The idea that Papua can become more than a remote frontier is at the heart of a new book that places food security, Indigenous knowledge, and regional cooperation at the center of the province’s future.
The book, “Papua: Jantung Ketahanan Pangan Indonesia-Pasifik (Papua: The Heart of Indonesia-Pacific Food Resilience),” written by Steve Rick Elson Mara, S.H., M.Han. (founder of the Melanesian Youth Diplomacy Forum, or MYDIF), was officially launched and discussed at a book review event in Jakarta on Friday, September 4. The event was organized by the Yayasan Pemuda untuk Perdamaian Indonesia (YPPI), bringing together discussions on Papua, food sovereignty, local wisdom, innovation, and sustainable development.
For Papua food resilience, Mara proposes a broader perspective. Food, he argues, is not simply about how much rice, corn, fish, or other commodities a region can produce. It is also connected to national resilience, supply-chain security, environmental sustainability, and Indonesia’s ability to cooperate with neighboring Pacific countries.
The argument arrives at a significant moment for Papua. Indonesia is accelerating agricultural development across the region, while local governments are simultaneously emphasizing traditional food systems such as sago and sweet potatoes. The challenge is how to combine these approaches without losing the ecological and cultural characteristics that make Papua unique.
A New Way of Looking at Papua
The central message of Mara’s book is straightforward but strategically important: Papua’s geographical position and natural resources give it the potential to contribute to food security far beyond its borders.
According to Jayapura Post, the book describes Papua as a potential new center of strength for Indonesia’s food resilience and as a strategic bridge toward the Pacific. Mara emphasizes the need to understand food security within the framework of climate change, geopolitical uncertainty, and disruptions to global distribution networks.
“Food is sovereignty,” Mara said during the presentation, emphasizing that countries capable of protecting their food resources and food systems have greater room to determine their future.
That argument gives the book a geopolitical dimension.
Papua sits on Indonesia’s eastern edge, facing the Pacific and positioned relatively close to Melanesian and Pacific Island countries. In Mara’s view, this geography can become an asset not only for trade but also for cooperation on food production, climate adaptation, fisheries, and agricultural knowledge.
The concept is particularly relevant for Pacific Island countries, many of which face structural vulnerabilities related to climate change, limited arable land, extreme weather, and dependence on imported food.
Lessons from Vanuatu
Mara told Biskom that the idea for the book developed after he visited Vanuatu in 2023 with Albert Yoku.
Discussions with communities there exposed him to concerns over food resilience in Melanesian island states, including the impact of cyclones on crops. That experience led him to consider whether Papua, with its extensive land resources and biological diversity, could contribute to a wider regional response.
“Papua has very fertile land, so we should be present to help our brothers and sisters in the Pacific,” Mara said, according to Biskom.
The statement is less about turning Papua into a simple export base than about developing a regional food partnership. The book proposes knowledge exchange, sustainable farming and fisheries, local empowerment, and cooperation in responding to climate-related food pressures.
Such an approach could give Papua a constructive role in Indonesia’s wider Pacific engagement.
Five Pillars for Papua’s Food Future
Mara’s proposal is built around five broad pillars: sustainable agriculture; fisheries development and management; environmental conservation; community empowerment and protection of Indigenous rights; and stronger connectivity between Indonesia and the Pacific.
The combination is significant.
Agricultural expansion without environmental safeguards could create long-term problems for forests, rivers, and biodiversity. At the same time, conservation without viable economic opportunities could leave communities unable to benefit from the resources surrounding them.
The book therefore presents food resilience as an ecosystem rather than a single agricultural target.
Sustainable agriculture can create production. Fisheries can provide protein and livelihoods. Forest conservation protects ecological services. Indigenous participation can strengthen local ownership. Better connectivity can bring products and knowledge to wider markets.
Together, these elements can form a more resilient regional food system.
Indigenous Communities as Participants
One of the strongest themes emerging from the Jakarta discussion is the importance of local ownership.
Biskom reported that Mara advocates a “local ownership” approach, meaning that Indigenous communities with customary land rights should be involved in development processes. He also proposes maintaining national strategic programs for nationally important commodities while developing regional programs for distinctive Papuan products such as sago, hipere or sweet potato, and pig farming.
That distinction matters because Papua’s food economy cannot simply be measured through national production statistics.
Sago, for example, is not merely a commodity. It has cultural, historical, and nutritional significance for many Papuan communities. The Papua provincial government has itself described sago as an important foundation for food sovereignty, cultural preservation, ecosystem protection, and the economic empowerment of Indigenous communities.
The central challenge, therefore, is finding a balance between modernization and local knowledge.
Connecting the Book to Indonesia’s Food Strategy
The ideas in Mara’s book also intersect with agricultural programs already being pursued by the Indonesian government.
The Ministry of Agriculture said in June that around Rp5 trillion had been allocated during 2025 and 2026 to support agricultural development in Papua. Programs include rice-field development, agricultural machinery, irrigation, plantations, and livestock, alongside commodities such as rice, corn, coffee, cocoa, nutmeg, sago, sweet potatoes, and cassava.
The government has also reported an 80,000-hectare rice-field development program across Papua for 2025 and 2026, with part of the area already entering production.
These programs demonstrate that food security has become an increasingly important part of Papua’s development strategy.
Yet the book raises a useful question: what should success look like?
It should not necessarily mean replacing Papua’s traditional food systems with a single national production model. A more durable strategy could involve multiple food systems operating together, from modern rice production and livestock to sago, sweet potato, fisheries, cocoa, and other local commodities.
This is where government policy and the book’s argument potentially intersect.
Sago as a Strategic Local Commodity
Recent developments in Jayapura illustrate the point.
In August, the Ministry of Agriculture’s Papua agricultural modernization agency supported the development and organization of 100 hectares of sago land across five farmer groups in Jayapura Regency. The program is intended to improve productivity and strengthen sago as a strategic local food commodity.
Sago offers an important example because it connects food, culture, and the environment.
Strengthening such commodities could also contribute to food diversification. Indonesia’s heavy reliance on rice makes alternative carbohydrate sources increasingly relevant, particularly when climate pressures and logistics disruptions affect food supply.
For international observers, this is one of the most important aspects of the debate on food resilience in Papua. The region does not have to choose between traditional food and modern agriculture. With appropriate planning, the two can reinforce each other.
Food Security as Pacific Diplomacy
Mara’s argument becomes more ambitious when he connects food security with diplomacy.
Rather than treating Pacific engagement primarily through political or security issues, Indonesia could increasingly use practical cooperation around food, climate resilience, and sustainable agriculture.
The approach would be familiar to many Pacific Island states. Food security is closely linked to climate resilience, fisheries, disaster preparedness, transport connectivity, and livelihoods.
Papua could potentially serve as a meeting point for these areas.
Agricultural researchers could exchange knowledge with Pacific counterparts. Fisher communities could discuss sustainable marine management. Universities could cooperate on climate-resilient crops. Young entrepreneurs could develop food-processing businesses. Government agencies could explore supply chain and logistics cooperation.
Such cooperation would not replace Indonesia’s existing diplomatic engagement with Pacific countries. Instead, it could add an economic and social dimension to it.
Jayapura Post reported that Mara sees food resilience as a possible instrument for new forms of diplomacy and cooperation between Indonesia and Pacific states.
For Indonesia, that could also strengthen Papua’s role as a constructive gateway to the Pacific.
Development Must Translate into Local Benefits
The Jakarta discussion also highlighted an important condition for any ambitious food strategy: local communities must see tangible benefits.
Infrastructure, irrigation, and agricultural machinery can increase production, but production alone does not guarantee prosperity.
Farmers need access to markets, storage, financing, technical assistance, and reliable transportation. Communities need roads, electricity, and telecommunications. Young Papuans need education and vocational skills if they are to become agribusiness operators, researchers, engineers, and entrepreneurs rather than remaining outside the value chain.
The government’s agricultural strategy has increasingly moved in this direction, combining land development with mechanization, farmer assistance, and human-resource development.
The book adds another layer by insisting that development should recognize customary rights and local knowledge.
That principle can help make large-scale development more sustainable, provided it is translated into transparent consultation, clear agreements, and measurable benefits for communities.
A Message to Papua’s Younger Generation
The book explicitly targets Papua’s younger generation.
Mara argues that young Papuans should not view their region only through the lens of underdevelopment and problems. Instead, they should see the opportunities created by Papua’s natural resources, strategic location, and growing role in Indonesia’s development.
“The future of Papua cannot only be discussed by other people,” Mara said, urging young Papuans to prepare themselves to participate in determining the future of Papua and Indonesia.
That message may ultimately prove as important as the book’s discussion of food policy.
A food-resilient Papua will require more than land. It will require people capable of managing farms, fisheries, processing facilities, logistics networks, technology, and international partnerships.
Education and skills will therefore be central to converting Papua’s natural advantages into sustainable economic opportunities.
From Ideas to Measurable Outcomes
The real test for “Papua: Jantung Ketahanan Pangan Indonesia-Pasifik” will come after the launch.
A book can change the way policymakers and communities think, but food resilience ultimately depends on implementation.
The concept will have greater value if it stimulates practical research, business partnerships, agricultural innovation, and government programs that can be measured over time. It will also need careful environmental safeguards and meaningful participation from Indigenous communities.
The recent launch of the book by YPPI provides one possible platform for that conversation. The foundation describes itself as a space for young people, particularly from eastern Indonesia, to contribute to development, food, and energy resilience while also encouraging oversight of development programs and attention to Indigenous rights.
That combination of participation and accountability could become important as Papua’s agricultural transformation accelerates.
Conclusion
The launch of Steve Mara’s book places an increasingly important question before Indonesia and the Pacific: can Papua transform its enormous food potential into a sustainable source of prosperity and regional resilience?
The answer will depend on how development is implemented.
Indonesia’s investment in agricultural infrastructure, food production, and modernization can create a stronger foundation for national food security. At the same time, Papua’s traditional commodities, biodiversity, and Indigenous knowledge can provide resources that are difficult to replicate elsewhere.
The most promising path may therefore blend traditional and industrial approaches. It is a model that combines modern technology with local knowledge, national food priorities with regional commodities, economic growth with environmental protection, and infrastructure development with genuine community participation.
If that balance can be achieved, Papua’s importance may extend well beyond its role as Indonesia’s easternmost region.
It could become a practical bridge between Indonesia’s national food-security ambitions and the wider resilience needs of the Pacific.
For a region increasingly exposed to climate and supply-chain pressures, that is a proposition worth taking seriously.
Read Also
Steve Rick Elson Mara: From Wamena Youth to Doctoral Peace Scholar in the UK
Papua Food Estate Gains Support From Local Communities
PAPEDA Summit Puts Indigenous Rights at the Center