bamboo bicycles are not only a means of transportation but also a means of social transformation. A well-designed bicycle, done with high craftmanship and an important part of a social movement, makes Spedagi different from other bicycles. Bamboo bicycles have national influence, having been used by the Indonesian president in diplomacy with the Australian prime minister and delivered to country delegations during Indonesia’s G20 presidency.

One of the Spedagi movement’s social projects, which has inspired hundreds of similar events in Indonesia, is Papringan market (pring means bamboo in Javanese, and then, Papringan is more or less “about bamboo”), a traditional market in a bamboo forest that blends food and art with traditional wisdom on nature and environmental care [29]. Papringan market was founded and operated by a group of young people from Ngadiprono Hamlet who are members of Komunitas Mata Air, a community dedicated to environmental conservation.

Papringan market was previously a neglected area that was often used for garbage disposal. The market occupies an area of 2500 square meters owned by several villagers. There are at least twenty vendors at the location. The handicrafts, vegetables, and traditional food and drinks sold at Papringan market have gone through a selection process, so their quality is guaranteed (Figure 4).

Figure 4.

Papringan market (photo by Hammad Zahid Muharram).

Customers must exchange money for pring money or bamboo money. Visitors are also prohibited from using plastic wrap on the goods and meals they purchase. For this reason, the management provides woven bamboo baskets and box-shaped containers. Bamboo bikes and Papringan market are examples of how cultural wealth and modernization may be used to improve environmental stewardship. From there, a circular economy is formed that can enable communities to fulfill each other’s needs [29]. In the face of climate change issues, sustainable village revitalization necessitates collaboration among the community, government, and other stakeholders. Communities can achieve development that preserves cultural heritage while also reducing their carbon footprint by using local understanding, implementing sustainable technologies, and raising public awareness. This is a difficult sustainability task, but as Stephenson [30] believes, culture has the capacity to do it.

6. Indonesian government commitment

The Indonesian government currently has various sustainable development programs which are an external expression of the government’s commitment to involving culture as part of development. One of these programs is the Indonesia FOLU Net Sink 2030 program, namely an effort to reduce the greenhouse effect through the development of agroforestry, especially bamboo agroforestry [7]. This source states that bamboo forests can be a means of protection from severe environmental damage when natural disasters such as earthquakes and tropical storms occur. It is further said that based on an agroforestry perspective, bamboo populations can also restore critical land. In critical land in East Nusa Tenggara, Indonesia, 2.5 million bamboo stalks have been planted on an area of ​​1300 ha. The Indonesian government, through the Ministry of Environment and Forestry, is targeting bamboo planting on an area of ​​300 thousand ha in 74,000 villages in various regions in Indonesia. This program shows the Indonesian government’s commitment to involving local culture as part of development.

The government program involving bamboo is just one of a number of programs involving indigenous communities to manage development in a way that is consistent with their traditional customs and culture. Another program is what is called social forestry. If bambooization specifically focuses on bamboo trees, then social forestry focuses on “forests”. In 2016, the Social Forestry program was launched through a regulation by the Minister of Environment and Forestry [31]. Prior to that year, management of Indonesia’s forest areas was dominated by Hak pengusahaan Hutan (Forest Concession Rights), a policy to permit to use forests for economic purposes. Even though in 1978 the community-based forest resource management approach, namely Forest for People, was declared at the 8th World Forestry Congress in Jakarta and Indonesia hosted the event, decades later the issue and agenda of “forests for the people in Indonesia” was still not be a priority [32]. The social forestry program is actually the result of a long process of struggle by indigenous communities to regain the power to manage forests in their territories, which were previously nationalized, recognized as state property, and handed over their management to entrepreneurs. Most of the entrepreneurs who receive permits for forest management rights come from outside the managed forest area. It is not surprising that they do not feel ownership of the forest and are not motivated to preserve the forest. For them, forests for which management permits have been granted are economic resources.

Instead of managing forests for the benefit of society or the state, entrepreneurs focus more on utilizing forests to maximize economic profits, and this is done with a modern approach so that forest use reaches massive levels, as does its impact on damage. Once again, modernization is an approach that is not in favor of sustainability. Forestry entrepreneurs have been proven to leave forests in a damaged state after receiving massive benefits. Most uses involve logging to use the wood or felling to use the land for other economic purposes such as mining. This modernization approach is very different from the traditional approach of indigenous peoples who view the forest as a “home” where they live and “depend on their livelihood”, so that their culture in terms of forest use also aims to protect the forest [10]. In traditional community management, trees are not cut down but maintained. An example is a program called foster trees [33], which is sharing responsibility for caring for trees in the forest so that the trees are maintained until they grow tall and widen in diameter. Another program is the development of ecotourism [34], namely making local resources and wisdom a tourist destination, which allows people to live through “forest use” without having to cut down trees. This program also opens access to the outside world to recognize the ways or culture of people in various forest village communities (communities of people who live in, on the edge or around the forest) in managing and protecting forests (Figure 5).

Figure 5.

Example of ecotourism. Source: [35].

Through this and other similar programs, forest village communities with their traditional living culture have proven that their way of life has the potential to absorb far more carbon than modern approaches to forest management. Therefore, it can be said that living with traditional culture is not only caring for the forest but also caring for the earth. Communities with traditional lifestyles are groups that from an ecological perspective are sustainable communities and whose lives are connected to nature [36]. The Indonesian government’s commitment to social forestry has now been proven by the establishment of around 90 customary forests in Indonesia with a forest area of ​​more than 75,000 hectares, and nearly 200 locations are in progress with a forest area of ​​almost 3 million hectares. [37]. From a conservation perspective, the Indonesian government has recorded 552 conservation areas covering an area of 27.14 million hectares located in 6381 villages throughout Indonesia [38]. Wiratno, the Director General of Natural Resources and Ecosystem Conservation, Ministry of Environment and Forestry of the Republic of Indonesia, reported that the scope of conservation includes ecosystems in high mountain (snowy) rain forests, low mountain rain forests, kerangas forests, swamp forests, peat forests, karst, savannas, mangroves, coastal forests, sandbanks, seagrass beds, coral reef ecosystems, and freshwater lake ecosystems. All conservation is managed by the community through the “Culture as a Base for Nature Conservation” program.

7. Conclusion

Indonesia, as a country with many tribes and many cultures, proves that living a traditional way of life is the best choice from a sustainability perspective. Even though indigenous communities throughout Indonesia are aware of this and are also supported by environmental scientists and environmental activists, efforts to realize “culturally friendly” development have still not reached the ideal level. This business is still connected with community groups who have economic and political interests in development. Based on experience and history in Indonesia, efforts to fight for cultural interests in development need to involve a number of stakeholders, especially indigenous peoples, cultural and environmental scientists and practitioners, as well as journalists. This is where psychology comes into play, as many sustainability challenges are interconnected in human behavior [39].

Indigenous communities are the main actors whose rights to forests and customary territories need to be “reclaimed”. The term “reclaim” has a complex meaning, namely not just reclaiming rights to manage forests and customary territories, but reclaiming a way of life that supports nature, giving nature the right to grow and develop, not exploiting it to fulfill human desires (not needs). There is a need for decolonization of knowledge, so that the pro-environmental behavior of indigenous peoples in terms of providing housing, public facilities, food management, providing clothing, etc., is not considered ancient, backward, and not modern. This behavior needs to be assessed as sustainability-oriented behavior so that it is worthy of implementation and promotion.

Because they are the main actors, indigenous communities must initiate this effort. They need to fight to have their “voices” considered in national development policies and plans. It is at this stage that indigenous communities need to receive assistance so that they can fight for it using the language of the laws and regulations that apply in Indonesia. That is the role of environmental scientists and practitioners.

Environmental scientists and practitioners are the groups best able to provide evidence that people’s traditional way of life is an alternative that has high sustainability value. Naturally, their behavior is sustainable behavior. Therefore, this behavior needs to be facilitated so that it can be realized. This behavior and lifestyle cannot be realized if their interactions with forests or nature are intervened by political or legal decisions that hand over the rights to manage forests and nature in their area to parties outside the community. Based on experience in Indonesia, the number of groups of environmental scientists and practitioners providing assistance and joint efforts with indigenous community groups is still small compared to needs.

Journalists are parties who play a role in disseminating information about indigenous peoples’ movements, in order to attract the attention of the general public to provide the necessary support. Data obtained through Google searches shows that there is still very little news about environmental issues, including the movement of indigenous communities to take over forest management rights and bambooization programs. Community search data also shows that not many people are looking for information about environmental issues and indigenous communities. This situation is reciprocal. Because there are not many people who are interested in environmental issues, in the journalist’s view, reporting about them does not have “news value”. On the other hand, because it is considered to have no news value, not many journalists report it in the mass media, so there is not much information about it, and as a result, the public is not adequately exposed to these issues. Thus, even though the movement towards sustainability has been launched in many groups of society, it still requires a long struggle by every element of society who has cultural and environmental awareness, so that this movement becomes a massive, popular movement and has a broad impact. The three stakeholder components, namely indigenous peoples, environmental scientists, and activists, as well as Indonesian journalists, have succeeded in achieving certain achievements in the past and present in Indonesia, and there is hope and optimism that by continuing to maintain similar efforts, these achievements will continue to increase in future years. Although individual and collective efforts have been made and a number of successes have been achieved, research shows that the transformation of sustainability thinking at the individual level is not enough [36]. How sustainability spreads from the individual level to local, regional, and global communities is still homework that needs to be done.