This month in Jakarta, I had the opportunity to moderate three distinct but deeply interconnected panels on ESG, sustainability, and strategic materials across two flagship industry events: the ESG Forum hosted by APNI and PERHAPI (with the backing of BAPPENAS and BKPM), and the SMM Indonesia Critical Minerals Conference.

Indonesia’s position as a cornerstone of the global energy transition is now unmistakable. But what remains contested and compelling is how the country balances rapid industrialisation with the demand for responsible, transparent, and inclusive value chains. Across the panels I moderated, one thread was constant: Indonesia is no longer a passive rule-taker; it is actively navigating the standards-setting landscape, sometimes in tension, sometimes in lockstep, with global expectations.

1. From Compliance to Capital: ESG as Market Leverage

At the ESG Forum’s session on “The Benefit of ESG Implementation in Leveraging Market Value,” we explored how ESG is evolving from a compliance burden into a commercial imperative. The discussion underscored a sobering but empowering message: access to capital, customers, and long-term buyers is now filtered through the ESG lens, not just in Europe or the U.S., but increasingly in Asia too.

Speakers highlighted the need for operational ESG metrics that translate into tangible valuation premiums whether in the form of green bonds, offtake terms, or access to export markets. The challenge is not just doing ESG work it’s being able to communicate and verify it in a language that buyers and investors trust. Traceability, third-party verification, and community benefit-sharing came up as non-negotiables for future growth.

ESG is no longer something you do for image, it’s how you unlock markets.

2. Aligning Global Demands with Indonesian Realities

The first panel I moderated at the SMM Critical Minerals Conference, “ESG Standards and Market Expectations”, dug deeper into the friction and promise of aligning global ESG criteria with local operating realities. There’s an urgent need to bridge what one panelist called the “metrics mismatch”: what Indonesia considers responsible development (e.g. job creation, local ownership, downstreaming) often differs from what international actors expect (e.g. carbon accounting, environmental disclosures, grievance mechanisms).

Conversations with Tubagus Nugraha (National Economic Council), Jim Lennon (Macquarie Capital), Mark Mistry (Nickel Institute), and Benjamin Katz (OECD) brought refreshing honesty and clarity. Panelists agreed that while international frameworks like the OECD Guidelines or the EU’s Battery Regulation provide a structure, Indonesia must assert its own ESG priorities, and be present at the table where definitions are shaped, not just applied.

We need to speak ESG in a way the world hears, but without losing our voice.