The document discusses the revitalization of Indonesia's shipbuilding industry and its role in maritime trade, highlighting improvements and challenges faced by major ports such as Tanjung Priok and Bitung. It emphasizes the need for better infrastructure, coordination among government bodies, and modernization to enhance efficiency in ports and facilitate international shipping. Additionally, it presents data on corn production and supply-demand balance across major Indonesian islands.

1. REGIONAL PORTS INTERREGIONAL TRADE
FLOWS OF (GRAIN) PRODUCTION OF
INDONESIA
Nuzul Achjar
Indonesian Maritime Center (IMC) and Department of Economics
and Business, University of Indonesia
Grain Forum and Maritime Days in Odessa, May 25-28, 2016

2.  As an archipelagic country, the existence of shipbuilding industry in
Indonesia is expected to play an important role in the development of
maritime-based economy.
 National shipbuilding industries have been operating since some years ago.
At the first stage, its development faced some constraints, among others
the limitation of financial and technological supports  Production did not
achieve economies of scale, the price of the ships were not competitive for
domestic and international market  Users prefered to import used ships.
 Today, there are some indications of the revitalization of shipbuilding.
INDONESIA IS AN ARCHIPELAGIC COUNTRY

3. • The declaration of Maritime Fulcrum (Maritime xis) under the
government of President Joko Widodo signed positive signals
of the revitalization of national shipping industry.
• In mid May 2016, Indonesia through PT PAL has been
successful to export military vessel of Strategic Sealift Vessel
(SSV) for the first time.
• The vessel was ordered by the Ministry of Defense of the
Philippines. This provides greater confidence that Indonesia
will be able to compete to produce medium size vessels
internationally in terms of quality and delivery
REVITALIZATION OF SHIPBUILDING INDUSTRY

4. Source: LPEM-FEBUI (2016) , ERIA (2016)
EXPORT AND IMPORT VALUE THROUGH MAJOR PORTS OF INDONESIA

5. The Role of Sea Transportation in Export and Export of Indonesia
Source: ERIA, 2016

6. • The most dominant port in Indonesia, since more than 70% of imports are
handled in this port.
• Many reforms related to soft and hard infrastructures have been conducted
in Tanjung Priok.
• There are issues of overcapacity of land transport. Roads connecting the
port tear out easily due to high frequency of usage / overcapacity. No
specific roads for cargo trucks. Constructing train transport is considered
inefficient (in already congested area).
• 24-hour services are only for documents handling (i.e. in customs).
Port of TanjungPriok

7. • Utilization is still low given the scale and improvement plan of this port.
Bitungis designated as hub, included in ASEAN maritime connectivity plan.
• Competition between Bitungand other ports especially in eastern areas (i.e.
Makassar and Balikpapan).
• International trade operation/handling is basically routed from and to
TanjungPriok/TanjungPerak. Issues on export of food/agricultural products.
• Issues in attracting and maintaining international shipping line to include
Bitungroute.
• No industrial zone in the mainland areas. Bitungis considered more suitable
for transshipment hub.
• Road capacity from Bitung to Manado is still inadequate, although there is
plan to develop toll and building new roads connecting the port.
Port of Bitung

8. • Port operation: Container terminals and customs office operate 24/7 in all
major ports.
• Supporting facilities have not implemented 24/7 operation (warehouse,
facilities outside terminal)
• Some ports suffer from shallow berth depth (Makassar & Belawan)
(<12m).
• Most ports have implemented one-stop service for paperworks, IT- based
service, and electronic exchange of data. Except: Makassar
• Issues in dwelling time: mostly from pre-customs clearance
• Importers use terminal yard for storage to reduce cost implementing
progressive tariff of 400%-600%
PORT PERFORMANCE AND UTILIZATION

9. • Administrative process in Indonesian seaborne trade contributes a
significant portion in inefficiency.
• There are about 18 government bodies and agencies related to the
seaborne export / import activities, some of which have overlapping
authorities with each other.
• The average benefit of reducing document handling process by one
day ranges between142.2 – 1218.7 thousand Rupiah (10.8–
90.3US$) per TEU.
• The estimate significantly increases for importing firms’ benefit,
ranging between 725.2–3464.6 thousand Rupiah (53.7–256.6US$)
per TEU.
BENEFIT FROM PORT IMPROVEMENT

10. • Planning on maritime connectivity in Indonesia is still in shape. No clear emphasis
on ASEAN maritime connectivity. Government's short-term objectives tend to focus
on handling domestic (logistics) issues.
• Regulatory coherency problems are latent, found at central government level and
on coordination between central and sub-national govs. Central government
coordination has not been optimal (i.e. on the issue of dwelling time). Lack of
coordination between central and sub-national govs especially on road
infrastructure and cases of industrial zone development.
• Efficiency and modernization still have issues. Reform on soft infrastructure is
fragmented; issue of no 24-hour operation. Port modernization is limited to handling
and yard expansion. Mixed used of ports in some regions - ports handle cargo as
well as passenger vessels, pomplaints from users as improvement in port
infrastructure translates to high handling costs.
• Capacity of stakeholders, since many reforms not only need cooperation of
governments but also other stakeholders (shipping line, logistic firms, etc.). Slow
adoption of IT modernization.
SOME ISSUES

11. • The existence of development of other ports. Development of Kuala
Tanjung is still in initial phase, and similar to Bitung, it is planned
to be the main hub in western area of Indonesia.
• There is also an issue of private port (the case of INALUM), in which its
operation is viewed in some extent as disrupting the route and transport
from existing port of Belawan.
• In Belawan Port, most ships are feeders to Tanjung Pelepas or Port
Klang in Malaysia. But in general cargo, there are more flexible routes
(i.e. route to Thailand).
Ports of Belawan and Kuala Tanjung

12. • The second main port after Tanjung Priok. There are only 2
ports in Indonesia (Tanjung Priok and Tanjung Perak) listed in
100 Top Container International.
• There has been improvement on soft infrastructure. There is
already 24-hour operation service.
• Utilization is high, especially on domestic routes. There are 55
domestic routes from Port of Tanjung Perak (higher number of
routes in comparison with Tanjung Priok).
Ports of Tanjung Perak

13. • On port utilization, the issue is on operational costs that are
viewed as quite expensive.
• Limitation in port improvement as depth is limited (<12 m) and
location in the city of Makassar.
• Some initiatives to improve soft infrastructure. INAPORTNET
is expected to operate starting from October 1, 2015.
Ports of Makassar

14. CONDITION OF REGIONAL MAJOR PORTS

15. • Onaverage,the dwelling time is much less efficient than
Malaysian international ports (2-3 days) and much more
inferior compared to Singapore’s or HongKong’s (less than 1
day).
• Complicated and disorganized administration process is one
of many aspects that cause longer dwelling time, particularly in
pre-clearance process.
• The government as formulated some initiatives to shorten and
simplify document-handling process in order to reduce the
dwelling time up to 20percent.
QUALITY OF SERVICE (1)

16. QUALITY OF SERVICE (2)
Source: Customs (2015)
Note: BOR and YOR for Surabaya are for non-container and container
terminals, respectively

17. Source: ERIA, 2016
46 PORTS UNDER ASEAN TRANSPORT STRATEGIC PLAN (ATSP) 2015-2025

18. 2011 2015 2020
MAIN PORTS 33 39 49
FEEDER PORTS
- Regional 249 235 225
- Local 741 726 704
COLLECTOR PORTS 217 240 262
TOTAL 1240 1240 1240
LOCATION OF MAIN AND FEEDER POTS OF INDONESIA

19. YEAR PLANTING AREA (Ha) HARVEST AREA (Ha)
PRODUCTIVITY
(TON/Ha)
PRODUKSI (Ton)
2015 4,244,976 4,019,360 5.05 20,313,731
2016 4,372,238 4,153,627 5.15 21,353,794
2017 4,470,435 4,246,914 5.27 22,360,000
2018 4,599,208 4,369,248 5.38 23,484,708
2019 4,744,526 4,507,299 5.48 24,700,000
PROJECTION OF CORN PRODUCTION 2015-2019
Soource: Ministry of Agriculture

20. 4.3
2.5
3.5
4.5
2.4
4.4
1.8
2.8
2 2
3
5
CATEGORY 1 CATEGORY 2 CATEGORY 3 CATEGORY 4
Chart Title
Series 1 Series 2 Series 3

21. No. YEAR
HARVEST AREA PRODUCTIVITY PRODUCTION
Ha
CHANGES 00KG/
HA
CHANGES
TON
CHANGES
Ha % % Ton %
1 2004 3,356,914 33.44 11,225,243
2 2005 3,625,987 269,073 8.02 34.54 1.10 3.29 12,523,894 1,298,651 11.57
3 2006 3,345,805 (280,182) (7.73) 34.70 0.16 0.46 11,609,463 (914,431) (7.30)
4 2007 3,630,324 284,519 8.50 36.60 1.90 5.48 13,287,527 1,678,064 14.45
5 2008 4,001,724 371,400 10.23 40.78 4.18 11.41 16,318,077 3,030,550 22.81
6 2009 4,160,659 158,935 3.97 42.37 1.59 3.91 17,629,748 1,311,671 8.04
AV IN 5 YR (05-09) 3,752,900 160,749 4.60 37.80 1.79 4.91 14,273,742 1,280,901 9.91
7 2010 4,131,676 (28,983) (0.70) 44.36 1.99 4.69 18,327,636 697,888 3.96
8 2011 3,864,692 (266,984) (6.46) 45.65 1.29 2.92 17,643,250 (684,386) (3.73)
9 2012 3,957,595 92,903 2.40 48.99 3.33 7.30 19,387,022 1,743,772 9.88
10 2013 3,821,504 (136,091) (3.44) 48.44 (0.55) (1.11) 18,511,853 (875,169) (4.51)
11 2014 3,838,015 16,511 0.43 49.59 1.15 2.37 19,032,677 520,824 2.81
AV IN 5 YR (10-14) 3,922,696 (64,529) (1.55) 47.41 1.44 3.23 18,580,488 280,586 1.68
AV IN 10 YR (05-14) 3,837,798 48,110 1.52 42.60 1.61 4.07 16,427,115 780,743 5.80
HARVEST AREA, PRODUCTION AND PRODUCTIVITY OF CORN

22. 2014 2015
A. PRODUCTION (DRY GRAIN) 19,032,677 20,313,729
B. DEMAND 19,974,076 20,291,618
- Seed (20 kg per ha) 81,860 104,900
- Direct Consumption 426,421 398,520
- Feed for livestock 13,769,816 14,750,393
- Poultry 7,649,045 8,250,000
- Local Husbandry 6,120,771 6,500,393
- Other food & non-food Ind 3,768,470 4,022,118
- Other losses 851,634 1,015,686
c. DEFICIT (941,399) 22,111
Number of Population 252,164,800 256,461,700
Av consumption per kapita 1.65 1.56
BALANCE OF SUPPLY AND DEMAND OF CORN

23. MAJOR ISLANDS 2014* 2015** GAP
1. SUMATERA 4,051,006 4,817,939 766,933
2. JAVA 10,151,190 9,911,933 (239,957)
3. BALI AND NUSA 1,465,834 1,627,655 161,821
4. KALIMANTAN 285,147 381,173 96,026
5. SULAWESI 3,127,178 3,207,045 79,867
6. MAL & PAPUA 46,354
54,255
7,901
INDONESIA 19,127,409 20,000,000 872,591
MAJOR ISLANDS 2014* 2015**
1. SUMATERA 21.2 24.1
2. JAVA 53.1 49.6
3. BALI AND NUSA 7.7 8.1
4. KALIMANTAN 1.5 1.9
5. SULAWESI 16.3 16.0
6. MALUKU & PAPUA 0.2 0.3
INDONESIA 100 100
PRODUCTION OF CORN
BY MAJOR ISLANDS