glendale partner
TRANSCRIPT
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
1/94
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
2/94
EU ACTIVEPROJECT
INDONESIANPORTSINFRASTRUCTURE
FINALREPORT
October2012
PTGLENDALEPARTNERS
Menara
Global,
23rd
Floor
Jl.
Gatot
Subroto
Kav
27,
Jakarta
12950
Ph: +62215270426,+625270438 Fax;+62215270433
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
3/94
i|P a g e
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A project funded by the EU has involved the study of a number of key sectors of theIndonesian economy. One of the sectors chosen for examination has been that of
Indonesias maritime ports. The coordinator of the overall study has been the
Indonesia Netherlands Association (INA), with the ports sector assigned to the
British Chamber of Commerce in Indonesia (BritCham), which in turn engaged one
of its member companies specialising in infrastructure to undertake a desk-study
review of the ports sector in Indonesia. This report is the culmination of that study,
which was carried out over the period February to September 2012 on a part-time
basis.
A short review is made of the impact of the major political changes that took place in
the country following the Asian Economic Crash of 1998, which hit Indonesia hard,
and of the economy, which recovered following this period to achieve the current
growth rate of 6.0-6.5%. The point was made, however, that to sustain or surpass
this level of economic growth in the future significant investment was required in
infrastructure in all areas. That required for ports in the ensuing 5 year period is
estimated to be in the order of US$40 billion, with a high level of private sector
support required over that to be committed by government.
This political and economic review was followed by an overview of the structure of
the industry, particularly following the structural changes that emanated from the
issuing of the new law for the ports and shipping sector in 2008, Law 17/2008.
The hierarchy of the different ports across the country, of which there are some 1900
havens, is shown from the highest category of those publicly administered by the
state-owned operating companies, down to fishing and special purpose ports with
the main differences being addressed.
The main roles of the Ministry, under its Directorate General of Sea Transport, Port
Authorities and the 4 State-owned Port Operating companies, the Pelindos, and their
interacting roles is briefly described before more detail is provided about each of the
Pelindos, numbered I-IV, with each having jurisdictional responsibility for a segment
of the archipelago. Pelindo I is responsible for Northern Sumatra, and Pelindo IV theeastern part of the country, with Pelindos II and III having charge of the segments in
between.
Pelindo II is the largest of the four, based on western Java, the centre of the
industrial heartland of the country, and headquartered in the capital city of Jakarta.
Its operation altogether amounts to almost the combined output of the other three
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
4/94
ii|P a g e
operations put together. As part of its increasing international outlook, Pelindo II has
been renamed as the Indonesian Ports Corporation.
A major container port expansion is underway at Tanjung Priok, the Jakarta port, and
this plus two other projects to upgrade container operations, albeit strictly outwith the
jurisdictional area of the IPC, at Batam, off Singapore, and Sorong in Papua, are
briefly described. Mention is also made of other work ongoing in the other Pelindos.
Successful port operations require good hinterland connections, in particular roads.
The study summarises the current status of both road and rail infrastructure across
the country and the need for parallel investment to match that expected in ports.
Logistical costs of transporting goods in Indonesia have been evaluated as among
the highest if not the highest in Asia. The countrys standing worldwide, as measured
in the World Banks Logistics Performance Index is relatively poor, particularly when
compared with its peers. Most of this poor performance is directly related to the poor
condition of much of the road network as well as the result of years of
underinvestment in the ports sector along with underperfomance in operations.
The different types of shipping trade, whether container, bulk or liquid or general
cargo have been discussed, with the expansion over the past few years highlighted
as well as that forecast for the years ahead. The shipping fleet, ferry transport and
the fishing Industry all badly need to be upgraded and expanded, however, and offer
opportunities for investment.
In May 2011 the Government of Indonesia unveiled a detailed plan for the economic
development of the archipelago, the MP3EI, or 6 Corridor Economic Development
Plan. The objectives of this comprehensive approach to accelerate economic growth
across the regions are stated and each of the 6 corridors is then briefly overviewed,with a particular focus on infrastructure and, in turn, that pertaining to ports and their
importance in the delivery of the objectives of the MP3EI. Attention to this plan will
be necessary when focusing on investment across the country.
Finally, a short section is included on financing issues as well as a restatement of
opportunities in summary.
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
5/94
iii|P a g e
Contents
Page
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY i
1.0. INTRODUCTION 1
2.0. THE EU ACTIVE PROJECT PORTS AND SHIPPING 2
3.0 OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE OF THE STUDY 2
4.0 POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC OVERVIEW 3
5.0 THE STRUCTURE OF THE PORTS AND SHIPPING INDUSTRY 6
Port Master Plan 8
Port Hierarchy and Profile 8
Non-administered Public Ports 11
Special Purpose Ports 12
Coal Terminals 13
Secondary and Rural Fishing Harbours 14
6.0 CHANGES IN REGULATIONS FOR THE PORT SECTOR 16
7.0 PELINDO RESPONSIBILITIES 17
8.0 PORT AUTHORITIES 18
9.0 PROFILE OF PELINDOS 18
Pelindo I 18
Pelindo II 21
New Priok 24
Batam Transhipment 24
Sorong 25
Pelindo III 29
Pelindo IV 32
10.0 CONTAINER SHIPPING 35
11.0 GENERAL, DRY AND LIQUID BULK CARGOES 41
12.0 FERRY TRANSPORT 45
13.0 COLD STORAGE FACILITIES 47
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
6/94
iv|P a g e
LOGISTICS & CONNECTING INFRASTRUCTURE ROAD AND RAIL 48
14.0 GENERAL 48
14.1 ROADS 48
14.2 RAIL 53
14.3 LOGISTICAL ISSUES 55
THE 6 CORRIDOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN MP3EI 58
15.0 INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES 58
15.1 THE MAIN ECONOMIC ACTIVITIES: PORTS HIGHLIGHT S 59
16.0 FINANCING ISSUES 71
17.0 SUMMARY, CONCLUDING REMARKS & OPPORTUNITIES 73
18.0 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 74
19.0 REFERENCES 75
APPENDICES 76
Appendix 1 1st Seminar Agenda 76
Appendix 2 2nd Seminar Agenda 77
Appendix 3 List of Identified Non-Administered Public Ports 78
Appendix 4 List of Identified Special Ports/Harbours 82
Appendix 5 Numbers of Fisheries Ports by Province 84
Appendix 6 Contact details for Ministry and Pelindo Offices 85
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
7/94
v|P a g e
List of Figures
Page
FIGURE 1.1 Main Ports of Indonesia 1
FIGURE 4.1 Current and Forecast Steady Expansion of the GDP Per-Capita,
2010 45 4
FIGURE 4.2 Indonesian Key Natural Resources 5
FIGURE 5.1 Jurisdictional Area of Each of the Pelindos 7
FIGURE 5.2 Six Non-Administered Public Ports 11
FIGURE 5.3 Special Purposes Ports 12
FIGURE 5.4 Coal Anchorages in Indonesia 13
FIGURE 5.5 Coal Production, Exports and Domestic Sales in Indonesia
(2003 2010) 13
FIGURE 5.6 Indonesian Fisheries Ports 14FIGURE 6.1 Changes in Regulations for the Port Sector 16
FIGURE 9.1 Jurisdictional Area of Pelindo 1 18
FIGURE 9.2 Pelindo I Ports 19
FIGURE 9.3 Belawan Port Profile 20
FIGURE 9.4 Jurisdictional Area of Pelindo II 21
FIGURE 9.5 Pelindo II Ports 22
FIGURE 9.6 Tanjung Priok Port (Main Port of Pelindo II) - Profile 23
FIGURE 9.7 New Priok (Kalibaru) Port Master Plan 26
FIGURE 9.8 Transhipment Hub at Batam 27
FIGURE 9.9 Sorong Port Container Terminal 28
FIGURE 9.10 Jurisdictional area of Pelindo III 29
FIGURE 9.11 Pelindo III Ports 30
FIGURE 9.12 Tanjung Perak Port (Main Port of Pelindo III) Profile 31
FIGURE 9.13 Jurisdictional Area of Pelindo IV 32
FIGURE 9.14 Pelindo IV Ports 33
FIGURE 9.15 Makassar Port (Main Port of Pelindo IV) Profile 34
FIGURE 10.1 Port Ranking in the World Container Shipping Lanes 35
FIGURE 10.2 Indonesian Container Traffic Projections from 2010 to 2030
under Alternative Growth Scenarios 36
FIGURE 10.3 2009 Domestic Container Trade Flows in Indonesia 37
FIGURE 10.4 2009 International Container Trade Flows in Indonesia 38
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
8/94
vi|P a g e
FIGURE 10.5 Growth of Container Flows within Indonesian Ports
Corporation I-IV 2006-2010 40
FIGURE 10.6 Growth in Number of Ships Calls within Pelindos I-IV, 2006-2010 41
FIGURE 11.1 Forecast of Total Indonesian Cargo Handled under Alternative
Growth Scenarios 41
FIGURE 11.2 2009 Domestic General Cargo Trade Flows in Indonesia 42
FIGURE 11.3 2009 Domestic Dry Bulk Trade Flows in Indonesia 42
FIGURE 11.4 2009 Domestic Liquid Bulk Trade Flows in Indonesia 43
FIGURE 11.5 2009 International General Cargo Trade Flows in Indonesia 43
FIGURE 11.6 2009 International Dry Bulk Trade Flows in Indonesia 44
FIGURE 11.7 2009 International Liquid Bulk Trade Flows in Indonesia 44
FIGURE 12.1 Commercial Ferry Passengers (2006-2010) 45
FIGURE 12.2 Ferry Transport Vessels in Service (2006-2010) 46
FIGURE 13.1 Cold Storage Opportunities 47
FIGURE 14.1 Low Network Density 48
FIGURE 14.2 Nature of Road Network 49
FIGURE 14.3 Java Toll Roads Network 50
FIGURE 14.4 Jabodetabek Toll Roads Network 51
FIGURE 14.5 Condition of Road Network 52
FIGURE 14.6 Main Rail Nework of Java in 2010 54
FIGURE 14.7 World Scale for Logistics Performance 56
FIGURE 14.8 2010 Indonesia Infrastructure Quality 56
FIGURE 15.1 Connectivity of the 6 Economic Development Corridors 58
FIGURE 15.2 22 Main Economic Activities 59
FIGURE 15.3 MP3EI and National Port Master Plan (NPMP) 60
FIGURE 15.4 Corridor 1: Sumatra and Port Highlights 62
FIGURE 15.5 Corridor 2: Java and Port Highlights 64
FIGURE 15.6 Corridor 3: Kalimantan and Port Highlights 66
FIGURE 15.7 Sulawesi and Port Highlights 67
FIGURE 15.8 Corridor 5: Bali and Nusa Tenggara with Port Hightlights 69
FIGURE 15.9. Corridor 6: Papua and Maluku with Port Highlights 70
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
9/94
vii|P a g e
List of Tables
Page
Table 5.1 Administered Public Ports under Pelindo I IV 9
Table 5.2 Fishing Harbours 15
Table 10.1 Forecast of Total Indonesian Cargo Demand
under Alternative Growth 36
Table 10.2 Top 50 Ports in Indonesia 39
Table 12.1 Ferry Volumes (2006-2010) 45
Table 13.1 Potential Marine Aquaculture Area Available in Maluku 47
Table 16.1 Infrastructure Quality in Selected Asian Countries 71
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
10/94
1
|P a g e
EU ACTIVE PROJECT
A STUDY OF INDONESIAS PORTS
FINAL REPORT
OCTOBER 2012
1.0 INTRODUCTION
After two decades of neglect in terms of investments, Indonesian seaports, the main
ones of which are shown in Figure 1.1, have been attracting increasing attention
following the issuing of a new law (Law 17/2008) for the ports and shipping sector.
Investment and developments are urgently required in the shipping industry, the
primary means of large volume cargo transport, which is absolutely vital for an
archipelagic country. Until some 6 years ago attention to the sector had not been
keeping pace with requirement, and had been increasingly falling behind the
potential and manifest demand for shipping services once the growth in the economy
began to take off. This was effectively from 2005 when Indonesia shrugged off the
slowdown enforced on the country from the 1998 Asian Economic Crisis.
The industry remains inefficient with significantly greater operating costs compared
with neighbouring countries, and failure to expand to meet the increasing trade
demand has shown up the lack of available shipping tonnage as well as the poor
condition of the countrys ports. There was for many years no incentive within the
country to develop the market or to invest.
Urgent steps have had to be taken in recent years to prepare conditions for and
invest in the industry to support the countrys rapidly recovering and expandingeconomy.
Source: MOT
Figure 1.1Main Ports of Indonesia
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
11/94
2
|P a g e
Furthermore, it has been recognised that the funding required to meet the large
scale of development in port infrastructure cross the country would need significant
support from the private sector, including international capital markets, for which
pertaining investment conditions have been inadequate.
2.0 THE EU ACTIVE PROJECT PORTS AND SHIPPING
The EU Active project is funded by the EU and coordinated by INA (Indonesia
Netherlands Association), the Dutch Business Chamber in Indonesia. It
encompasses a study of a number of key sectors of the Indonesian economy, all of
interest to EU countries. One of the sectors has concerned seaports, the
responsibility for which was assigned by INA to BritCham (British Chamber of
Commerce in Indonesia), which in turn engaged one of its member companies,
Glendale Partners, a consulting firm specialising in infrastructure to carry out a
comprehensive review of the ports infrastructure in Indonesia.
The project commenced in February 2012, a contract of engagement being signed
on 29th February 2012. The work to be covered in the project would be largely in the
form of a desk study (part-time), complemented by two workshops, which would
highlight some key features of the industry as well as provide an interim statement of
results from the study. The workshops were conducted on 24th May 2012 and again
on 25th September 2012, each held in the Mercantile Athletic Club, World Trade
Center, Jakarta. The agenda of each workshop is given in Appendices 1 and 2.
3.0 OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE OF THE STUDY
To present an in-depth appreciation of the seaport sector in Indonesia, which
would include but not be limited to, where information was available:
- Profile of ports
- Identification of constraints, strengths and weaknesses of current port
management and operations
To present, through overview the importance of land connectivity as
supporting infrastructure to seaport activities in Indonesia
To identify where there may be appropriate opportunities that might be of
interest to the EU along with attendant risks.
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
12/94
3
|P a g e
4.0 POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC OVERVIEW
Indonesia was the most badly hit of Asian regional economies in 1998 as a result of
the Asian Economic Crisis, with its GDP crashing that year from a healthy positive
growth position in preceding years to -14% accompanied by a major debasing of the
currency. The economic crash also brought about the end of the autocratic form of
government that had been in place for 32 years and for many of the 20 years before
that, following Independence. The nation consciously decided to adopt a democratic
approach to government, becoming a fully-fledged democracy in a matter of 6 years.
Within 2 years from 1998 the economy had recovered to show a small positive GDP
growth which improved gradually over the ensuing few years before reaching 5% by
the middle of the first decade of the 21st century. From this point it has proceeded
onwards to its present level of 6-6.5%, although it should be noted that the growth
temporarily slowed down to 4% during the 2008 Global Economic Crisis, the effects
of which are still current across the world. This short period of slower growth was
still, however, a significantly better performance than that achieved by many othercountries at this time, due to a robust and expanding consumer market.
From a debt to GDP ratio of about 100% in 2000, strong, careful fiscal policies by the
Ministry of Finance have reduced this figure to an impressive 25%, one of the lowest
in the world.
Having espoused the role to democracy in 1998, the country also adopted a policy of
decentralisation with the passing of the Regional Autonomy Law in 1999 (No.22),
last amended by Law No.32 in 2004, with the objective of strengthening the role of
local governments. These, in turn, would be expected to take increasing
responsibility for steady economic development in their respective areas ofjurisdiction. The impact of this is becoming increasingly obvious with some regions
now performing better than the national average, and thus offering an encouraging
platform the development set out in the 6-Corridor Economic Development Plan, the
MP3EI, which was tabled in 2011 and which is discussed more fully below.
Indonesia has now matured into a politically stable country with a steadily growing
economy. It is the 16th largest economy in the world destined, with continued steady
growth, to become the 7th largest by 2030. It is the dominant growth centre within
ASEAN and comprises 40% of the overall ASEAN economy. Its population is the 4th
largest in the world, currently 245 million with a good demographic structure, and the
country also offers a useful counterbalancing market to the giants of Asia, Chinaand India.
It is now a member of the G20 group of nations and was re-established at
investment grade by world leading rating agencies at the beginning of the year. With
its very important large raw material and energy resources along with a fast-
expanding and maturing consumer market based on its large population and
balanced demographic profile for the foreseeable 30 years, Indonesia is attracting
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
13/94
4
|P a g e
considerable investor interest. It will shortly become a trillion dollar economy with
steadily expanding GDP per-capita profile. This is highlighted in Figure 4.1.
Figure 4.1
Current and Forecast Steady Expansion of the GDP Per-Capita, 2010 - 45
While 58% of the population is based on Java, along with 83% of national industry,
and there is rapid urbanization taking place in and around the main cities of Jakarta
(greater Jakarta with 27 million of a population is now the 2nd largest conurbation in
the world), Surabaya, Bandung and Semarang, urbanization is also taking place at
other main population centres across the country. Some of these are expanding on
the back of increasing activities in clean energy developments, particularly in
development of the large geothermal energy resources, as well as in expansion of
commodity and agriculturally based industries and series attracted by these.
Indonesia is one of most important countries worldwide for the production of key
natural resources and this is set out in Figure 4.2. There are also further reserves of
oil yet to be explored.
3,000
5,300
9,000
14,900
22,500
30,400
38,600
46,900
2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045
PREPARATION ACCELERATION SUSTAINABILITY
Nominal
GDP
(US$
Billion)
711 1,335 2,416 4,257 6,793 9,706 12,989 16,578
Population(Millionpeople)
237 253 269 286 302 319 336 353
NominalGDPperCapitaUSD
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
14/94
5
|P a g e
Figure 4.2
Indonesian Key Natural Resources
However, the rate of development of the country has been and is seriously
hampered by inadequate infrastructure right across the archipelago, very much
including that related directly and indirectly to ports, which is the subject of this study.
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
15/94
6
|P a g e
5.0 THE STRUCTURE OF THE PORTS AND SHIPPING INDUSTRY
There are three main players in the structure of the Indonesian ports and shipping
industry. These are (i) the National Government, (ii) Port Authorities, and (iii) the
Pelindo companies, State-Owned port operating companies.
The National Government, through the Ministry of Transport, is responsible fordrawing up the National Ports Master Plan that also addresses the countrys
connectivity needs, Policy matters, Implementing Regulations and International
Relations. Its Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) are (i) measurement of sea freight
costs with the objective of accepting ships that will provide the lowest sea freight
costs, (ii) to facilitate movement in the market by accelerating the service of ships
and reducing delays, and (iii) to assess route costings, with a view to improving
productivity along with much needed training and capacity development and better
information services. Policies are to be focused on stimulating port development in
line with market demand, encouraging private investment and developing
competition between terminals, while maintaining social stability during the period ofneeded change.
The Port Authorities are responsible for Strategic Port Management and Harbour
Master duties, including safety and security issues. Their KPIs concern port capacity,
utilization and competition. (In reality, there becomes an overlap between Port
Authority responsibilities and the operations of the Pelindos, with the latter taking the
dominant role at this time. The functioning of the Port Authorities is yet to be properly
defined).
There are four Pelindo companies, each with responsibilities for operations, the KPIs
being in the efficiency of services, including berthing allocations, and in financialperformance; being a State-Owned Enterprise (SOE), each Pelindo is expected to
show an annual auditable operational profit. The jurisdictional areas of each of the
four Pelindos is shown in Figure 5.1.
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
16/94
Figure 5.1
Jurisdictional Area of Each of the Pelindos
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
17/94
8|P a g e
As discussed below, there is also a large number of other categories of ports,
altogether some 1900 havens across the archipelago, with most of the smaller
entities not within the jurisdiction of the Pelindos.
Port Master Plan
Each Pelindo port is expected to have its own Master Plan, which will include forboth sea and shore allotments covering work and port interest areas. The Master
Plan should be prepared for
- Long term: 15-20 years, with review and updating every 5 years
- Medium term: 10-15 years
- Short term: 5-10 years
The Master Plan should also be based on the National Port Master Plan, prepared
by Central Government, the Provincial Spatial Plan and the Regency/City Spatial
Plan. It should also take into account other location activities; technical,
environmental and economic feasibility; and safe and secure ship movements withina port area.
Port Hierarchy and Profil e
The ports are divided into three levels of importance:
- Main port: international and domestic
- Collector port:domestic transport and transhipment
- Feeder port:serving main collector ports with limited cargo capacity
There are 111 adminstered public ports, which fall under the aegis of the four
Pelindos, of which 98 are listed in Table 5.1. With reference to Figure 5.1, Pelindo I
is responsible for 31 ports, Pelindo II for 19 ports, including the National Jakarta hub
port of Tanjung Priok, Pelindo III for 27 ports and Pelindo IV, covering Eastern
Indonesia for the remaining 21 ports.
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
18/94
9|P a g e
Table 5.1
Administered Public Ports under Pelindo I IV
PelindoINo.
Province
(Area)
No. Port
1
1.NangroeAcehDarussalam
(Aceh)
1 Sabang
2 2 Malahayati
3
3 Lhok seumawe4 4 Meulaboh
5 5 KualaLangsa
6 6 PangkalanSusu
7
2.NorthSumatra
7 Belawan
8 8 BelawanContainerTerminal
9 9 KualaTanjung
10 10 TanjungBalaiAsahan
11 11 Sibolga
12 12 GunungSitoli
13
3.Riau
13 BaganSiapiapi14 14 Dumai
15 15 Bengkal is
16 16 SeiPakning
17 17 Perawang
18
18 PekanBaru
19 19 SelatPanjang
20 20 Rengat
21 21 Tembilaha n
22 22 KualaEnok
23
4.RiauIslands
23 TanjungBalaiKarimun
24 24 PulauSambu/PulauLumba
25 25 Sekupang(InternasonalSekupang)
26 26 BatuAmpar
27 27 Kabil
28 28 TanjungUban
29 29 TanjungPinang_(SriBintanPura)
30 30 SriPayungBatuAnam
31 31 Kijang
PelindoIINo.
Province
(Area)
No. Port
32 1.WestSumatra 1 TelukBayur
332.Jambi
2 KualaTungkal
34 3 Jambi
35 3.Bengkulu 4 Bengkulu36 4.SouthSumatra 5 SPalembang/BoomBaru
375.BangkaBelitung
6 Muntok
38 7 Pangkalbalam
39 8 TanjungPandan
40 6.Lampung 9 Panjang
41 7.Banten 10 Banten
42
8.DKIJakarta
11 SundaKelal
43
12 TanjungPriok
44 13 JakartaInternatonalContainer
45 14 Kalibaru
46 9.WestJava 15 SCirebon
47
10.WestKalimantan
16 Sintete48 17 Singkawa ng
49 18 Pontianak
50 19 Ketapang
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
19/94
10|P a g e
Pelindo
III
No.
Province
(Area)
No. Port
51
1.CentralKalimantan
1 PangkalanBun
52 2 Kumai
53 3 kualaPembuang
54 4 Sampit
55 5 Samuda
56
6 PulauPisau
572.SouthKalimantan
7 TrisaktiBanjarmasin58 8 Kotabaru
593.CentralJavaand4.
Yogyakarta(0)
9 Tegal
60 10 TanjungIntan
61 11 TanjungEmas
62
5.EastJava
12 PelabuhanGresik
63 13 PelabuhanTanjungPerak
64 14 Probolinggo
65 15 TanjungWangi
66 16 Kalianget
676.Bali
17 CelukanBawang
68 18 Benoa
69
7.NusaTenggaraBarat
19 Lembar
70
20 LabuhanLalar
71 21 LabuhanAlas
72 22 Badas
73 23 Bima
74
8.NusaTenggaraTimur
24 Waingapu
75 25 Ende
76 26 Maumere
77 27 Tenau
PelindoIVNo. Province(Area) No. Port
78
1.EastKalimantan
1 Nunukan
79 2 Samarinda
80 3 Balikpapan
81 2.NorthSulawesi 4 Bitung
82 5 Manado
83 3.Gorontalo 6 Gorontalo
84
4.CentralSulawesi
7 Toli Toli
85 8 Pantoloan
86 9 Luwuk
875.SouthSulawesi
10 PelabuhanNusantaraParepare
88 11 Makassar
89
6.SouthEastSulawesi(Sulawesi
Tenggara) 12 PelabuhanNusantaraKendari
90 7.NorthMaluku 13 AchmadYani Ternate
918.Maluku
14 Ambon
92 15 BandaNaira
93
9.WestPapua
16 Sorong
94 17 FakFak
95 18 Manokwari
96
10.Papua
19 Biak
97 20 Jayapura
98 21 Merauke
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
20/94
11|P a g e
Non-administered Public Ports
The non-administered Public Port is designated as non-commercial, but functions
where there is a lack of port facilities in the area. It does not meet standards that
necessarily accommodate and serve business activities, i.e., for trading and the like.
Indonesia has approximately 614 non-administered public ports of which 166 portshave been identified by location in the listing detailed in Appendix 3.
Figure 5.2, shows six aerial illustrations of identified non-commercial public ports per
six main Indonesian islands:
1.Tanjung Beringin North Sumatera 2. Pangandaran Ciamis West Java
3. Sangkulirang Kutai, East Kalimantan 4. Leok Buol, Central Sulawesi
5. Labuhan Haji, East Lombok, NTB 6. Tobelo, North Halmahera, N.Maluku
Figure 5.2
Six Non-Admin istered Public Ports
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
21/94
12|P a g e
Special Purpose Ports
Special ports are usually established for specific purposes, i.e., for handling coal, oil
and gas, etc. Currently Indonesia has approximately 177 special purpose ports, of
which 27 and 6 other ports are identified by location, with details given in Appendix
4.
Figure 5.3 shows aerial illustrations of 6 special purpose ports;
1.Pertamina Sabang - Sabang, Aceh 2.Kertapati Palembang, S.Sumatera
3.Conoco Kep. Seribu, DKI Jakarta 4.Paiton Energy Probolinggo, E.Java
5.Semen Gresik Tuban, East Java 6.Pupuk Kaltim Bontang, E.Kalimantan
Figure 5.3
Special Purposes Ports
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
22/94
13|P a g e
Coal Terminals
Figure 5.4 shows the locations of the main coal terminals serving the main centres of
coal mining in East and South Kalimantan and Sumatera.
Figure 5.4
Coal Anchorages in Indonesia
Figure 5.5 shows the coal production, exports and domestic sales in Indonesia for
the period of 2003 2010. While 2012 has shown a dip in coal exports as a result of
the global economic slowdown, especially in China, it is expected that expansion indemand should return from late 2013/early 2014.
Source: Indonesian Coal Mining Association (ICMA)
Figure 5.5
Coal Production , Exports and Domestic Sales in Indonesia (2003 2010)
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
CoalProduction 121.04 130.86 152.86 190.48 221.1 240 283 325
Export 85.3 93.76 110.79 144. 94 158.6 191 230 265
Domestic 35.74 37.1 41.3 45.54 62.5 49 53 60
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
MillionTons
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
23/94
14|P a g e
Secondary and Rural Fishing Harbours
Indonesian fish landing places are classified into 3 main categories, Types A, B and
C or classes I, II and III, and are managed by the Directorate General of Fisheries,
Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries. The categories are based on capacity andavailable facilities, as shown in Table 5.2. The list of existing fishing harbours by
province is available in Appendix 4.
There are also Fish Landing Harbours (Pelabuhan Pendaratan Ikan) which are
managed by provincial governments. Figure 5.6 presents an aerial view of four of the
countrys fishing ports.
1.FP. Sibolga Sibolga, S.Sumatera 2.FP.Samudra Besar Sabang, Aceh
3.FP. NizamzachmanN.Jakarta, DKI Jkt 4.FP. Barondong, Lamongan, E. Java
Figure 5.6
Indonesian Fisheries Ports
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
24/94
Table 5.2
Fishing Harbours
NoFishingHarbours
Criteria
OceanicFishingHarbour
(PPS)
NusantaraDomestic
FishingHarbour(PPN)CoastalFishingHarbour(PPP
1 Category TypeAorClassI TypeBorClassII TypeCorClassIII
2 OperationalArea
TerritorialWaters,
ExclusiveEconomicZone
(EEZ)andInternational
Waters
TerritorialWaters,
ExclusiveEconomicZone
(EEZ)
InnerandInterislandwaters,Territori
ExclusiveEconomicZone(EEZ
3 BerthingFacilities >60GT 30 60GT 10 30GT
4WharfLengthand
Seabeddepth>300mand>3m 150 300mand>3m 100 150mand>2m
5 Capacity
>6000GT(equivalentto
100vesselsof60GT
each)
>2250GT(equivalentto
75vesselsof30GTeach)>300GT(equivalentto30vesselsof1
6
VolumeofFish
Landed
average
60
ton
per
day
average
30
ton
per
day
7 Export Yes Yes No
8 Area >30Ha 15 30Ha 5 15Ha
9
Facilitiesfor
QualityControlof
FishProduction
Available Available/NA NA
10
ZonationofFish
Processingand
Industry
Available Available Available
11 Harbours 6 14 46
12 LocationsBelawan,
Bungus,
Cilacap,Kendari,Nizam
Zachman Jakarta
Ambon,Bitung,Brondong,
Kejawanan,Pelabuhan
Ratu,Pekalongan,
Pemangkat,Prigi,Sibolga,
TanjungPandan,Ternate
andTual
AsemDoyong,Bacan,Bajomulyo,Ban
Bawean,Blanakan,Bondet,Cilautereun
Dagho,Eretan,
Hantipan,
Karanga
Karimunjawa,KidangLor,KotaAgung,
Kwandang,Labuan,LabuhanLombok,
Lekok,Lempasing,Mayangan,Moro
Source: Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
25/94
16|P a g e
6.0 CHANGES IN REGULATIONS FOR THE PORT SECTOR
Figure 6.1. shows diagramatically the impact of changes in shipping and port affairs
and regional autonomy, following on the from the Asian Economic Crisis of 1998.
The first important step was the enactment of Law No 17 in 2008, as referred to
above, followed by the presentation of the ensuing Government Regulation on Port
Affairs, No 61 in 2009. These form the basis of the changes that are slowly taking
place as the industry tries to adjust to overdue modernisation and capability to
manage crucial sea-borne activities.
Figure 6.1
Changes in Regulations for the Port Sector
The law has included the issue of cabotage through an attempt to increasedomestic-based shipping involvement for in country operation and cargos. While this
step is viewed as correct in order to manage investment in the domestic shipping
sector, the main players in the shipping industry are concerned over short-term
operating difficulties that result from enforcement of the law and are seeking
alternative solutions for future operations. The oil industry, which involves significant
shipping services support, has been extremely concerned, since highly specialized
vessels are needed for exploration and production activities and currently only a very
limited number of Indonesian flagged vessels are able to meet such specific
requirements. Solutions are being addressed between the government at Ministerial
level, and the Indonesian Petroleum Association.
LAWNo. 22/1999
on
RegionalAutonomy
LAWNo. 32/2004
on
RegionalAutonomy
LAW No.17/2008
on
Shipping
Gov. RegNo.61/2009
on
PortAffairs
LAWNo. 21/1992
on
Shipping
Gov.Reg.No.69/2001
on
PortAffairs
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
26/94
17|P a g e
7.0 PELINDO RESPONSIBILITIES
Under its operational duties, each Pelindo is responsible for allocating ships to
berths. It can also lease out berths, land and storage areas. It is also responsible for
pilotage and tugs, channel dredging, tariffs and implementing and/or modifying as
necessary the Master Plan.
A main function is the operation of container terminals with the operations at the
important hubs of Makassar (Pel IV), Belawan (Pel I), Bitung and Semarang (Pel III)
being totally under Pelindo control, while most container operations at the key ports
of Tanjung Priok (Jakarta, Pel II) and Tanjung Perak (Surabaya, Pel III) are joint
ventures with global operators. They also take income from special leased out
terminals or anchorages.
Until recently none of the Pelindos have been engaged in major capital projects, the
large expansion of the container facility at Tanjung Priok being the first such project
to be undertaken, although others are being discussed and planned.
There is now a drive to step up and expand the function and operations of the
Pelindos and various options have been under discussion. A key decision seems to
have been taken to focus in a major way on the large potential of the expected
burgeoning container shipping market, both domestic and international. Other
options concern the possibility of extending the range of cargoes handled, certainly
in oil-related products and perhaps in selling small ports to local governments.
Pelindos would appear to be more aware of the need for investment from other
sources as well as from generated income, and balance sheets have been
improving. However, there is a significant need to improve the skills and capability of
Pelindo staff across all aspects of management and operations, and this would nowappear to be receiving some attention.
The policy of privatising State-Owned Enterprises, which was much to the fore five
years ago, has effectively been shelved in more recent years so that SOEs, such as
the Pelindos, will become much more attentive to maximizing earnings and
profitability, perhaps adopting some private sector management principles as part of
the necessary reforms that have to be undertaken in the companies.
One other outstanding issue also relates to proper demarcation of the sometimes
apparently overlapping roles of the Pelindos and Port Authorities, as referred to
above, with the Pelindos currently seeing to port operation duties.
Speed of improvement in operations will be hampered by the poor quality of
hinterland road capacity, and sometimes rail, which is discussed more fully below.
Improvement is also needed through the revitalization of cargo consolidation logistics
operators, more ships and routes offering a plurality of options, and new, more
appropriate types of interisland shipping; most of the domestic shipping fleet is more
than 20 years old and introduction of newer ships is overdue.
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
27/94
18|P a g e
8.0 PORT AUTHORITIES
As discussed above several of the undertakings of Pelindos in other circumstances
could be expected to be carried out by Port Authorities, for instance pilotage and tug
operations. At this juncture, the role of the Port Authorities vis-a-vis the Pelindos
remains unresolved. The Government realises that it will take some time to develop
the role of Port Authorities properly; they have no structure to raise finance and they
need effective procedures with capable staff to implement them. Consequently, it is
expected that Pelindos will take the lead in the immediate term to carry out urgently
needed developments, such as the expansion for Tanjung Priok.
9.0 PROFILE OF PELINDOS
Pelindo I
The main port in the jurisdiction of Pelindo I is Belawan, serving Medan, the capitalof North Sumatra and locations dependent on Medan.
Pelindo I covers the north half of Sumatera, the Provinces within Pelindo I territorial
area being Nangroe Aceh Darussalam/Aceh, North Sumatera, Riau and Riau Islands
with the Special Economic Zone status of Batam of Particular importance. The area
served by Pelindo I has a hinterland well developed with production of CPO, rubber,
oil and gas, agricultural output, mining, and some tourism. Overall, there remains
many areas of mining potential and tourism still to be developed by PT Pelindo I.
Figure 9.1 shows the plan of the Pelindo I area with 31 identified administered public
ports under its territory:
Figure 9.1
Jurisd ictional Area of Pelindo I
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
28/94
19|P a g e
Figure 9.2 presents an aerial view of the layouts of six of the many public ports
administered by Pelindo I.
1.Sabang Sabang City, Aceh 2.Kuala Langsa Langsa City, Aceh
3.Belawan CT Medan, N. Sumatera 4.Dumai Dumai City, Riau
5.Sikupang Int. Batam, Riau Islands 6.Batu Ampar Batam, Riau Islands
Figure 9.2
Pelindo I Ports
The profile of Pelindo Is major port of Belawan is presented in Figure 9.3. The port
has an expansion programme yet to be developed. As can be seen, the LWS depth
of the port area has to be deepened to improve the capacity of the port. There is as
well upgrading of other ports planned, although expansion of Batam as a
transshipment hub is to be undertaken by the International Ports Corporation (the
new appellation for Pelindo II).
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
29/94
PortCode
Name
Address
Telephone
Fax
Regency/City
Province
Management
ManagementAddress
Coordinate
Function
Class
LogPortGateway
Length
Wide
Depth
PortPond
Wide
Minimum
Depth
MaximumDepth
Figure 9.3
Belawan Port - Profile
Source: MOT, GP recompiled
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
30/94
21|P a g e
Pelindo II
The main port in the jurisdiction of Pelindo II is Tanjung Priok, serving DKI Jakarta,
the capital city of Indonesia and locations dependent on DKI Jakarta and beyond.
Pelindo II covers an area encompassing the southern part of Sumatera, the western
part of Java as well as West Kalimantan. Provinces within Pelindo II territorial watersare: West Sumatera, Jambi, Bengkulu, South Sumatera, Bangka Belitung, Lampung,
Banten, DKI Jakarta, West Java, West Kalimantan. Figure 9.4 shows more details of
the Pelindo II area with 19 identified administered public ports under its territory:
Figure 9.4
Jurisdict ional Area of Pelindo II
Pelindo II, now renamed as the International Ports Corporation (IPC), is significantly
the largest of the four Pelindo entities, having as well as Jakarta many of the larger
port outlets supporting Western Java, Batam and the main ports of Southern
Sumatra. It is Indonesias premier port developer, which needs to raise its standard
to world class by adopting strict commercial principles and be free from politicalinfluence. While the reforms to the industry mooted in 2005 and tabled in the 2007
Law have been adopted, along with the National Plan, the lack of clarity in Pelindos
role vis-a vis the Ministry and that yet to be defined for the Port Authority has
hampered the speed of development. Despite this Pelindo II has been able to clearly
improve its balance sheet.
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
31/94
22|P a g e
Figure 9.5 presents an aerial view of some of the administered public ports under the
jurisdiction of Pelindo II.
1.Teluk BayurPadang C., W. Sumatera 2.Panjang B. Lampung City, Lampung
3.Kalibaru N. Jakarta, DKI Jakarta 4.Cirebon, Cirebon City, West Java
5.Singkawang W.Kalimantan 6.Pontianak W. Kalimantan
Figure 9.5
Pelindo II Ports
The profile of the Main Port of Pelindo II Tanjung Priok Port, is presented in Figure9.6. Improvements planned include widening the entry channel for 2-way ship
movements and deepening the channel for the layer ships that the port is expecting
to handle, especially container vessels.
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
32/94
PortCode 2
Name T
Address J
J
Telephone 0
Fax 0
Regency/City N
Province D
Management P
(
Management
Address
J
J
Coordinate 0
1
Function I
Class C
LogPortGateway
Length 1
Wide n
Depth 1
PortPond
Wide 4
Minimum
Depth
7
MaximumDepth 7
Figure 9.6
Tanjung Priok Port (Main Port of Pelindo II) - Profile
Source: MOT, GP recompiled
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
33/94
24|P a g e
Apart from its current operational conditions, as for the other Pelindos, there is a
number of limitations to what Pelindo II can control or undertake. It is unable to
deliver effective inter-island shipping, which requires revitalising cargo consolidation
and logistics operators, more ships and routes offering a plurality of options, or
innovation in the types of ships, tugs and barges that need to be used, or investment
in the demand for this expansion. Furthermore, it has no control over the significantconstraints posed by inadequate hinterland road connections. Hence in parallel with
port upgrading there requires to be investment in shipping and in land connections to
ports for which it should seek partners and co-investors.
To improve productivity it needs an immediate US$100 million of investments in new
cranes, training and dredging works in several of its ports.
It has three strategic projects that it is now pursuing:
New Priok (formerly called Kalibaru) a large container terminal for up to 10.5
m TEU and petroleum products: key details of this devlopment are gIven in
Figure 9.7.
Transhipment hub at Batam, with a focus on north Indonesia, in line with the
National Ports Master Plan (NPMP), and which can be brought on stream
fairly quickly. Features are highlighted in Figure 9.8.
Sorong Port Container Terminal (albeit located in Pelindo IV area) to support
the Papua Economic Development Corridor. See Figure 9.9.
New Priok
Pelindo II (IPC) has been given the mandate by government to develop New Priok.Technical, financial and structural operating arrangements have been proceeding in
parallel for the early development tasks to resolve the position of the full long-term
layout and prepare details for phase I (3 terminals plus petroleum products
terminals) as well as arrangements for the dedicated toll road access. A decision has
been taken that phase I will be carried out by State Owned Construction Company,
PT PP. Discussion are ongoing with prospective terminal operators. It is expected
that the first terminal will be operational in 2016, although the terminal operators will
be taking a considerable interest in the construction proposals since the scope of the
project is demanding.
Batam Transhipment
The IPC is to deliver a container transhipment terminal with a focus on the Malacca
Straits in line the National Port Master Plan. For this IPC is to develop, operate and
expand a container terminal (New Batam) to serve as a transhipment focus for a
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
34/94
25|P a g e
major shipping line and additional container support services, while expecting to
allow for an acceptable return on investment and providing employment and income.
The terminal will service very large ships and require a minimum draft of 16 m. The
preliminary construction cost estimate is US$ 260 million. It is planned that the
terminal will be operational by 2016.
Sorong
The mission for IPC is to develop, operate and expand a container terminal near
Sorong. To serve local container traffic demand and to consolidate container
demand across East Indonesia while expanding the operating envelope of IPC and
providing an investment return for the company.
The initial strategy is a target volume by 2020 of 300,000 to 350,000 TEU, followed
by phased expansions and upgrading. The target start update is 2015, and IPC havebeen seeking minority equity partner (s).
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
35/94
Figure 9.7
New Priok (Kalibaru) Port Master Plan
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
36/94
Figure 9.8
Transhipment Hub at Batam
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
37/94
Figure 9.9
Sorong Port Container Terminal in context of MP3EI corridor 6
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
38/94
29|P a g e
Pelindo III
Tha main port in the jurisdiction of Pelindo III is Tanjung Perak, serving Surabaya,
the city of East Java and locations dependent on Surabaya.
Pelindo III covers some of Kalimantan, central and eastern Java and Nusa
Tenggara. Provinces within the Pelindo III jurisdictional area are: Central Kalimantan,South Kalimantan, Central Java, Yogyakarta, East Java, Bali, West Nusa Tenggara
and East Nusa Tenggara. Figure 9.10 shows an outline of the Pelindo III area and
the 27 identified administered public ports within its territory:
Figure 9.10
Jurisd ictional Area of Pelindo III
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
39/94
30|P a g e
Figure 9.11 presents an aerial view of some of the ports falling under the jurisdiction
of Pelindo III.
1.Tanjung Emas Semarang, C. Java 2.Gresik Gresik, East Java
3.Lembar W. Lombok, NTB 4.Benoa, Denpasar City, Bali
5.Pangkalan BunW.Waringin, C.Kmtan 6.Trisakti Banjarmasin, S Kalimantan
Figure 9.11
Pelindo III Ports
The profile of the Main Port of Tanjung Perak, is presented in Figure 9.12. Pelindo III
is seeking to embark on an upgrading and expansion plan for Tanjung Perak , which
is the largest port in East Java, and serves as a center for the other ports under itsjurisdiction. Upgrading will also allow for large container vessels. Funding support is
required.
Tanjung Emas is the main port outlet for Central Java at Semarang. Upgrading plans
are in hand, but are complicated by a steady problem of ground subsidence, largely
related to near hinterland groundwater abstraction.
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
40/94
PortCode 4
Name P
Address Jl
Telephone 0Fax 0
Regency/City C
Province E
Management P
(P
Management
Address
Jl
Coordinate 0
1
Function In
Class n
LogPortGateway
Length 2
Wide 1
Depth 9
PortPond
Wide 1
Minimum
Depth
9
MaximumDepth 1
Figure 9.12
Tanjung Perak Port (Main Port of Pelindo III) - Profile
Source: MOT GP recom i led
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
41/94
32|P a g e
Pelindo IV
The main port in the jurisdiction of Pelindo IV is Makassar, serving Makassar, the
capital city of South Sulawesi and locations dependent on the city of Makassar,
especially in East Indonesia.
Pelindo IV covers East Kalimantan, all of Sulawesi, Maluku and Papua. Provinceswithin Pelindo IV territorial water are: East Kalimantan, North Sulawesi, Gorontalo,
Central Sulawesi, South Sulawesi, South East Sulawesi, North Maluku, Maluku,
West Papua and Papua. Figure 9.13 shows an outline of Pelindo IVs territorial area
in East Indonesia and some of the ports within its jurisdiction.
Figure 9.13
Jurisdictional Area of Pelindo IV
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
42/94
33|P a g e
Figure 9.14 presents an aerial view of some the administered public ports under
Pelindo IVs responsibility.
1.Samarinda Samarinda C, E.Klmtan. 2.Balikpapan, Balikpapan, E. Kalimantan
3.Bitung Bitung City, N. Sulawesi 4.Ambon, Ambon City, Maluku
5.Sorong Sorong City, West Papua 6.Jayapura Jayapura City, Papua
Figure 9.14
Pelindo IV Ports
The profile of the Main Port of Makassar is presented in Figure 9.15. The port is
directly connected to the out port by toll road. The Makassar area is expanding
impressively. Bitung in North Sulawesi is a natural deep water harbour and is being
considered for a larger role in overall connectivity issues. Sorong in West Papua is tobe expanded under the responsibility of the IPC, as discussed above.
Karangan container port in East Kalimantan has been expanded to cater for 250,000
TEUs at a cost to Pelindo IV and the provincial government of US$ 75 million. Also
in East Kalimantan, the proposed construction of the Maloy (deep/ water) port and
accompanying 5,300 ha industrial estate, still at planning stage, is estimated to cost
US$ 500 million when built.
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
43/94
PortCode 7
Name M
Address J
Telephone
0Fax 0
Regency/City M
Province S
Management
P
(
Management
Address J
Coordinate
0
1
Function
InClass M
LogPortGateway
Length 2
Wide 1
Depth 2
PortPond
Wide 1
MinimumDepth
9
MaximumDepth 1
Figure 9.15
Makassar Port (Main Port of Pelindo IV) - Prof ile
Source: MOT, GP recompiled
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
44/94
35|P a g e
10.0 CONTAINER SHIPPING
In Figure 10.1 is depicted the relative importance of Jakartas Tanjung Priok port in
terms of world container shipping rankings. At this juncture there are many key world
ports that are larger, but the forecast development of the country indicates that
container volumes are set to increase steadily and significantly over the years
ahead.
Figure 10.1
Port Ranking in the World Container Shipping Lanes
Despite the recent short term turn down in world trade, which affected significantly
the container trade volumes as well as the transport of other products, the future
demand growth for Indonesia is very large as shown in Table 10.1. For instance the
growth in demand for container shipping for Indonesia is expected to double
between 2020 and 2030. Figure 10.2 shows the forecast increase in container traffic
under alternative growth scenarios between 2010 and 2030. However, in order for
this expected demand to be accommodated, there needs to be considerable
expansion in the port facilities currently available in Indonesian ports.
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
45/94
36|P a g e
Table 10.1
Forecast of Total Indonesian Cargo Demand under Alternative Growth
2015 - 2030 (000's tons)
TypeofCargo Scenario 2015 2020 2030
GeneralCargo Low 177,256 207,033 249,092Base 185,241 222,160 288,851
High 193,226 237,287 328,609
Container Low 166,360 236,640 421,280
Base 171,545 255,115 495,085
High 176,730 273,590 568,890
DryBulk Low 603,532 647,005 763,230
Base 726,454 835,950 1,078,156
High 849,375 1,024,895 1,393,081
LiquidBulk Low 222,846 265,866 364,496
Base 231,360 285,948 422,963
High 239,873 306,029 481,430Source: Nathan Associates Inc.
Source: Nathan Associates Inc.
Figure 10.2
Indonesian Container Traffic Projections from 2010 to 2030under Alternative Growth Scenarios
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2025
2030
000'sTEU
YEAR
HighGrowth BaseCase LowGrowth
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
46/94
37|P a g e
Figures 10.3 and 10.4 show the major domestic and international container trade
flows in Indonesia, clearly dominated by movements between locations in Java,
Sumatra, Sulawesi (Domestic) and to Singapore (International) as the regional
international hub. The upcoming expansion of Jakartas main port, Tanjung Priok,
will allow berthing of the largest container vessels currently operating and thus offera direct service to a wider range of world markets.
Source: IndII - Academic Paper to Support NPMP Decree
Figure 10.3
2009 Domestic Container Trade Flows in Indonesia
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
47/94
38|P a g e
Source: IndII - Academic Paper to Support NPMP DecreeFigure 10.4
2009 International Container Trade Flows in Indonesia
Accordingly, apart from the stated expansion for Tanjung Priok, the other ports
where upgrading of container terminal activities is to take place are Batam, Sorong
and Kalibaru under the aegis of Pelindo II, and Tanjung Perak and Tanjung Emas of
Pelindo III. Under Pelindo IV an upgrading of the container terminal at Karangan in
East Kalimantan has recently been completed, as mentioned above.
Table 10.2 presents a ranking of the top 50 ports in Indonesia which handle
container traffic. The dominance of the two main Java ports of Tanjung Priok and
Tanjung Perak is clearly shown, with the importance of the main regional outlets of
Belawan (Medan), Tanjung Emas and Panjang and Makassar also highlighted. While
container traffic is expected to expand at these regional ports, the relative
importance of Tanjung Priok and Tanjung Perak and Belawan for northern Sumatra
will continue.
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
48/94
39|P a g e
Table 10.2
Top 50 Ports in IndonesiaForeignTrade DomesticTrade
No Port Imports Exports Subtotal Unloading Loading Subtotal TOTAL
1 Tg.Priok 1,605 1,485 3,090 328 505 833 3,923
2
Tg.
Perak
630
576
1,206
256
282
538
1,744
3 Belawan 302 309 611 180 98 278 889
4 Tg.Emas 291 253 544 17 15 32 576
5 Panjang 137 139 276 14 11 25 301
6 Makassar 2 2 144 104 248 250
7 Banjarmasin 61 57 118 118
8 Pontinak 70 29 99 99
9 Samarinda 50 45 95 95
10 Pekanbaru 11 32 43 16 13 29 72
11 Merak 25 36 61 1 1 2 63
12 Perawang 1 53 54 4 5 9 63
13 Bitung 27 36 63 6314 Palembang 16 16 32 14 15 29 61
15 BatuAmpar 18 29 47 47
16 TelukBayur 20 22 42 42
17 Balikpapan 1 2 3 19 16 35 3818 Batam 1 3 4 15 11 26 30
19 Jayapura 12 15 27 27
20 Buatan 2 26 28 28
21 Kabil 12 15 27 27
22 KualaTungkal 22 22 22
23 Sorong 13 9 22 22
24 Tarakan 9 8 17 17
25 Ambon 7 8 15 1526 BatuLicin 7 7 14 14
27 BauBau 7 4 11 11
28 Biak 7 3 10 10
29 Merauke 6 4 10 10
30 P.Burung 10 10 10
31 TalangDuku 4 5 9 9
32 Palu 5 4 9 9
33 Timika 5 4 9 9
34 Kendari 6 3 9 9
35 S.Guntung 8 8 8
36 FakFak 4 3 7 7
37 Manokwari 4 3 7 738 Nabire 4 3 7 7
39 Benoa 3 3 6 6
40 Benete 2 3 5 5
41 Jambi 2 2 4 4
42 Muntok 2 2 4 4
43 Sampit 2 2 4 4
44 S.Buatan 3 3 3
45
Pantoloan
2
1
3
3
46 PangkalBalam 1 1 2 2
47 Malili 1 1 2 2
48 Tg.Pandan 1 1 2 2
49 Kumai 1 1 2 250 Luwuk 1 1 1
Top50Ports 3,065 3,030 6,095 1,343 1,352 2,695 8,790
Source: DGST - Nathan Associates Inc. recompiled.
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
49/94
40|P a g e
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
PELINDOI 304,002 319,202 900,623 1,340,337 2,158,333
PELINDOII 3,920,049 4,116,045 4,527,650 4,754,031 5,051,156
PELINDOIII 833,573 1,691,783 1,798,785 1,878,799 2,104,849
PELINDOIV 544,058 571,261 1,031,450 1,185,024 1,280,388
1,000,000
2,000,000
3,000,000
4,000,000
5,000,000
6,000,000
ContainersHandled(Teus)
Figure 10.5 gives container flows within each Pelindo jurisdiction, with those for
Pelindo II more or less being equal to the combined flows of the other Pelindos. The
figure also shows the steady growth in traffic over the 5 year period, 2006-2010.It is
also worth noting the volume growth in Pelindos I, III, and IV since 2008, indicating
that the economy in the regions is expanding significantly, with some areas showing
faster growth rates than the national average, a point made recently by McKinsey(2012).
Source: Directorate of Port and Dredging, Directorate General of Sea Transportation - MOT
Figure 10.5
Growth of Container Flows with in Indonesian Ports Corporation I - IV
2006 - 2010
In Figure 10.6 can be seen the number of ship calls handled by each of Pelindos I-IV
over the period 2006-2010. Only Pelindo II is showing a steady upward trend on the
number of calls. Comparing this data with that presented in Figure 10.5, it is clear
that the sizes of vessels handled by Pelindo II, particularly at Tanjung Priok, is
markedly larger than at ports within the remit of the other Pelindos, which relates
also to the depth of water available at respective berths. This issue has to be
addressed in all jurisdictions in order to meet increasing trade demand.
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
50/94
41|P a g e
Source: Directorate of Port and Dredging, Directorate General of Sea Transportation - MOT
Figure 10.6Growth in Number of Ship Calls wi thin Pelindos I IV, 2006 - 2010
11. GENERAL, DRY AND LIQUID BULK CARGOES
While the current Pelindo focus is on improving the capability of the ports to handle
the burgeoning volumes in container trade, steady expansion in the market for
carrying general, dry bulk and liquid bulk cargoes is also expected. This was
indicated earlier in Table 10.1 and is highlighted in Figure 11.1 in terms of projected
tonnage forecast to be handled.
Source: DGST - Nathan Associates Inc.Figure 11.1
Forecast of Total Indonesian Cargo Handledunder Alternative Growth Scenarios
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
PELINDOI 77,309 75,749 76,164 73,171 69,544
PELINDOII 62,181 64,046 70,451 74,314 79,403
PELINDOIII 70,818 73,277 74,818 72,480 68,963
PELINDOIV 58,160 58,160 55,580 54,964 59,464
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
90,000
No
.of
Shipcalls
500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
2,500,000
3,000,000
3,500,000
Low Base High Low Base High Low Base High Low Base High
GeneralCargo Container DryBulk LiquidBulk
000'stons
2030
2020
2015
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
51/94
42|P a g e
Figures 11.2 to 11.7 show the direction of domestic and international trade flow
(2009) for general, dry bulk and liquid bulk cargoes, respectively. While Java still
features strongly for general cargo volumes, the high commodity development areas
of Kalimantan, specially East Kalimantan, and Sumatra dominate movements in
these areas, with coal and CPO being the main commodities moved. Java also
features for liquid bulk transport.
Source: IndII - Academic Paper to Support NPMP DecreeFigure 11.2
2009 Domestic General Cargo Trade Flows in Indonesia
Source: IndII - Academic Paper to Support NPMP DecreeFigure 11.3
2009 Domestic Dry Bulk Trade Flows in Indonesia
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
52/94
43|P a g e
Source: IndII - Academic Paper to Support NPMP DecreeFigure 11.4
2009 Domestic Liquid Bulk Trade Flows in Indonesia
Source: IndII - Academic Paper to Support NPMP DecreeFigure 11.5
2009 International General Cargo Trade Flows in Indonesia
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
53/94
44|P a g e
Source: IndII - Academic Paper to Support NPMP DecreeFigure 11.6
2009 International Dry Bulk Trade Flows in Indonesia
Source: IndII - Academic Paper to Support NPMP DecreeFigure 11.7
2009 International Liquid Bulk Trade Flows in Indonesia
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
54/94
45|P a g e
12. FERRY TRANSPORT
The multi - island coastline of Indonesia stresses the importance of having a
significant inter - island ferry service. Unfortunately, there has been little investment
in ferries over the past decade, and many ferries are old and the seaworthiness of
some is questionable, especially where there has been lack of maintenance. The
investment deficit in this subsector of sea transportation is both for new vessels, and
improved port - landing facilities and operations.
The numbers of passengers, goods, and vehicles carried by ferries are statistically
presented in Table 12.1. More than 80% of total passengers on commercial ferries
are transported through 3 main ferry routes which are Merak - Bakauheni (34%),
Ujung Kamal (23%), and Ketapang Gilimanuk (24%), as shown in Figure 12.1.
These 3 ferry routes link Java with Sumatra, Madura and Bali, respectively.
Table 12.1
Ferry Volumes (2006 2010)Descript ion 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Passangers 27,829,666 40,557,832 46,926,166 61,011,280 39,683,788
Goods 25,422,005 31,936,937 41,079,174 44,068,406 13,511,363
Vehicles 11,889,055 11,874,500 14,224,447 13,885,667 14,769,039
Total 65,140,726 84,369,269 102,229,787 118,965,353 67,964,190
Source: Directorate General of Land Transportation (DGLT) - MOT
Source: Directorate General of Land Transportation (DGLT) - MOTFigure 12.1
Commercial Ferry Passengers (2006 - 2010)
2,000,000
4,000,000
6,000,000
8,000,000
10,000,000
12,000,000
14,000,00016,000,000
18,000,000
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Passengers
YEAR
Merak Bakauni Ujung Kamal Ketapang Gilimanuk Others
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
55/94
46|P a g e
Source: Directorate General of Land Transportation (DGLT) - MOTFigure 12.2
Ferry Transpor t Vessels in Service (2006 - 2010)
Figure 12.2 shows the number of ferry transport vessels in service, highlighting the
significance of Ro-Ro units. However, to reiterate much of the ferry fleet is old and
needs replacement. Investment in ferries has been seriously lacking.
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
LCT 10 10 10 10 8
Passanger 10 11 11 6 3
TruckAir 5 0 4 5 0
Roro 166 175 171 171 210
0
50
100
150
200
250
Unit
YEAR
Roro TruckAir Passanger LCT
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
56/94
47|P a g e
13. COLD STORAGE FACILITIES
According to the Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries (KKP), there is large
potential for the fishing industry within the Maluku area in the Banda Sea, the Seram
Sea and the Arafura Sea is considerable. The three potential sites are called the
golden fishing ground. The Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries intend to
create fishery industry processing nodes in Maluku at Tual, Ambon and Seram.
Figure 13.1 shows the fisheries business locations within Maluku islands, which
covers an area of almost 500 ha (Table 13.1). Having this large potential fishery
business, there is a need for cold store facilities and opportunity for high-fresh quality
fish processing, a new underdeveloped potential export market.
Figure 13.1
Cold Storage Opportunities
Table 13.1
Potential Marine Aquaculture Area Available in Maluku
Descriptions Area(Ha)
WhiteSnapper 31
Grouper
104Seaweed 206
PearlOyster 73
SeaCucumber 28
Lobster 23
Shellfish 29
Total 495
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
57/94
48|P a g e
LOGISTICS & CONNECTING INFRASTRUCTURE ROAD AND RAIL
14.0 GENERAL
Apart from the greater efficiency required in port operations, as discussed above, akey factor in the lack of logistical performance of transport operations overall lies with
the poor quality of land connectivity to the countrys ports, whether major or small. A
study by theAsia Foundation (2009) indicated that road transport costs in Indonesia
were signifcantly the highest in Asia, and rail plays very little part in carrying freight
to and from seaports.
As shown in Figure 14.1 the road density compares unfavourably with other main
Asian countries as a function of land area.
Source: Central Statistics Bureau, GP recompiled
Figure 14.1
Low Network Densit y
14.1 ROADS
The total road network in Indonesia amounts to some 473,000 km, which is deemedas about half that which should be available in order to provide adequate
connectivity across the country to promote regional growth. Of the existing network,
92% is under regional jurisdiction, as shown in Figure 14.2, with national and
provincial roads providing most of the balance.
-
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
Country
(,000Km)
Area (,000 Km2) Roads* (,000 Km)
Area (,000 Km2) 9,570 2,973 1,905 517 329 300
Roads* (,000 Km) 3,860 3,320 473 212 100 202
China India Indonesia Thailand Malaysia Philippines
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
58/94
49|P a g e
Source: Central Statistics Bureau, GP recompiled
Figure 14.2Nature of Road Network
The current length of toll roads amounts to about 800 km, mostly located within Java.
It is planned to complete the Trans Java Toll Road as quickly as possible, est. 2017-
18, in order to provide a high class highway system across the island, where most of
the nations industry is located. This Trans Java link supplemented by toll road
networks round Jakarta and othe major conurbations, once fully in place, is expected
to considerably facilitate the movement of goods within the Java industrial heartland
and through, as necessary, to the main ports, in particular Tanjung Priok. At the
current time, the lack of road network connecting to Tanjung Priok is a major factor in
the high time costs asociated with the movement of goods in and out of the port.
A key delaying factor in the toll road programme has been the inability to undertake
land acquisition for route rights-of-way over nearly all granted concessions, even
with the establishment by government of a Revolving Fund set up to ease the land
purchase process. A new law was recently drafted to limit the possibility of open-
ended delay, the readings being completed in late 2011 for enactment in January
2012 (Law No. 2/2012), this being followed with a Government Regulation towards
implementation in August 2012. While the new law has yet to be tested, it is
expected that it will beneficially help to accelerate the construction of the links
required.
In Figure 14.3 is depicted the outline of the Trans Java Toll Road links and shows
the status of development. Figure 14.4 shows the network, some of which is
operational, to serve the greater Jakarta area as well as the location of Tanjung
Priok port.
-
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
350,000
400,000
450,000
500,000
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
KM
YEAR
National Province Regency/Urban
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
59/94
Source: Jasa MargaFigure 14.3
Java Toll Roads Network
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
60/94
Figure 14.4
Jabodetabek Toll Roads Network
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
61/94
52|P a g e
While some of the other main ports of the country have toll road standard links
serving some of the accesses required, e g Surabaya, Semarang, Makassar, this is
not the case for most ports, which rely on national or provincial road links. Minor
ports will often only be served by local jurisdictional routes. Apart from there being a
considerable construction programme needed in the regions, there is also the
question of upgrading the existing network. As shown in Figure 14.5, anunacceptable level of the local government network is in a damaged or badly
damaged condition and, while there is a significant central government budget
allocation provided for repair and upgrade the standards of work obtaining in the
regions in order to achieve improvement is often inadequate. Several reasons have
been identified role of site supervision is not taken seriously with a weak
enforcement of professional standards, shortage of experienced and professionally
trained public officials and consultants and the application of unreasonably small
contracts (Ref: Development of Road Infrastructure in Indonesia, Scott
Wilson/Glendale Partners World Bank project, 2011). This naturally impacts on the
logistical costs incurred in carrying goods to and from ports.
Source: Central Statistics Bureau
Figure 14.5
Condition of the Road Network
It is obviously important to ensure that road networks immediately serving the
countrys ports are improved to good workable standard and that action in this regard
is treated as priority, bearing in mind the very significant growths expected in alltypes of shipping cargoes.
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
National Province Regencyl/Urban
50%
6%
22%
34%
34%
25%
13%
27%31%
3%
33%22%
Percentage(%)
Status
Good Moderate Damaged Badly Damaged
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
62/94
53|P a g e
14.2 RAIL
The rail network, while being linked into key port operations pre-Independence,
today has very little or no impact on the carrying of goods to ports. While there are
plans to provide some re-connections, e g Tanjung Priok, the overall impact on the
volume of freight in Java that will be carried by rail in the foreseeable future will be
minimal.
The infrastructure of the railway is owned by the Indonesian Government and
managed by the Directorate General of Railways. The operator of the railway
network is the State Owned Company, PT Kerata Api. At this juncture there is no
provision in law for private operators.
The current status of the rail network in Java is shown in Figure 14.6, some 75% of
that existing in the 1930s. At that time, albeit international cargo ships weresignificantly smaller than those of today, rail lines came right onto the pier head with
offloading directly from ship to rail. While todays loading arrangements have
advanced and are more sophisticated, rail links no longer enter directly into main
port areas, although reviving this is once more being discussed for Tanjung Priok.
Notwithstanding this, virtually all land links into ports across the archipelago will
continue to be by road.
Current upgrading of the rail sector in Java is focused on double-tracking, especially
on Trans Java urban routes and on improving operational systems, finance usually
being provided through soft loans. The routing of the rail network in the Jakarta area
has little changed from that existing 90 years ago, and is exclusively in use forpassenger movements, as also for the main inter-city routes.
High priority rail projects are those that will provide city centre rail links to the
countrys main airports, eg Soekarno-Hatta for Jakarta and the airports for Surabaya
and Medan.
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
63/94
Figure 14.6
Main Rail Network of Java in 2010
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
64/94
55|P a g e
The complementary rail link figures for Sumatra are 1,860 km in the 1930s reduced
to 1,348 km in 2010. It is a long term plan to have a continuous modern railway
along the spine of Sumatra, although current upgrading and extensions are being
centred on working out of the main cities, e g Medan. The other main focus is to
construct new lines to take inland commodities, e g coal and iron ore to seaports.
Plans, under PPP arrangement, to build a railway from Bukit Asam coal mine in thewestern region of South Sumatra to a new coal port in Lampung, some 278 km to
the south, are well advanced, although hampered by land acquisition issues. There
are also plans to access coal and iron from inland West Sumatra by rail to the
coastal capital of Padang.
There are other projects on the drawing board for rail lines to take out mined
commodities, mostly coal, from the centre of Kalimantan to dedicated coastal
locations. These are also being thought of in terms of PPP projects, but land
acquisition and appropriate methods of funding remain as difficult unresolved issues.
Prior to 1948, the railways in Indonesia were self-financing, with adequateoperational income being derived from both passenger and freight income. In more
recent times, investment in the rail sector has been carried out under a mix of local
funding, and bilateral or multilateral loans, with Japan providing the largest
component of aid to date. Rail operations have not always been profitable and
certain journey, are subsidised, consider as public service operation. However,
current funding is that railway operations must become profitable.
As a result of lack of financing and investment in the railway sector over the past
decades, the skills to run a financially viable railway network are well below
requirement. Much management time is spent in trouble-shooting rather than in
financially sustainable operations and longer-term growth. As in the case of portoperations, there requires to be very significant investment in human resources
development.
The private sector is examining the potential for investment in the commercial
opportunities that could arise from the upgrading and expansion of mainline city
stations, particularly in Java.
14.3 LOGISTICAL ISSUES
The Government of Indonesia recognises the importance of sound logistics although
the country performance is poor,as shown in Figure 14.7, where it is ranked 75th in
2010 on a world scale for Logistics Performance; this was a drop from the ranking
carried out in 2007. The figure for 2012, however, indicates an improvement from the
2010 assessment, with a current ranking of 59th, a score relating to a little above
that of a lower middle income country.
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
65/94
56|P a g e
Source: International Logistics Performance Index (LPI) - World Bank recompiled
Figure 14.7
World Scale for Logistics Performance
In Figure 14.8 is given a comparison of Indonesias infrastructure quality when
compared with ASEAN and selected other countries. It highlights the relatively poor
condition of Indonesias road and transport sector infrastructure in line with the
discussion above on the road and rail sectors.
Source: International Logistics Performance Index (LPI) - World Bank recompiled
Figure 14.8
2010 Indonesia Infrastructure Quality
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00
4.50
Singapore
Japan
Australia
New
Zealand
KoreaRepublic
China
Malaysia
Thailand
Philippines
India
Vietnam
Indonesia
LaoPDR
Cambodia
Myanmar
Brunei(N/A)
2 7 18 21 23 27 29 35 44 47 53 75 118 129 133 N/A
Index
Score
Country
and
LPI
Index
Rank
G20
average Lower
middle
Income
average
1 2 3 4 5
Telecom&IT
Warehousing/transloading
Rail
Road
Airports
Ports
Score
Infrastructure
ASEAN+6Others Indonesia
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
66/94
57|P a g e
The World Banks LPI (ranking 1-5) helps to identify priorities. The LPI provides
information on international (import-export) connectivity and is a tool to determine
weak links in connectivity and logistics, as well as helping to determine priorites. In
the ports sector attention is being paid to border agencies and dwell time, where lack
of adequate port facilities in Indonesia shows the country comparing badly over this
issue.
In an effort to promote reform, the Government has created an interdepartmental
team focusing on debottlenecking issues and the Ministry of Trade has established a
Directorate for Logistics. The MP3EI, 6 corridor economic development plan,
discussed below, includes a connectivity strategy.
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
67/94
58|P a g e
THE 6 CORRIDOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN MP3EI
15.0 INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES
In mid 2011, the Government issued a comprehensive plan for sustainable economicdevelopment from Aceh right across to Papua. The key of the plan was the sub-
division of the country into 6 corridors, as shown in Figure 15.1. Naturally there is a
focus on land, air and sea connectivity as a fundamental to the core sectors for
economic development.
Figure 15.1
Connectivity of the 6 Economic Development CorridorsThe six corridors as shown in the figure are:
1. Sumatra
2 Java
3 Kalimantan
4 Sulawesi
5 Bali and Nusatenggara
6 Papua and Maluku
Each corridor provides a quite different focus on development requirements.
The objectives of the MP3EI are to increase connectivity via better infrastructure with
resulting more equitable economic growth and upgrading of the skills in human
capital through improved science and technical education, to be available in each
corridor. This would then provide the basis for the vision of Transforming the
Indonesian economy to establish a developed nation recgonized by the World
Community through high, inclusive and sustainable economic growth.
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
68/94
59|P a g e
Indonesia, being an archipelago, has to rely extensively on sea-based trade and thus
ports will be a major factor in the country improving its domestic and foreign
connectivity. However, success is going to need the active participation of regional
governments and their ability to attract private investment, without recourse to
central government. This will mean, as appropriate, increasing cooperation between
regional governments and private companies. In turn, regionally based privateventures will be seeking more and better port outlets to move their commodities and
other goods.
Much essential work needs to be undertaken to improve human capital to support
the development output required and its sustainability.
15.1 THE MAIN ECONOMIC ACTIVITIES: PORTS HIGHLIGHTS
Figure 15.2 sets out the 22 main economic activities that the Government has
recognised as fundamental to meeting the objectives of sustainable developmentacross the archipelago.
Figure 15.2
22 Main Economic Activi ties
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
69/94
60|P a g e
It was also stated that the National Port Master Plan was to be linked to the 6
corridors economic development plan, the links addressing the issues of national
connectivity, human resources development and logistics. This is shown
diagrammatically in Figure 15.3
Figure 15.3
MP3EI and National Port Master Plan (NPMP)
VISIONOFINDONESIA 2025AselfSufficient,Advanced,Just,
and ProsperousIndonesia
MP3EIAccelerateEconomic
Transformation
NATIONAL CONNECTIVITYECONOMICCORRIDOR
NationalHumanResources
CapabilityandScience
Technology
NationalTransportSystem
(SISTRANAS)
NATIONAL PORTMASTER
PLAN
NationalLogistic System
(SISLOGNAS)
OtherNationalMaster
Plan/BluePrints
IndividualPortMaster
Plan
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
70/94
61|P a g e
Sumatra, Corridor 1, is one of the largest islands of the world. It supports some 24%
of the total population of Indonesia and is subdivided into 10 provinces Aceh, N
Sumatra, W Sumatra, Riau, Jambi, S Sumatra, Bengkulu, Lampung, Riau Islands
and Bangka/Bilitung, with all but the latter two located on the main island. Each
province on the main island has a central urban centre, which is a focus for growth of
its particular province. Of special importance are the cities of Medan, the capital of NSumatra with a population of 4 million, Palembang, the capital of S Sumatra with a
population of 1.6 million, Lampung city for Lampung, Banda Aceh for Aceh province
and Padang (port of Teluk Bayar) for W Sumatra. Each of these also has a port of
significance crucial to support each of the provinces economies, and they are shown
on Figure 15.3. Within Sumatra, there are two Pelindo jurisdictions involved in these
ports, the ports to the north of the island falling under Pelindo I and the southern
ones under Pelindo II.
The island of Sumatra is rich in a wide range of minerals, coal (about 40% of known
national reserves), iron ore and rarer ores, and agricultural output, with CPO, in
particular, and rubber important export commodities. It is also a good source for oiland gas. The lack of good land infrastructure has greatly inhibited the development
of the economy with access to many of the valuable commodities seriously
constrained through lack of road infrastructure or poor quality of what exists. Rail
solutions are being considered for important large volume commodities, e g coal, but
have yet to be implemented, the difficulties mostly associated with land acquisition
issues and financing, as discussed earlier.
The plans for improving both the road and rail infrastructure over the ensuing 5 years
and beyond must be implemented, but it is going to be important that each of the
provinces takes a leadership role in ensuring that what is required in their respective
domains is duly and properly carried out.
The ports being targeted for upgrading in the short term on Sumatra are:
Belawan (Medan) for new or extended container terminal
Dumai (Riau) for common user petroleum products
Panjang (Lampung) for general cargo and bulk handling and
common user petroleum products
Palembang for general cargo or bulk handling
Padang (Teluk Bayar) for common user petroleum products
Jambi (Tanjung Emas) for common user petroleum products
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
71/94
62|P a g e
Source: IndII - Academic Paper to Support NPMP Decree, GP recompiled
Figure 15.4Corridor 1: Sumatra and Port Highlights
-
7/26/2019 Glendale Partner
72/94
63|P a g e
Java, Corridor 2 with 58% of the total population of 245 million, is the industrial
heartland of the country with 83% of industry based on the island, mostly in the
western part of West Java and Banten and the densely populated Grea