Consolidated and compiled By Happy Tarumadevyanto | Independent Consultant | Environmental Asia | happy.devyanto@environmental.asia
The struggles faced by voluntary certification systems, like the Indonesian Ecolabeling Institute (LEI), offer vital lessons on why consistent implementation is so critical. Despite significant initial support from both domestic and international sources, in terms of resources, expertise, and good intentions, LEI’s impact was ultimately “less potent” due to a lack of consistent backing from its advocates and implementers.
The Consistency Challenge in Voluntary Systems
Several key areas of consistency often trip up voluntary certification systems, especially in developing nations:
- Standard Enforcement: A major hurdle is ensuring that ecolabel standards are applied and monitored uniformly in the field. Inconsistencies can arise from varying interpretations by auditors or even pressures that prevent full enforcement. This undermines the certification’s credibility, making it less valuable to consumers and stakeholders who expect the label to reflect best practices truly.
- Actor Commitment: Even with outreach, not all businesses (like forest owners or processing companies) fully grasp or commit to the sustainability principles required by ecolabels. Some might see certification as just a cost or obstacle, rather than a worthwhile, long-term investment. Without a consistent internal commitment from top management to on-the-ground operations, implementation will fall short.
- Market and Consumer Support: Voluntary certifications depend heavily on market demand. If consumers and buyers (especially in export markets) don’t consistently choose certified products, producers lose the incentive to maintain their certification. Fluctuating demand, combined with potential price premiums for certified goods, can make businesses hesitant to invest in sustainable practices that require ongoing consistency.
- Institutional Governance: The long-term viability of any certification body hinges on consistent leadership, strategy, and internal operations. Shifts in leadership, financial strains, or a lack of long-term vision can destabilize the organization. Furthermore, issues like corruption or conflicts of interest can erode consistency in decision-making.
- Communication and Advocacy: For an ecolabel to truly “take hold,” the public and market need to understand what it means, its importance, and its benefits. If messaging is inconsistent or advocacy efforts aren’t sustained, public awareness will remain low, preventing the label from gaining traction.
The LEI case clearly shows that initial financial and technical support simply isn’t enough. Lasting success relies on fostering a culture of consistency across the entire certification ecosystem—from how standards are set and audits are conducted, to the commitment of businesses, market support, and the internal governance of the certifying body itself. Without this overarching consistency, even the most innovative initiatives will struggle to deliver meaningful and sustainable impact.
It’s disheartening to see the governance of organizations in Indonesia constantly fluctuate, never seeming to find stable ground. Why is this the case?
It’s truly frustrating to witness the inconsistent nature of organizational governance in Indonesia, seemingly unable to establish lasting stability. Why does this recurring pattern emerge?
A core issue often stems from a lack of sustained commitment and consistent execution. While many organizations initially draft sound governance systems with good intentions, these principles frequently erode when confronted by real-world pressures. Factors like leadership changes, economic strain, or the allure of shortcuts can easily undermine even the most robust plans.
Organizational and individual culture also plays a significant role. If an internal culture prioritizes personal loyalty over meritocracy, or if integrity and transparency aren’t consistently upheld as fundamental values, the governance framework will inevitably weaken. New leadership can swiftly alter priorities, making previous governance reforms ineffective.
Moreover, inconsistent enforcement of laws and regulations exacerbates the problem. Without reliable consequences for governance breaches, organizations have little motivation to uphold high standards. Consequently, many governance improvement initiatives end up being temporary projects rather than establishing solid, enduring foundations. This is a complex challenge, demanding a collective and sustained commitment from all involved parties.
