New energy, old institutions: Unraveling institutional politics and renewable energy governance behind the Flores geothermal energy project in Indonesia

This study explores the relationship between institutional politics and geothermal energy governance in Indonesia, using the Flores Geothermal Energy Project (FGEP) as a case study. Existing studies have identified major barriers to geothermal development in Indonesia, such as hefty investment costs, inadequate infrastructure, and persistent social resistance. Yet they are ill-equipped to explain why these challenges repeatedly enable extensive state intervention, reinforce power asymmetries, and generate recurring social conflicts. This paper aims to advance the debate by demonstrating how these outcomes are intertwined with the country’s top-down institutional configuration of energy governance, even during the post-reformation era, where decentralization should be highly prioritized. It argues that geothermal is a new energy source, but its governance is not. The latter reproduces state-centric resource extraction enabled by the institutional arrangement that bypasses participatory development, generating social crisis and declining project legitimacy. This is evident in the designation of FGEP as one of the National Strategic Projects (Proyek Strategis Nasional, or PSN) during Jokowi’s presidency to accelerate project implementation by deploying disproportionate financial and technical supports from the central government. However, such efforts have eroded regional autonomy and undermined indigenous participation. Drawing on historical institutionalism, this paper shows how institutional politics continues to drive a state-centric development strategy that reproduces power inequality and social tension in the FGEP. Through a documentary analysis of the Constitution, laws, and government regulations during Jokowi’s Presidency (2014-2024), the study illustrates how recentralization has come to dominate the implementation of the FGEP. This research contributes to contemporary debates on energy democracy by showing that the governance of capital-intensive renewable energy, like geothermal, is deeply connected with institutional politics that supports recentralization. It implies that democratic energy governance requires novel institutional reforms to redistribute power and counterbalance the dominance of centralized institutions.