The Political Economy of Environmental Degradation and Climate Disaster in Southeast Asia

  • Paul K. GellertEmail author
Part of the Studies in the Political Economy of Public Policy book series (PEPP)


Forwarding an ecological dimension to the Murdoch school of political economy, this chapter examines environmental degradation, biodiversity loss, and climate change as inseparable parts of the political economy of Southeast Asian development. The chapter first reviews regional environmental indicators of biodiversity loss, air pollution, water degradation, deforestation, and climate change. It then explains this degradation as an intrinsic part of capitalist development in the region, driven by manufacturing, urbanisation, pollution, and increased resource-based production and exports. Finally, the chapter examines several examples of environmental governance efforts that have failed because they do not address the underlying mode of accumulation and fundamental social conflicts. The status quo direction of the region, the chapter concludes, is disastrous ecologically and socially.


Environment Pollution Climate change Deforestation Development Environmental governance 


  1. ADB [Asian Development Bank]. (2018). Key indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2018. Asian Development Bank. Accessed 6 May 2019.
  2. Baird, I. G., & Quastel, N. (2015). Rescaling and reordering nature–society relations: The Nam Theun 2 hydropower dam and Laos–Thailand electricity networks. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 105(6), 1221–1239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brecht, H., Dasgupta, S., Laplante, B., Murray, S., & Wheeler, D. (2012). Sea-level rise and storm surges: High stakes for a small number of developing countries. The Journal of Environment & Development, 21(1), 120–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Burke, L., Selig, E., & Spalding, M. (2002). Reefs at risk in Southeast Asia. Washington, DC: World Resources Institute. Accessed: 24 Apr 2019.
  5. Burton, M., & Somerville, P. (2019). De-growth: A defence. New Left Review, 115(Jan–Feb), 95–104.Google Scholar
  6. Camba, A. A. (2016). Philippine mining capitalism: The changing terrains of struggle in the neoliberal mining regime. ASEAS – Austrian Journal of South-East Asian Studies, 9(1), 69–86.Google Scholar
  7. Climate Action Tracker. (2019). Accessed 30 Apr 2019.
  8. Colchester, M., & Chao, S. (Eds.). (2018). Conflict or consent? The oil palm sector at a crossroads. Moreton-in-Marsh: Forest Peoples Programme, Sawit Watch and TUK INDONESIA.Google Scholar
  9. Colchester, M., Jiwan, N., Andiko, Sirait, M., Firdaus, A. Y., Surambo, A., & Pane, H. (2006). Promised land. Palm oil and land acquisition in Indonesia: Implications for local communities and indigenous peoples. Moreton-in-Marsh/Bogor: Forest Peoples Programme/Perkumpulan Sawit Watch.Google Scholar
  10. Conway, J. (2015). Indonesia’s palm oil fires: Interview with Friends of the Earth Indonesia. Accessed 25 Apr 2019.
  11. Cramb, R., & McCarthy, J. (Eds.). (2016). The oil palm complex: Smallholders, agribusiness and the state in Indonesia and Malaysia. Singapore: National University of Singapore Press.Google Scholar
  12. Curtis, P. G., Slay, C. M., Harris, N. L., Tyukavina, A., & Hansen, M. C. (2018). Classifying drivers of global forest loss. Science, 361(6407), 1108–1111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dasgupta, S., Laplante, B., Meisner, C., Wheeler, D., & Yan, J. (2007). The impact of sea level rise on developing countries: A comparative analysis (Research working paper no. WPS 4136). Washington, DC: World Bank. Accessed 25 Apr 2019.
  14. End Coal. (2018). Summary statistics. Accessed 10 Dec 2018.
  15. FAO [Food and Agriculture Organization]. (2011). Southeast Asian forests and forestry to 2020: Sub-regional report of the second Asia-Pacific forestry sector outlook study. Bangkok: FAO. Accessed 31 Mar 2019.
  16. Field, R. D., van der Werf, G. R., Fanin, T., Fetzer, E. J., Fuller, R., et al. (2016). Indonesian fire activity and smoke pollution in 2015 show persistent nonlinear sensitivity to El Niño-induced drought. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(33), 9204–9209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fletcher, R., Dressler, W., Büscher, B., & Anderson, Z. R. (2017). Debating REDD+ and its implications: Reply to Angelsen et al. Conservation Biology, 31(3), 721–723.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gecko Project & Mongabay. (2018, April 18) Ghosts in the machine: The land deals behind the downfall of Indonesia’s top judge. Mongabay Series: Indonesia for Sale. Accessed 20 Apr 2018.
  19. Gellert, P. K. (1998). A brief history and analysis of Indonesia’s forest fire crisis. Indonesia, 65, 63–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gellert, P. K. (2019). Neoliberalism and altered state developmentalism in the twenty-first century extractive regime of Indonesia. Globalizations, 16(3), 894–918.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gellert, P. K., & Andiko. (2015). The quest for legal certainty and the reorganization of power: Struggles over forest law, permits, and rights in Indonesia. The Journal of Asian Studies, 74(03), 639–666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Global Forest Watch. (2019). Tree cover loss. Accessed 8 May 2019.
  23. Greenpeace. (2015). Indonesia’s forests under fire. Amsterdam: Greenpeace International. Accessed 16 Feb 2018.
  24. Greenpeace, JATAM, ICW, & Auriga. (2018). Coalruption: Elite politik dalam pusaran disnis batu bara [Coalruption: Elite politics in the whirlpool of coal business]. Accessed 24 Dec 2018.
  25. The Guardian. (2016, September 21). Indonesia dismisses study showing forest fire haze killed more than 100,000 people. The Guardian. Accessed 25 Apr 2019.
  26. The Guardian. (2018, October 8). We have 12 years to limit climate change catastrophe, warns UN. The Guardian. Accessed 12 Dec 2018.
  27. Hameiri, S., & Jones, L. (2015). Governing borderless threats: Non-traditional security and the politics of state transformation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Harris, N., Petersen, R., Davis, C., & Payne, O. (2016). Global forest watch and the forest resources assessment, explained in 5 graphics. World Resources Institute. Accessed 14 May 2019.
  29. Hatch, W., & Yamamura, K. (1996). Asia in Japan’s embrace: Building a regional production alliance. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hirsch, P. (2016). The shifting regional geopolitics of Mekong dams. Political Geography, 51, 63–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hirsch, P. (2017). Introduction: The environment in Southeast Asia’s past, present, and future. In P. Hirsch (Ed.), Routledge handbook of the environment in Southeast Asia (pp. 3–13). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  32. Hughes, A. C. (2017). Understanding the drivers of Southeast Asian biodiversity loss. Ecosphere, 8(1), e01624.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hughes, A. C. (2018). Have Indo-Malaysian forests reached the end of the road? Biological Conservation, 223, 129–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. IEA. (2017, November 14). World energy outlook 2017. International Energy Agency.Google Scholar
  35. IPBES [Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services]. (2019, May 6). Media release: Nature’s dangerous decline “unprecedented”; Species extinction rates “accelerating”. IPBES. Accessed 7 May 2019.
  36. IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change]. (2013). Climate change 2013: The physical science basis. New York: Cambridge University Press. Accessed 25 Apr 2019.
  37. IPCC. (2014). Climate change 2014: Synthesis report. Contributions of working groups I, II, and III to the fifth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Geneva: IPCC. Accessed 31 Mar 2019.
  38. IPCC (2018). Global warming of 1.5°C. An IPCC special report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty. Geneva: IPCC.Google Scholar
  39. Jambeck, J. R., Geyer, R., Wilcox, C., Siegler, T. R., Perryman, M., et al. (2015). Plastic waste inputs from land into the ocean. Science, 347(6223), 768–771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Jones, G. W. (2014). Urbanisation and development in South-east Asia. Malaysian Journal of Economic Studies, 51(1), 103–120.Google Scholar
  41. Jong, H. N. (2018, August 10). Indonesia’s “one-map” database blasted for excluding indigenous lands. Accessed 15 Mar 2019.
  42. Kalleberg, A. L., & Hewison, K. (2012). Precarious work and flexibilization in South and Southeast Asia. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(4), 395–402.Google Scholar
  43. Lao PDR. (2018). Lao PDR energy statistics 2018. Jakarta: Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia. Accessed 7 May 2019.
  44. Marlier, M. E., DeFries, R. S., Kim, P. S., Koplitz, S. N., Jacob, D. J., et al. (2015). Fire emissions and regional air quality impacts from fires in oil palm, timber, and logging concessions in Indonesia. Environmental Research Letters, 10(8), 085005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Maxton-Lee, B. (2018). “Common sense” versus good sense: A critical analysis of forest conservation and deforestation in Indonesia. PhD dissertation, Hong Kong University.Google Scholar
  46. McCarthy, J. F., & Robinson, K. (2016). Land and development in Indonesia: Searching for the people’s sovereignty. Singapore: ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Monbiot, G. (2015, October 30). Indonesia is burning so why is the world turning away? The Guardian. Accessed 12 Dec 2018.
  48. Moore, J. W. (Ed.). (2016). Anthropocene or capitalocene? Nature, history, and the crisis of capitalism. Oakland: PM Press.Google Scholar
  49. Potter, L. (1993). The onslaught on the forests in South-East Asia. In H. Brookfield & Y. Byron (Eds.), South-East Asia’s environmental future: The search for sustainability (pp. 103–123). New York: United Nations University Press.Google Scholar
  50. Purnomo, H., Shantiko, B., Sitorus, S., Gunawan, H., Achdiawan, R., et al. (2017). Fire economy and actor network of forest and land fires in Indonesia. Forest Policy and Economics, 78, 21–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Pye, O. (2018). Commodifying sustainability: Development, nature and politics in the palm oil industry. World Development. Scholar
  52. Raghu, A. (2019, January 13). The world has loads of sustainable palm oil… But no one wants it. Bloomberg. Accessed 9 May 2019.
  53. RAN. (2016). The human cost of conflict palm oil: Indofood, Pepsico’s hidden link to worker exploitation in Indonesia. Rainforest Action Network, Oppuk and ILRF. Accessed 12 Aug 2017.
  54. Reuters. (2018, March 8). Indonesia caps domestic coal price for power stations, could hit miners. Reuters. Accessed 28 Apr 2019.
  55. RSPO [Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil]. (2019a). Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil. Accessed 8 May 2019.
  56. RSPO. (2019b). Final decision on complaint against PT. PP London Sumatra Indonesia Tbk. Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil. Accessed 12 Mar 2019.
  57. Seymour, F. (2019, February 21). Indonesia reduces deforestation, Norway to pay up. Global Forest Watch blog. Accessed 17 Apr 2019.
  58. Seymour, F., & Busch, J. (2016). Why forests? Why now? The science, economics, and politics of tropical forests and climate change. Washington, DC: Center for Global Development.Google Scholar
  59. Sugiura, E., & Okutsu, A. (2018, November 21). Why Japan finds coal hard to quit. Nikkei Asian Review. Accessed 4 Feb 2019.
  60. Teoh, C. H. (2012). Malaysian corporations as strategic players in Southeast Asia’s palm oil industry. In O. Pye & J. Bhattacharya (Eds.), The palm oil controversy in Southeast Asia: A transnational perspective (pp. 19–47). Singapore: ISEAS.Google Scholar
  61. Tucker, R. P. (2007). Insatiable appetite: The United States and the ecological degradation of the tropical world. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.Google Scholar
  62. UCS [Union of Concerned Scientists]. (2018). Each country’s share of CO2 emissions. Union of Concerned Scientists. Accessed 8 May 2019.
  63. UNEP [United Nations Environment Program]. (2016). Snapshot of the world’s water quality. Nairobi: United Nations Environment Programme. Accessed 8 May 2019.
  64. UNFCCC [United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change]. (2015). Intended nationally determined contribution (various governments). Accessed 2 Dec 2018.
  65. USDA [United States Department of Agriculture]. (2018). Indonesia expands biodiesel mandate. GAIN reports, Foreign Agricultural Service. Accessed 2 Dec 2018.
  66. Varkkey, H. (2014). Natural resource extraction and political dependency: Malaysia as a rentier state. In M. L. Weiss (Ed.), Routledge handbook of contemporary Malaysia (pp. 189–199). New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Veron, J. E. N., Hoegh-Guldberg, O., Lenton, T. M., Lough, J. M., Obura, D. O., et al. (2009). The coral reef crisis: The critical importance of <350ppm CO2. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 58(10), 1428–1436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Warburton, E. (2017). Resource nationalism in Indonesia: Ownership structures and sectoral variation in mining and palm oil. Journal of East Asian Studies, 17(3), 285–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. WHO [World Health Organization]. (2016). Ambient air pollution: A global assessment of exposure and burden of disease. Geneva: World Health Organization. Accessed 4 Apr 2019.
  70. WHO. (2018, May 2). 9 out of 10 people worldwide breathe polluted air, but more countries are taking action. World Health Organization News. Accessed 18 Feb 2019.
  71. World Bank. (2016). The cost of fire: An economic analysis of Indonesia’s 2015 fire crisis. Washington, DC: World Bank.

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of TennesseeKnoxvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations