Jakarta, IO – According to the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), sand is the world’s second most-used natural resource, after water. Every year, billions of tons of sand are mined or dredged from the seabed or riverbeds, to meet a growing demand from the construction industry: bridges, office towers, highways, stadiums.

A valuable natural resource, sand has considerable commercial value – and its extraction equally exerts an environmental impact.

Behind the beauty of the white sandy beaches and rolling hills we all enjoy lies an environmental cost that threatens both marine and terrestrial ecosystems.

One example is the coastal village of Numbing Island in Bintan Regency, Riau Islands Province. Its residents have been divided, since plans emerged for industrial-scale marine sand mining around the island. While some fishermen have come out in support of the project, presented as a “seabed sediment management initiative”, others strongly oppose it.

One fisherman who requested anonymity admitted that the proposed marine sand mining project has created social tensions within the community. The divisions extend beyond neighbors, with even close family members no longer speaking to one another because of their opposing views.

The conflict began when a group of Numbing fishermen staged a public protest against the arrival of mining companies. Alarmed residents objected after learning that the sediment management project involved not just one company, as initially presented, but a total of 13 different companies.

Concerned about the environmental and social consequences, fishermen opposed to the project organized a resistance movement. Together with fellow fishermen from the islands of Numbing, Karimun and Lingga, they staged demonstrations at the Riau Islands Governor’s Office and the provincial legislative council (DPRD).

Data compiled by the Indigenous Peoples’ Initiative (IMA) detail a persistent controversy over marine sand mining in Pulau Numbing. In March 2025, fishermen first heard about plans for a single company to mine sand in the area – but later were unhappy to discover that 12 more companies were expected to participate.

In response, and to ease local concerns, the companies involved have held public consultation meetings on Numbing Island. Fishermen who oppose the project said they were unaware of the consultations – because they were never invited to participate.

Opposition to the proposed excavation is not without reason. Novan, one of the fishermen, said he has been able to support his family, including paying his child’s college tuition, through fishing.

The waters off Numbing are rich in fish stocks. Novan detailed how a single fishing trip was able to generate between Rp1 million and Rp2 million. With four trips a month, he is able to take home a monthly income of around Rp4 million to Rp8 million.

“That does not even include what I set aside as the boat owner,” he said.

Novan fears the mining project will change those conditions. Fish that are now easily caught could disappear, as sediment clouds the water. He noted how fishermen would have to travel farther offshore to find fish that have scattered to new deep sea habitats.

“That is why I am worried that if the sea bottom is mined, it will definitely be damaged. We have our reasons, as others have suffered this previously. When marine sand mining was approved for Batam, our waters also became murky,” he complained.

Not all fishermen share Novan’s views. Among those who attended the companies’ public consultations, some were convinced to support the project, because they were promised compensation.

One fisherman explained how each company had agreed in principle to provide monthly compensation of Rp2 million for each fishing family, and Rp1 million for non-fishing households. If all 13 companies participate, resident families could receive some Rp13 million a month in compensation.

For many fishermen, that amount is substantial, amounting to roughly four times Bintan Regency’s minimum monthly wage.

In addition, according to a fisherman named Irun, the companies also promised assistance through their corporate social responsibility (CSR) programs, including fishing equipment and aquaculture support.

“I think that is a good form of cooperation,” he said. He acknowledged, however, that no written agreement has yet been signed, regarding those commitments.

Irun also did not deny that mining activities could have severe environmental consequences. According to him, any activity at sea carries risks. However, he believes companies can minimize those impacts. He pointed to tin mining in Bangka Belitung as an example, arguing that its effects have not been as calamitous as many people feared.

Irun said he understands the concerns of fishermen who oppose the project and believes the dispute should be resolved through open dialogue involving all stakeholders.

Read More: Prabowo Inducts 1,177 Graduating Cadets Into Indonesian Military And Police

Meanwhile, Nukila Evanty, an international law expert and chairwoman of the Indigenous Peoples’ Initiative (IMA), and a campaigner who has long provided advocacy and capacity-building programs for fishermen, sea nomad communities and coastal residents throughout Indonesia’s islands expressed disappointment with the local government’s response.

“Local governments have been entrusted by the public with the authority to manage these areas. They should understand the concerns of the community and take swift action to address the worries of fishermen and coastal residents on Bintan Island,” she said.

According to Nukila, companies planning to dredge marine sand or carry out seabed sediment removal should first conduct extensive public outreach to coastal and island communities before beginning any operations.

“Local governments are on the front line, because they administer the Bintan Islands region. They should also bring the companies together with the fishermen and coastal residents who oppose the project so the two sides can find common ground,” she explained.

She said public outreach should not be limited to one or two meetings but should continue until both parties reach a shared understanding.

“I often see companies overlooking the fact that these projects affect not only the environment but also the economy, society and culture,” she said.

Regarding compensation, Nukila stressed that it must be calculated carefully, to ensure fishermen are not disadvantaged.

“Fishermen have children whose education must be financed. Compensation should never leave them worse off,” she said.

According to Nukila, the implementation of the Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) principle in Batam and the Riau Islands has fallen short. In principle, FPIC is intended to ensure that Indigenous peoples and local communities have the right to give or withhold consent for projects affecting their lands, territories and natural resources.

In practice, however, FPIC is often reduced to little more than an administrative formality or a one-way consultation. Governments and corporations frequently treat FPIC as a checklist to satisfy legal requirements rather than as a meaningful process that respects community rights. Such practices, she argued, contradict Article 18B, paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution, which recognizes and respects Indigenous customary law communities and their rights.

Cases in the Riau Islands and Batam show that FPIC often fails to provide communities with a genuine opportunity to determine their own future. Public consultations may rely on technical language that is difficult to understand or involve only a handful of community leaders, without broader deliberation. As a result, the consent obtained does not necessarily reflect the will of a collective community.

More broadly, Nukila said these shortcomings illustrate how Indonesia’s development model still tends to follow a top-down approach, where development comes first and public participation follows later. In her view, FPIC should reverse that logic, by ensuring development begins with the consent of affected communities, and responds to their needs, rather than being driven primarily by investment interests. (des)