When (Not) Nutritious (Not) Free Meals
The Free Nutritious Meals Program (MBG) has been touted as a flagship program of the Prabowo-Gibran administration. The government, through Bappenas, has identified 4 main objectives for MBG. These include meeting the nutritional needs of vulnerable groups. The program is also intended to improve the quality of education. MBG is expected to stimulate local economies. The program is also claimed to be capable of creating jobs.
President Prabowo Subianto has repeatedly said that MBG provides nutritious meals at no cost. The program is believed to be able to improve children’s nutrition. MBG is also said to be capable of generating economic activity for thousands of farmers, fishers, and small business owners. This narrative fosters hope that the state is tangibly present in people’s everyday lives.
However, various criticisms have emerged during implementation. The food supply chain mechanisms are considered unclear. The quality of service providers remains in question. Oversight on the ground is also seen as weak. This has divided public opinion on MBG.
Some members of the public see MBG as reflecting populist policymaking. The program is considered to offer short-term benefits. At the same time, the country’s fiscal sustainability is seen as receiving insufficient attention. These doubts are not without reason. Indonesia’s history of social assistance has often been marred by irregularities. Problems with beneficiary targeting have also recurred. Political manipulation has further reinforced public distrust.
On the other hand, support for MBG is also strong. For many low-income families, the most important thing is that their children can eat. Access to free nutritious food is seen as tangible assistance. The program eases families’ daily expenses. Children who previously arrived at school hungry are considered more able to learn. For supporters, MBG has become a symbol of the state’s presence in ensuring citizens’ basic rights.
The CELIOS study places MBG between social urgency and the challenges of policy governance. The findings show that 79% of respondents are aware of conflicts of interest in the direct appointment of vendors. A total of 73% of parents prefer direct cash assistance to MBG. Some 65% of respondents said they still spend additional money on food to replace MBG meals.
This report invites the public to take a more comprehensive view of MBG. The program cannot be judged solely by its good intentions and popularity. MBG requires transparent policy design. Implementation accountability must be strengthened. Without improvements to governance, the goals of meeting nutritional needs and achieving social justice risk not being met sustainably.
Study: One Year of (Not) Nutritious (Not) Free Meals_2025_CELIOS_ Download
Deck_One Year of (Not) Nutritious (Not) Free Meals Evaluation_2025 Download
CELIOS_MBG Report_English Version Download