Sidelining sustainability: the impact of sea sand mining in Indonesia’s Riau islands Open Access

Sea sand is a type of sand found on beaches or seabeds, formed from the erosion of rocks and terrestrial minerals, transported by water and deposited in coastal areas or on the ocean floor (Surianti et al., 2023). Sea sand serves important ecological functions and plays a crucial role as a habitat for marine organisms living on the seafloor. Sea sand also contributes to maintaining the balance of coastal and marine ecosystems. Furthermore, sea sand plays a vital role in protecting coastlines from erosion and abrasion caused by ocean waves. Sea sand maintains seawater quality by filtering pollutants and preserving nutrient balance in marine ecosystems (Pranyoto, 2024). Sea sand has become the primary choice as fill material for large-scale coastal reclamation projects, given the difficulty of expanding land toward the interior in urban spatial planning and meeting new coastal space requirements. While small-scale reclamation can still utilize terrestrial fill materials, the large volumes required for major projects make sea sand the primary source of fill material (Ernas et al., 2018). Consequently, these significant benefits make sea sand highly valuable and establish it as one of the key mining commodities.

Marine sand mining is defined as the practice of extracting sand from the seabed for various purposes such as construction, manufacturing, and other industries, as well as for export to countries that require sea sand as a primary material for reclamation projects (Sari, 2023). This means that marine sand mining is not only aimed at fulfilling various national needs but is also exported to meet international demand. Export activities play a crucial role in economic growth for developing countries like Indonesia (Redjeki, 2023). When properly managed, exports generate multiple benefits. These include increased foreign exchange reserves, expanded market access, job creation, and strengthened international economic relations. However, export policies must balance economic gains with long-term sustainability considerations. However, exports cannot be conducted arbitrarily, especially to the point of excessive exploitation without considering the long-term consequences, particularly when exporting sea sand that has become a central component of social, national, and state life. Both in the past and present, marine sand mining and export activities have been a contentious topic in significant debates from social, economic, and political perspectives (Korenelius, 2024).

Indonesia previously prohibited marine sand exports through Ministerial Decree No. 117/MPP/Kep/2/2003. This decree implemented Presidential Instruction No. 2/2002 on Marine Sand Mining Control. It was reinforced by Presidential Decree No. 33/2002 on Marine Sand Control and Management. The reasons for the temporary suspension of sea sand export included unresolved maritime boundary issues between Indonesia and Singapore, environmental damage to coastal areas and small islands resulting from marine sand mining that impacted biodiversity conservation in the Riau Islands waters, and the collapse of Export Reference Prices set by the government due to sea sand mafia activities (Purwaka, 2014). Nevertheless, the Indonesian government reopened sea sand export after a twenty-year temporary suspension.

In 2023, the Indonesian government issued Government Regulation (PP) No. 26 of 2023 on Marine Sedimentation Management, followed by Regulation of the Minister of Marine Affairs and Fisheries No. 33 of 2023 on Implementation Regulations for PP No. 26 of 2023. Subsequently, in 2024, the Indonesian government issued Regulation of the Minister of Trade (Permendag) No. 20 of 2024 on the Second Amendment to Regulation of the Minister of Trade No. 22 of 2023 on Goods Prohibited for Export, and Permendag No. 21 of 2024 on the Second Amendment to Permendag No. 23 of 2023 on Export Policy and Regulation. Through this series of regulations, the Indonesian government reopened sea sand export and nullified previous regulations regarding the temporary suspension of sea sand export.

These regulations have drawn opposition from various stakeholders, as the government issued regulations perceived as highly sensitive due to their potential harm to communities and the environment, as well as their potential threat to national sovereignty. Through these regulations, large-scale marine sand mining for export purposes becomes highly feasible. The policy shift toward marine sand exports raises questions about alignment with Indonesia’s sustainable development commitments. Analysis of Government Regulation No. 26/2023 reveals limited integration of environmental safeguards compared to the comprehensive controls established under the 2002–2003 prohibition framework. The Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia 1945 indeed affirms that the earth, water, and natural resources contained therein are controlled by the state and utilized for the greatest prosperity of the people. Article 33 of Indonesia’s 1945 Constitution mandates that natural resources be utilized for maximum public prosperity. Effective implementation requires policy frameworks that integrate economic objectives with environmental sustainability and social equity considerations.

Sustainable development is a development concept that, in its implementation, meets present needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. This concept aims to manage natural resources appropriately and wisely (Tay and Rusmiwari, 2019). Sustainable development in Indonesia focuses on economic growth and poverty alleviation as priorities in improving community economic conditions. The government has implemented various policies to reduce poverty levels, with sustainable development considered a potential solution that combines economic, environmental, and social aspects for a more prosperous and equitable future (Hapsoro and Bangun, 2020). According to Intan Veronica, Fasa and Suharto (2022), sustainable development is important for three main reasons. First, there is a moral responsibility to preserve natural resources for future generations. The current generation enjoying environmental benefits must ensure that future generations can also experience the same benefits. Second, ecological reasons dictate that economic activities should not focus solely on resource exploitation but must also consider the preservation of ecosystem functions. Third, economic reasons arise because it is difficult to determine whether economic activities have met sustainability standards.

Figure 1 maps designated marine sediment extraction zones across Indonesian territorial waters. The government has identified multiple locations for potential marine sand mining operations under Government Regulation No. 26/2023. These areas represent regions where seabed sediment deposits are concentrated and accessible for extraction activities. The spatial distribution shows significant extraction zones in western Indonesian waters, particularly near the Riau Islands Province, which borders Singapore. This geographic concentration reflects both geological sediment availability and proximity to major export markets requiring sand for coastal reclamation projects. Jamika et al. (2023), in their article “Coastal and Marine Management in Case Study of Beach Reclamation and Sand Mining Impacts on Marine Ecosystems and Coastal Communities,” emphasize that marine sand mining leads to environmental damage from such activities. Furthermore, it also impacts coastal ecosystems and the economic well-being of local communities.

Based on the data in Table 1 above, the Riau Islands constitute one of the provinces with significant potential for sea sand exploitation in non-metallic mining activities. Karimun Regency alone has a planned marine sand mining area covering 46759.17 hectares, representing the largest area in the Riau Islands Province. Additionally, Batam and Lingga have allocated areas of 2320.91 hectares and 3640.9 hectares respectively for marine sand mining activities. This substantial potential indicates that the Riau Islands possess abundant sea sand reserves that can be utilized for local and national economic activities. However, the greatest challenge lies in ensuring that these mining activities can be conducted sustainably, considering the significant environmental impacts involved.

Furthermore, the marine sand mining yields will be exported abroad, which will undoubtedly affect Indonesia’s national sovereignty if this sea sand is subsequently used as material for land expansion and/or coastal reclamation. Singapore’s coastal reclamation has utilized Indonesian marine sand since 1976 (Alunaza et al., 2018). Sollitan and Posumah (2020) document that Singapore’s land expansion through reclamation has reduced the distance between Singaporean territory and Indonesian waters, creating maritime boundary management challenges. This development will certainly disturb Indonesia’s national sovereignty. According to Yusnita (2024), this situation is exacerbated by the absence of regulations regarding reclamation within UNCLOS 1982, which weakens maritime boundary law.

Figure 2 visualizes the bibliometric network of marine sand mining research using VOSviewer, showing the main clusters and keyword connections derived from the analyzed publications. The visualization highlights that the dominant keywords such as “sea sand,” “sand mine,” and “marine sand mining” are still weakly connected to broader environmental and sustainability topics. This suggests that academic attention to the ecological and governance aspects of sea sand mining remains limited and fragmented.

Based on 997 Google Scholar documents discussing sea sand from 2014 to 2024, it was found that marine sand mining remains limited in its coverage, with the trend of marine sand mining discussions only beginning to emerge in 2020 and still attracting relatively few researchers to study sea sand. This can be observed from the bibliometric VOSviewer analysis derived from 19 main items and divided into 4 clusters, which identified a research gap in the form of marine sand mining. Additionally, the impacts of marine sand mining have also been minimally studied by researchers within the 2014–2024 timeframe. From this foundation, the researchers proceeded to investigate the impacts of marine sand mining from ecological and economic perspectives.

From the above description, the authors have chosen the research title “Sidelining Sustainability: The Impact of Marine sand mining in Indonesia’s Riau Islands” This title was selected based on concerns regarding sea sand exploitation in border areas, particularly in the Riau Islands, which potentially disregards the principles of sustainable development. The data above demonstrates three distribution areas of marine sand mining in the Riau Islands, namely Karimun Regency, Batam City, and Lingga Regency, indicating that the Riau Islands represent one of the strategic regions for marine sand mining. However, uncontrolled marine sand mining and export activities will threaten ecological integrity, economic stability, and national sovereignty.

Sustainable development requires balancing economic growth, social welfare, and environmental preservation. This concept has evolved into the Blue Economy framework, emphasizing regenerative utilization of marine resources without reducing ecosystem capacity for future generation (Wenhai et al., 2019). The ASEAN Blue Economy Framework 2023 represents a comprehensive approach to marine resource governance, positioning blue economy as ASEAN’s future growth engine given that 66% of Southeast Asia is covered by oceans, generating 3–6 trillion USD annually. Figure 3 illustrates the ASEAN Blue Economy Framework structure, which emphasizes three guiding principles: Value Creation, Inclusivity, and Sustainability. The framework identifies Blue Conservation Management, Blue Science Technology and Innovation, and Blue Priority Sectors as core strategies, supported by infrastructure, institutional setting, cooperation and capacity building, and sustainable investment and finance as enablers.

Blue Economy implementation faces serious criticisms in practice. Silver et al. (2015) identified “blue washing” phenomena—practices labeling environmentally harmful marine economic activities as sustainable without substantive changes. Voyer et al. (2018) emphasized that competing interpretations of blue economy can produce marine governance contradicting sustainability principles. This criticism directly applies to Indonesia’s marine sand mining policy, categorized as “sediment management” while fundamentally representing large-scale resource extraction. Table 2 demonstrates systematic deviation between ASEAN Blue Economy principles and Indonesia’s policy implementation. The integrated holistic approach required by ASEAN framework contrasts sharply with Indonesia’s sectoral mining approach under Government Regulation No. 26/2023.

International practices demonstrate alternative approaches to marine resource management. The Netherlands implements comprehensive circular economy targeting full circularity by 2050 through multi-stakeholder collaboration involving public authorities, knowledge institutions, environmental organizations, industry, trade unions, and civil society (PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, 2023). Dutch “Building with Nature” program integrates engineering solutions with natural processes for coastal protection, creating regenerative approaches that contrast Indonesia’s extractive model (De Vriend et al., 2015). Netherlands regulations establish ecosystem-based design rules for marine sand mining sites, including strict depth and volume limitations to minimize ecological impacts (Roos et al., 2011). Figure 4 demonstrates the fundamental difference between circular and linear economic models in marine resource management. The circular economy model emphasizes limited extraction, efficient utilization, and restoration cycles, contrasting sharply with Indonesia’s linear model focused on large-scale extraction and export without regeneration mechanisms.

Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) provide specific evaluation metrics for marine resource policies. SDG 13 (Climate Action) target 13.2 mandates integrating climate change measures into national policies, while large-scale marine sand mining contradicts this requirement by reducing coastal resilience and ecosystem adaptation capacity (Colglazier, 2015). SDG 14 (Life Below Water) demonstrates global progress with 126 countries engaging in marine spatial planning initiatives in 2024, representing 20% increase from previous year. Indonesian policies show clear deviation from this positive global trend.

Based on Table 2, Indonesia’s marine sand mining policy exhibits high-level deviations across multiple SDG targets, particularly concerning climate resilience (SDG 13.1), pollution prevention (SDG 14.1), and ecosystem management (SDG 14.2). The absence of Strategic Environmental Assessment (KLHS) in Government Regulation No. 26/2023 represents fundamental policy integration failure.

Table 3 shows the deviation of Indonesia’s marine sand mining policy from several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) targets. The findings reveal that most impacts exhibit a high deviation level, particularly concerning marine pollution prevention, coastal ecosystem degradation, and lack of policy coherence. These results indicate that current marine sand mining practices undermine environmental resilience and sustainable ocean management efforts.

Bennett et al. (2019) identified three critical conditions for successful blue economy implementation: cross-sectoral policy integration, active local community participation, and robust monitoring mechanisms. Indonesian marine sand mining policy implementation fails to meet all three conditions. Institutional fragmentation among Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries, Ministry of Trade, Ministry of Environment and Forestry, and Regional Governments produces incoherent policies with contradictory objectives.

Analysis reveals Indonesia’s marine sand mining policy experiences “policy capture” by short-term economic interests, fundamentally ignoring sustainable development principles. This pattern aligns with Winder and Le Heron (2017) findings on “assembling blue economy moments”—phenomena masking extractive practices with sustainability rhetoric. Rebranding large-scale mining activities as “marine sedimentation management” demonstrates systematic policy legitimation attempts that potentially harm marine ecosystems and coastal communities while contradicting Indonesia’s international commitments under both ASEAN Blue Economy Framework and UN Sustainable Development Goals.

The methodology employed in this study is qualitative research with a literature review approach. Qualitative research is a type of research that focuses on the conditions, characteristics, or values of a phenomenon or object (Abdussamad, 2021). A literature review is a research method that involves collecting articles and books to understand and examine theories relevant to the research (Adlini et al., 2022). The primary sources for this article include journal articles, theses, news reports, and other relevant sources.

Figure 5 illustrates the stages of the qualitative research process used in this study. The process begins with literature collection and source tracking, followed by data classification, processing, and presentation. The final stages involve abstraction and interpretation of data to draw meaningful conclusions that align with the research objectives.

Referring to the framework above, the first step in qualitative literature review research is to gather literary sources, both primary and secondary. This is followed by data classification based on the research formulation, continued with data processing involving the citation of both secondary and primary data that will subsequently be presented in the article (Darmalaksana, 2020).

In addition to secondary sources such as journal articles, theses, and news reports, this study also refers to primary sources such as official government reports, statistical data from the Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, and national policy documents related to marine sand management. These primary sources are used to strengthen the validity of the findings while reducing dependence on secondary literature alone.

Figure 6 illustrates the PRISMA flowchart outlining the systematic literature selection process applied in this study. The process demonstrates how sources were progressively refined from initial identification to final inclusion, ensuring that only the most relevant and credible literature was analyzed. This systematic approach enhances the validity and transparency of the study’s qualitative synthesis.

To ensure transparency in the selection of literature, this study applied a selection flow based on PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses). The selection process was carried out in several stages: (1) identification of articles and reports from academic databases (Google Scholar, Scopus, DOAJ) and official government websites; (2) screening based on titles and abstracts to ensure relevance to the topic; (3) eligibility assessment through full-text review; and (4) inclusion to determine the final literature to be analyzed. This is in line with best practice in systematic reviews in the field of management, which emphasizes clarity of search strategies and inclusion/exclusion criteria Rojon et al. (2021).

The literature criteria used include publications within the last 10 years (except for relevant classical theories), a focus on marine sand issues, maritime policy, sustainable development, and sources from official and verifiable documents.

Sea sand export in Indonesia has become a sensitive issue due to the impacts generated by such activities. Large-scale sea sand exploitation, particularly in border areas such as the Riau Islands, prompted the government to issue various regulations to halt these practices. During the presidency of Megawati Soekarnoputri from 2001 to 2004, Indonesia experienced significant changes in natural resource and environmental management, including the prohibition of sea sand exports (Amarin, 2024). During this period, sea sand became a highly sought-after export commodity, especially from Singapore as a basic material for Singapore’s land reclamation. However, the environmental impacts of marine sand mining for Indonesia were substantial and concerning, ultimately leading the government to implement strict regulations regarding sea sand exports.

Initial concerns about the impacts of marine sand mining emerged in the early 2000s. Two years later, Presidential Decree No. 33 of 2002 concerning Control and Supervision of Sea Sand Business was issued. This regulation emerged from the government’s efforts to control the exploitation of natural resources in Indonesian waters, particularly sea sand. This is explained in Article 2, which states: “Control and supervision of sea sand business includes control and supervision of mining, dredging, transportation, export trade, utilization of sea sand business results, and prevention of marine damage carried out in an integrated and coordinated manner and implemented in accordance with statutory provisions.”

The government undertook efforts to prevent marine ecosystem damage through various means, from monitoring mining activities to prohibiting mining activities and selling sand abroad. This Presidential Decree was preceded by the Joint Decision of the Minister of Industry and Trade No. 89/MPP/Kep/2/2002, the Minister of Marine Affairs and Fisheries No. SKB.07/MEN/2002, and the Minister of Environment No. 01/MENLH/2/2002 concerning the Temporary Cessation of Sea Sand Exports. This decision considered the environmental damage impacts on ecosystems and marine biota habitats resulting from widespread and uncontrolled marine sand mining.

Subsequently, the Ministry of Industry and Trade Decision No. 117/MPP/Kep/2/2003 concerning the Temporary Cessation of Sea Sand Exports was issued separately. This decision explicitly explained the cessation of sea sand exports from non-metallic sand mining materials in Indonesian territorial waters throughout the Republic of Indonesia. The Indonesian government continued to issue regulations in 2009 in the form of Law No. 32 of 2009 concerning Environmental Protection and Management. This law became the legal foundation for various environmental policies in Indonesia, including marine sand mining regulations.

Law No. 32/2009 stipulates that every natural resource exploitation activity must be based on sustainability principles and environmental protection. In other words, mining activities that threaten environmental pollution in Indonesia must be permanently closed, such as marine sand mining. Article 4 paragraph 1 point (a) of Government Regulation No. 78 of 2010 concerning Reclamation and Post-Mining states that “protection of surface water quality, groundwater, seawater, soil, and air based on quality standards or environmental damage criteria in accordance with statutory provisions.”

Supporting sustainability, the government issued Law No. 32 of 2014 concerning the Sea, explaining in Article 4 paragraph 1: “The scope of this Law includes the regulation of Indonesian maritime implementation in an integrated and sustainable manner to develop national prosperity.” This is reinforced by the requirement to utilize marine resources using sustainability concepts to maintain marine resources for future generations.

Along with regulations prohibiting the export of sea sand, global attention to the impact of sand extraction on coastal and marine ecosystems has increased. International studies show that beach and marine sand mining can trigger coastal erosion, changes in sediment flow, disruption of benthic biota habitats, and increased water turbidity that damages seagrass and coral reefs (Rangel-Buitrago et al., 2023).

For example, studies in various countries have noted that direct sediment extraction from the seabed (benthic dredging) results in a decline in fauna biomass and a shift in the composition of local species (United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR), 2025). Thus, the policy of banning sea sand exports in the early 2000s was not only protective of national resources, but also in line with efforts to mitigate damage to marine ecosystems, which has become a growing concern in scientific and global policy circles.

The government’s legal politics in improving people’s welfare established Law No. 6 of 2023 concerning Job Creation as a legal umbrella to accelerate national strategic projects, facilitate and improve the investment ecosystem, and increase national attractiveness for investment through economic transformation. One sector reopened was dredging and sea sand sedimentation export permits through Government Regulation No. 26 of 2023 concerning Management of Sedimentation Results at Sea (Jauhari and Surono, 2023). Marine sand mining and exports resumed during President Joko Widodo’s era after being temporarily halted for 20 years.

The temporary cessation regulation for marine sand mining and exports, namely Ministry of Industry and Trade Decision No. 117/MPP/Kep/2/2003, was annulled through Trade Ministry Regulation No. 21 of 2024 concerning the second amendment to Trade Ministry Regulation No. 23 of 2023 concerning export policies and arrangements.

From historical and planning perspectives, the reopening of marine sand mining and exports had been planned for a long time, but the momentum was only achieved in May 2023 when the Indonesian government issued Government Regulation No. 26 of 2023 concerning management of sedimentation results at sea. This regulation opened the way for previously prohibited sea sand exports. In August 2024, the Minister of Trade signed Trade Ministry Regulation No. 20 of 2024 regulating sea sand export policies and arrangements.

However, the reopening of sea sand exports through GR 26/2023 and derivative policies shows potential inconsistencies with the principles of ecological sustainability recognized in global literature. According to research by Rozi Beni and Atsari (2023), there is an incongruity between the provisions of GR 26/2023 and the principles of Indonesian environmental law, particularly in articles 9 and 18, which tend to allow exploitation without strict controls (Beni and Atsari, 2023). Other researchers emphasize that this regulation could “indirectly support environmental exploitation” if it is not accompanied by green incentive schemes and strict control mechanisms.

From a global marine ecology perspective, the opening of marine sand extraction also raises concerns about the decline in coastal resilience to extreme waves and sea level rise, which is a major theme in global climate resilience studies (Stockholm Resilience Centre, 2025).

Furthermore, recent reports indicate that several important articles in GR 26/2023 have been overturned by the Supreme Court because they are considered to be in conflict with the 2014 Maritime Law and pose significant environmental risks (Basten Gokkon, 2025). Therefore, strengthening policies through the development of strict technical extraction standards, independent monitoring mechanisms, and green policy incentives is crucial to ensure that export liberalization does not destroy marine ecosystem functions.

The implementation of Government Regulation No. 26 of 2023 concerning Marine Sedimentation Management recently surprised the public, as the Indonesian government had closed sea sand export channels for 2 decades and now reopened them. This policy potentially causes environmental damage, particularly to marine ecology. According to Surianti (2024), ecological impacts from marine sand mining include damaged marine ecosystems, such as destroyed coral reefs and seagrass beds. These ecosystems are important habitats for various marine species, functioning as feeding grounds, shelter, and breeding areas.

Mining that damages these areas reduces marine biodiversity and causes environmental degradation that is difficult to repair. Additionally, coastal current patterns, sedimentation, and overall ecological balance can be affected by coastal morphological changes caused by mining (Surianti, 2024). These changes disturb ecological balance in coastal areas, affect marine ecosystems, and accelerate coastal erosion and abrasion.

Furthermore, Surianti et al. (2023) stated that impacts from sand mining include mangrove forest damage, coastal marine abrasion, increased coastal erosion, decreased environmental quality, and increased seawater pollution. Mining causes abrasion that accelerates coastal degradation, increasing natural disaster risks such as floods and tidal waves. Declining seawater quality also threatens marine ecosystem health and the lives of coastal communities dependent on the sea for their livelihoods, such as fishermen.

According to Gomareuzzaman (2024), Karimun Regency waters have bathymetry of −1.5 to −3.5 meters of sea sand. Such activities must consider water conditions to avoid changing the characteristics of Karimun Regency waters. Marine sand mining without environmental consideration will negatively impact the environment, particularly significant changes to seabed morphology, affecting sea current flow and sedimentation patterns.

In addition to the financial benefits, international reports remind us that the ecological damage caused by marine sand mining activities also carries hidden economic costs that are often overlooked, including losses in the fisheries, tourism, and marine ecosystem services sectors (BMI Country Risk and Industry Analysis, 2025).

For example, an analysis by Fitch Solutions reports that although legalized sea sand exports can increase state revenues, they also carry the risk of declining fish production and coastal communities’ dependence on degraded ecosystems, which in the long term can weaken fishermen’s livelihoods and increase socioeconomic burdens (BMI Country Risk and Industry Analysis, 2025).

A study in Kenya (Mbiuni Ward, Machakos County) shows that river/coastal sand mining activities cause significant environmental and social degradation, including water pollution and a decline in environmental quality, which ultimately disrupts the income of local residents (Mbaka and Rono, 2022).

Singapore is the main importing country for sea sand exports from Indonesia due to reclamation targeted until 2030, requiring substantial sea sand from Indonesia. The Riau Islands Province has become one of the marine sand mining locations. Since this policy was implemented, 66 companies have applied for permits from the Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries for marine sand mining and exports.

Singapore’s reclamation has occurred since colonial times. One of the largest post-independence reclamation projects was along the East Coast, adding 1,525 hectares to the southeastern coastal area (Azarya, 2019). Singapore, once a small fishing village, transformed into a significant trading center through land use reorganization and optimization. Since 1976, Singapore has relied on sand from Batam and Karimun waters in Riau Islands Province for its reclamation projects (Alunaza et al., 2018).

Sea sand exports provide economic opportunities for Indonesia. The main benefit is increased state revenue through non-tax state revenue (PNBP). According to the Ministry of Finance, potential revenue from sea sand exports could reach trillions of rupiah annually. With an export benchmark price of Rp186,000 per cubic meter, if export volume reaches 50 million cubic meters, state revenue could reach approximately Rp2.5 trillion.

However, reopening sea sand exports potentially only benefits a few entrepreneurs and creates opportunities for political elites to seek profits. Despite potential state revenue and private sector benefits, negative impacts from marine sand mining and exports on the economy will be more significant, particularly for communities and the environment.

Internationally, the concept of sustainability emphasizes that the exploitation of natural resources must be balanced with ecosystem protection and social welfare. The study “SDG 12 needs an oceanic interface: sand mining, saltwater intrusion (SWI) and coastal sustainability” states that sand mining causes coastal erosion, habitat destruction, and water quality degradation, which not only threatens biodiversity but also the stability of food production, coastal agriculture, and water security for local communities (Sarupria et al., 2023).

Furthermore, the UNEP report states that some sand extraction has exceeded natural replenishment rates, leaving ecosystems insufficient time to recover, which means that long-term sustainability in line with SDG 14—Life Below Water—is at stake (UN Environment Programme, 2023).

Large-scale marine sand mining in Indonesian marine areas, such as the Riau Islands, demonstrates non-integration with sustainable development concepts regulated in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Sustainable development emphasizes balance between economic development, social welfare, and environmental preservation. Uncontrolled marine sand mining activities potentially damage the environment and contradict three relevant SDG indicators: (13) climate action, (14) life below water, and (17) partnerships for the goals.

Marine sand mining directly affects climate change through impacts on coastal and marine ecosystems that serve as natural carbon sinks. Mangrove forests, seagrass beds, and other coastal ecosystems have high capacity for absorbing carbon dioxide and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. According to Handayani (2019), oceans contribute to managing approximately 50%–70% of carbon on Earth. When oceans experience decreased productivity, global warming increases.

Marine sand mining clearly contradicts SDG indicator 14, which emphasizes protection and sustainable utilization of marine resources. Marine ecosystems are important components in the global ecological chain supporting millions of living beings, including humans. Damage caused by marine sand mining, such as destroyed coral reefs, seagrass beds, and mangrove forests, reduces the ability to maintain marine ecosystem balance.

Natural resource management requires cooperation between government, private sector, and communities to achieve common goals (Rifai, 2024). The importance of cross-sector and inter-country partnerships to achieve sustainable development goals is reflected in SDG 17. Marine sand mining activities in the Riau Islands that are not managed transparently and collaboratively show non-integration with this indicator.

The dramatic shift in Indonesia’s sea sand export policy from complete prohibition to selective reopening represents a complex interplay between economic pressures and environmental stewardship. This policy reversal occurred despite 2 decades of recognition regarding the severe environmental consequences of large-scale marine sand mining. The transformation from Presidential Decree No. 33 of 2002 and subsequent regulations that established comprehensive controls to Government Regulation No. 26 of 2023 that reopened exports demonstrates the challenge of maintaining consistent environmental policies amid changing economic priorities.

The policy to reopen sea sand exports cannot be separated from domestic political pressure and the need for economic recovery after COVID-19. Since the pandemic, the need for fiscal stimulus and foreign exchange earnings has become the government’s main agenda, which has encouraged the acceleration of natural resource exploitation. Indonesia, which has experienced a slowdown in exports and a decline in revenue from other sectors, sees the potential of sea sand exports as a means to boost state revenue. The new policy also appears to reflect intensive lobbying by the construction sector and bilateral diplomacy, in which importing countries have strong bargaining power over resource providers.

The government’s justification for reopening exports—distinguishing between regular sea sand and sediment that disrupts shipping lanes—appears to be a regulatory compromise that may not adequately address the fundamental environmental concerns that led to the original prohibition. This semantic differentiation between “sea sand” and “marine sediment” raises questions about the scientific validity of such distinctions when considering ecosystem impacts.

The ecological impacts identified in this study align with broader research on marine habitat destruction from extractive industries. The documented damage to coral reefs, seagrass beds, and mangrove ecosystems represents more than localized environmental degradation—it constitutes a systematic dismantling of critical marine habitats that support both biodiversity and coastal protection services.

The morphological changes to seabed topography described by Gomareuzzaman (2024) have cascading effects throughout the marine system. When natural sediment flow patterns are disrupted, the consequences extend far beyond the immediate extraction site. The resulting sedimentation of previously clear waters can smother benthic communities, alter fish spawning grounds, and reduce the photosynthetic capacity of marine plants that form the foundation of coastal food webs.

The acceleration of coastal erosion and abrasion represents a particularly concerning feedback loop. As protective coastal ecosystems are damaged and natural sand supplies are depleted, coastal communities become increasingly vulnerable to storm surge, sea-level rise, and other climate-related impacts. This creates a situation where short-term economic gains from sand exports may generate long-term costs in terms of coastal protection and disaster resilience.

The economic analysis reveals significant asymmetries in how benefits and costs are distributed across different stakeholders. While the potential for trillions of rupiah in state revenue appears substantial, this figure must be evaluated against the economic losses experienced by coastal communities, particularly those dependent on fishing and marine tourism.

The concentration of benefits among a limited number of companies—66 firms applying for extraction permits—suggests that the economic gains may be narrowly distributed rather than contributing to broad-based economic development. This pattern is consistent with resource extraction industries where profits accrue to capital owners while environmental and social costs are externalized to local communities and ecosystems.

Singapore’s historical dependence on Indonesian sand for its reclamation projects, dating back to 1976, illustrates how Indonesia’s natural resources have long supported neighboring countries’ development ambitions. While such trade relationships can be mutually beneficial, the current policy framework raises questions about whether Indonesia is receiving adequate compensation for the permanent loss of marine resources and ecosystem services.

The reopening of sea sand exports appears to contradict Indonesia’s commitments under both UNCLOS and the SDGs framework. UNCLOS Articles 194 and 195 specifically require states to prevent, reduce, and control pollution of the marine environment and to avoid transferring damage from one area to another. Large-scale sand extraction, particularly in border areas like the Riau Islands, has documented transboundary environmental effects that may violate these obligations.

The contradiction with SDGs is particularly stark given Indonesia’s stated commitment to blue economy principles. The concept of blue economy, as defined by Nikitenko et al. (2022) emphasizes nature’s efficiency and zero waste principles. Current marine sand mining practices violate both principles by disrupting natural ecosystem processes and generating irreversible environmental damage.

The failure to conduct comprehensive environmental impact assessments for transboundary effects represents a significant gap in policy implementation. UNCLOS requires such assessments for activities that may cause substantial pollution or significant harmful changes to the marine environment, yet the current regulatory framework appears to lack adequate provisions for such evaluations.

The policy reversal reveals significant challenges in Indonesia’s environmental governance system. The ability to overturn 2 decades of environmental protection measures through regulatory changes suggests that environmental policies may lack the institutional robustness needed to withstand short-term economic pressures.

The limited public participation in policy formulation, as noted in the analysis, represents a departure from principles of environmental democracy that require meaningful stakeholder engagement in decisions affecting environmental resources. This is particularly concerning given that coastal communities bear the primary costs of environmental degradation while receiving limited benefits from extraction activities.

The coordination challenges between different government agencies—from the Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries issuing extraction permits to the Ministry of Trade regulating exports—highlight the need for more integrated environmental governance approaches. Without effective inter-agency coordination, policies may work at cross-purposes, undermining both environmental protection and sustainable economic development objectives.

In some cases, the opening up of sea sand exports has reportedly been motivated by pressure from large private actors and foreign investors, who want quick access to reclamation materials amid regional competition. For example, the special export price policy (USD 11.49 per m³) and regulations that redefine “sedimentation” as an export material (separate from ordinary sea sand) are often interpreted as political compromises that benefit large industry players rather than coastal communities (Staff, 2023).

The sea sand export policy represents a test case for Indonesia’s commitment to sustainable development principles. The failure to integrate environmental considerations with economic planning suggests that sustainable development remains more rhetorical than operational in key policy areas.

The long-term economic implications of ecosystem degradation may far exceed the short-term revenue gains from sand exports. Coastal ecosystems provide valuable services including storm protection, fisheries support, carbon sequestration, and tourism attraction. The economic value of these services, when properly calculated, often exceeds the value of extracted resources.

The policy’s inconsistency with blue economy principles undermines Indonesia’s broader sustainable development strategy. As maritime nation, Indonesia’s long-term prosperity depends on healthy marine ecosystems. Policies that compromise ecosystem integrity for short-term gains may ultimately undermine the country’s sustainable development prospects.

This policy explicitly deviates from Indonesia’s commitment to the SDGs framework. For example, although SDG 13 (Climate Action) encourages climate change mitigation through the protection of blue carbon ecosystems, marine sand mining activities actually destroy mangroves and seagrass beds that function as carbon sinks.

In terms of SDG 14 (Life Below Water), the export of sea sand, which weakens the structure of the seabed and pollutes habitats, clearly contradicts the goal of sustainable marine conservation. The UNEP’s Marine Sand Watch report (2023) shows that global marine sand mining has caused widespread damage to benthic habitats and disruption to marine ecosystems.

Meanwhile, SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals) encourages cross-border and cross-sectoral partnerships in natural resource management. However, Indonesia’s seabed sand export policy lacks transparent and collaborative mechanisms with coastal communities and neighboring countries—reflecting a clear deviation from the principles of SDG integration.

Based on this analysis, several recommendations emerge for reforming Indonesia’s approach to marine resource management:

1. Comprehensive Environmental Assessment, Implement mandatory transboundary environmental impact assessments for all marine extraction activities, with particular attention to cumulative and long-term effects.

2. Stakeholder Engagement, Establish meaningful consultation processes with coastal communities, environmental groups, and scientific experts before implementing policies affecting marine resources.

3. Economic Valuation, Develop comprehensive economic valuations of marine ecosystem services to ensure that policy decisions account for the full costs and benefits of different management approaches.

4. International Coordination, Strengthen cooperation with neighboring countries to address transboundary environmental effects and ensure compliance with international obligations.

5. Monitoring and Adaptive Management, Establish robust monitoring systems for tracking environmental and social impacts, with provisions for policy adjustment based on empirical evidence.

6. The sea sand export case illustrates the ongoing tension between short-term economic gains and long-term environmental sustainability in Indonesia’s development strategy. Resolving this tension requires not just better policies, but fundamental changes in how environmental values are integrated into economic decision-making processes.

The policy to reopen marine sand mining and export activities in Indonesia, particularly in the Riau Islands Province, shows a clear inconsistency with the principles of sustainable development and the blue economy framework. This decision highlights the tension between short-term economic needs—such as post-pandemic fiscal recovery and external pressures from regional construction demand—and the country’s long-term ecological sustainability goals. The findings of this study show that large-scale marine sand mining causes widespread environmental degradation, including coral reef damage, seagrass loss, and mangrove deforestation, all of which play an important role in maintaining climate stability and coastal resilience.

Based on these findings, Indonesia’s seabed sand management policy needs to transform from a revenue-oriented approach to an ecosystem-based governance model that is aligned with sustainable development goals (SDGs 13, 14, and 17). Operational and contextual recommendations that can be implemented include:

1. Establishing an Independent Monitoring Committee tasked with overseeing the licensing process, mining activities, and sea sand exports. This committee should involve academics, civil society, and local communities to ensure transparency and accountability in decision-making.

2. Implementing a Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES) scheme, whereby a portion of the revenue from sea sand exports is allocated to coastal restoration programs, mangrove rehabilitation, and local community empowerment. This mechanism ensures that the economic value of ecosystems is recognized and environmental costs are internalized in management policies.

3. Implementing an Ecosystem Carrying Capacity-Based Quota System, which regulates export volumes based on ecological studies and marine sedimentation levels. This system can limit exploitation in sensitive areas and encourage adaptive management of environmental conditions.

4. Enhance regional cooperation under the SDG 17 framework by establishing bilateral mechanisms with sand-importing countries such as Singapore to ensure fair compensation and shared responsibility in addressing cross-border environmental impacts.

By implementing these measures, Indonesia can move towards a more balanced policy between economic interests and ecological sustainability. This approach not only restores the consistency of national policies with sustainable development goals, but also strengthens Indonesia’s position as a regional leader in sustainable marine resource management in the Southeast Asian region.