Policy analysis of the new energy and renewable energy bill through the environmental ethics paradigm
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61511/enjust.v2i2.2025.4210Keywords:
anthropocentrism, new and renewable energy, environmental ethics, EBET billAbstract
Background: The New Energy and Renewable Energy (EBET) Bill has been under discussion since 2019, but to date, the bill has yet to reach a clear conclusion in the legislative process. The bill aims to support efforts to reduce emissions from the energy sector, the largest contributor to emissions in Indonesia. However, little research has examined the bill from the perspective of environmental ethics. This study aims to determine the environmental ethics paradigms embedded in the EBET Bill and to assess whether its provisions reflect anthropocentric, biocentric, or ecocentric values. Methods: This study employed a qualitative document analysis of the New Energy and Renewable Energy (EBET) Bill and relevant literature. Content analysis was used to identify and classify provisions according to the environmental ethics paradigms of anthropocentrism, biocentrism, and ecocentrism. Findings: The analysis identifies six provisions in the bill that are oriented towards anthropocentrism. These include the classification of nuclear energy and general hydrogen as part of new energy, the recognition of non-legal business entities in the energy sector, the justice principle emphasizing human interests, the accommodation of carbon capture and storage technologies (CCS/CCUS), and other provisions that prioritize economic growth and human welfare over the intrinsic value of ecosystems. Conclusion: This study suggests that future energy legislation should incorporate stronger ecocentric principles to ensure that energy transition policies promote not only emission reduction and economic development but also long-term ecological sustainability. Novelty/Originality of this article: This study offers an environmental ethics perspective on the EBET Bill by identifying six provisions that reflect an anthropocentric orientation and examining their implications for the recognition of the intrinsic value of ecosystems in Indonesia’s energy transition policy.
References
Badan Nasional Penanggulangan Bencana. (2025). Geoportal data bencana Indonesia. Retrieved August 9, 2025, from https://gis.bnpb.go.id/
Boslaugh, S. E. (n.d.-a). Anthropocentrism. In Encyclopaedia Britannica. Retrieved September 14, 2025, from https://www.britannica.com/topic/anthropocentrism
Boslaugh, S. E. (n.d.-b). Biocentrism. In Encyclopaedia Britannica. Retrieved September 14, 2025, from https://www.britannica.com/topic/biocentrism
Brennan, A., & Lo, Y.-S. (2002). Environmental ethics. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Retrieved September 14, 2025, from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-environmental/
Climate Action Tracker. (2025). Indonesia. Retrieved October 5, 2026, from https://climateactiontracker.org/countries/indonesia/2025-12-08/
Creswell, J. W. (1994). Research design: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Sage Publications.
Deng, D., Zhang, L., Dong, M., Samuel, R. E., Ofori-Boadu, A., & Lamssali, M. (2020). Radioactive waste: A review. Water Environment Research, 92(10), 1818–1825. https://doi.org/10.1002/wer.1442
Gubrium, J. F., & Holstein, J. A. (1992). Qualitative methods. In E. F. Borgatta & M. L. Borgatta (Eds.), Encyclopedia of sociology (Vol. 3). Macmillan.
Jenkins, K., McCauley, D., Heffron, R., Stephan, H., & Rehner, R. (2016). Energy justice: A conceptual review. Energy Research & Social Science, 11, 174–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2015.10.004
Julhijah, R., M, M., Alfurqan, I., Tekayadi, S. K., & Rizal, P. (2024). Public trust doctrine regulation in the draft law on new and renewable energy. Unizar Law Review, 7(2), 163–175. https://doi.org/10.36679/ULR.V7I2.77
Kementerian Lingkungan Hidup dan Kehutanan. (2024). Laporan inventarisasi gas rumah kaca dan monitoring, pelaporan, verifikasi. https://kemenlh.go.id/dashboard/public/storage/reports/XmPwBrjHiWx6I9Lw6MBvXE3psmGrS3DwAq9PY8uL.pdf
Keraf, A. S. (2010). Etika lingkungan hidup. Kompas.
Keraf, A. S. (2014). Filsafat lingkungan hidup: Alam sebagai sebuah sistem kehidupan bersama Fritjof Capra. Kanisius.
Kopnina, H., Washington, H., Taylor, B., & Piccolo, J. J. (2018). Anthropocentrism: More than just a misunderstood problem. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 31(1), 109–127. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-018-9711-1
Maghfiroh, I. S., Budi, S., & Wardani, E. (2025). Conflict of interest in the ratification of the draft law on new and renewable energy (RUU BET) for the 2024 period. JIIP: Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu Pendidikan, 8(1), 588–598. https://doi.org/10.54371/JIIP.V8I1.6652
McKibbin, B. (2007). Deep economy: The wealth of communities and the durable future. Times Books/Henry Holt and Company.
Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources. (2023). Miliki potensi EBT 3.686 GW, Sekjen Rida: Modal utama jalankan transisi energi Indonesia. Retrieved October 7, 2026, from https://www.esdm.go.id/id/media-center/arsip-berita/miliki-potensi-ebt-3686-gw-sekjen-rida-modal-utama-jalankan-transisi-energi-indonesia
Munir, M. I. A. (2023). Environmental ethics paradigm patterns: Anthropocentrism, biocentrism, and ecocentrism. Yaqzhan: Jurnal Analisis Filsafat, Agama dan Kemanusiaan, 9(1), 19–35. https://doi.org/10.24235/JY.V9I1.10000
Naess, A. (1973). The shallow and the deep, long-range ecology movement: A summary. Inquiry, 16(1–4), 95–100. https://doi.org/10.1080/00201747308601682
Priyono, B. B., Purwantara, S., & Widyastuti, W. (2025). Biocentrism and ecocentrism: Alternative environmental philosophical views on the crisis of nature in the era of anthropocentrism. Jurnal Filsafat Indonesia, 8(2), 280–290. https://doi.org/10.23887/JFI.V8I2.88217
Saputra, H. Y., Syah, N., & Azhar, A. (2025). Application of environmental ethics principles to sustainable development policies: A literature review. RIGGS: Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Digital Business, 4(3), 2972–2979. https://doi.org/10.31004/riggs.v4i3.2372
Sarah, S., & Hambali, R. Y. A. (2023). Ekofilosofi “deep ecology”: Pandangan ekosentrisme terhadap etika deep ecology. Gunung Djati Conference Series, 19, 754–761. https://doi.org/10.15575/gdcs.v19i.1557
Schlosberg, D. (2007). Defining environmental justice: Theories, movements, and nature. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199286294.001.0001
Somantri, G. R. (2005). Memahami metode kualitatif. Makara Human Behavior Studies in Asia, 9(2), 57–65. https://doi.org/10.7454/mssh.v9i2.122
Sovacool, B. K., & Dworkin, M. H. (2015). Energy justice: Conceptual insights and practical applications. Applied Energy, 142, 435–444. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.01.002
Sugar, F. R., & Darling, D. Z. (2025). Anthropocentrism and the environmental crisis in the perspective of the encyclical Laudato Si’. CARAKA: Jurnal Teologi Biblika dan Praktika, 6(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.46348/CAR.V6I1.307
Taylor, P. W. (1986). Respect for nature: A theory of environmental ethics. Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt7sk1j
White, L., Jr. (1967). The historical roots of our ecologic crisis. Science, 155(3767), 1203–1207. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.155.3767.1203
Published
Issue
Section
Citation Check
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Muhammad Zulkifli
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
