Dynamics of Change in Partnership Governance between PT Freeport Indonesia and Customary Institutions LEMASA–LEMASKO
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.46799/adv.v4i10.744Keywords:
Partnership Governance, Accountability, Institutional Capacity, Knowledge Management, TransparencyAbstract
Sustainable mining operations depend on stakeholder trust, institutional legitimacy, and effective partnership governance. At PT Freeport Indonesia (PTFI), these factors are closely associated with transparency and accountability in partnerships with LEMASA and LEMASKO, customary institutions representing the Amungme and Kamoro Indigenous communities, respectively. This study aimed to examine changes in partnership governance involving these institutions and propose strategies to improve partnership effectiveness. A qualitative case study design was employed to investigate governance dynamics within the PTFI–LEMASA–LEMASKO partnership. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with representatives of PTFI, LEMASA, LEMASKO, and the Mimika Regency Government, supplemented by document analysis and field observations. The data were analyzed thematically across three dimensions: institutional capacity, knowledge management, and stakeholder misalignment. The findings revealed that inconsistencies in partnership implementation were associated with institutional capacity constraints, weak accountability mechanisms, unclear organizational roles and responsibilities, and inadequate knowledge management practices. Furthermore, disparities in transparency and accountability expectations between PTFI and the customary institutions contributed to governance challenges. Based on these findings, the study proposed an Integrated Governance and Management Improvement Model to strengthen institutional capacity, clarify stakeholder responsibilities, improve knowledge-sharing mechanisms, and promote more transparent and accountable partnership governance.
References
Affairs, C. (2020). PTFI community affairs strategic social investment framework.
Aliberti, S., Dela Cruz, C. S., Amati, F., Sotgiu, G., & Restrepo, M. I. (2021). Community-acquired pneumonia. The Lancet, 398(10303), 906–919.
Anggraini, S. (2024). The Analysis of Dangerous Face-Cream Cosmetic Product Threats and Preventive Strategies. Security Intelligence Terrorism Journal (SITJ). https://doi.org/10.70710/sitj.v1i2.18
Ansell, C., & Gash, A. (2008). Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(4), 543–571. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mum032
Argote, L., & Ingram, P. (2000). Knowledge transfer: A basis for competitive advantage in firms. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82(1), 150–169. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.2000.2893
Ballard, C., & Banks, G. (2003). Resource wars: The anthropology of mining. Annual Review of Anthropology, 32, 287–313. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.anthro.32.061002.093116
Battilana, J., & Dorado, S. (2010). Building sustainable hybrid organizations: The case of commercial microfinance organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 53(6), 1419–1440. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.57318391
Bebbington, A, Bebbington, H., D, Bury, J, Lingan, J, Muñoz, J. P., & Scurrah, M. (2008). Mining and social movements: Struggles over livelihood and rural territorial development in the Andes. World Development, 36(12), 2888–2905. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2007.11.016
Bovens, M. (2007). Analysing and assessing accountability: A conceptual framework. European Law Journal, 13(4), 447–468. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0386.2007.00378.x
Ebrahim, A. (2003). Accountability in practice: Mechanisms for NGOs. World Development, 31(5), 813–829. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-750X(03)00014-7
Elkington, J. (1997). Cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st century business. Capstone Publishing.
Emerson, K, Nabatchi, T., & Balogh, S. (2011). An integrative framework for collaborative governance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 22(1), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mur011
Huang, X., & Liu, Y. (2024). Integrated symbiotic governance framework in stakeholder partnership. Journal of Governance and Regulation, 13(2), 45–61. https://doi.org/10.22495/jgrv13i2art4
(IFC), I. F. C. (2012). Performance standards on environmental and social sustainability. https://www.ifc.org/wps/wcm/connect/Topics_Ext_Content/IFC_External_Corporate_Site/Sustainability-At-IFC/Policies-Standards/Performance-Standards
Indonesia, P. T. F. (2024). Sustainability report 2024.
Indonesia, R. (2022). Undang-Undang Nomor 1 Tahun 2022 tentang Hubungan Keuangan antara Pemerintah Pusat dan Pemerintahan Daerah [Law No.
Kantar. (2025). PTFI corporate reputation study: Public perception toward PT Freeport Indonesia, 2024 survey results.
Keputusan Menteri Energi Dan Sumber Daya Mineral Republik Indonesia Nomor 1824 K/30/MEM/2018 Tentang Pedoman Pelaksanaan Pengembangan Dan Pemberdayaan Masyarakat (2018).
LPEM, F. E. B. U. I. (2024). Economic value-added impact of PTFI’s mining activities.
Mark, C. (2024). Copper Mark assurance framework and performance standards.
Moffat, K., & Zhang, A. (2014). The paths to social licence to operate: An integrative model explaining community acceptance of mining. Resources Policy, 39, 61–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2013.11.003
Nations, U. (2011). Guiding principles on business and human rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” framework. https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/publications/guidingprinciplesbusinesshr_en.pdf
Nations, U. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development. https://sdgs.un.org/2030agenda
Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation.
Nonaka, I., & von Krogh, G. (2009). Tacit knowledge and knowledge conversion: Controversy and advancement in organizational knowledge creation theory. Organization Science, 20(3), 635–652. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1080.0412
Owen, J. R., & Kemp, D. (2013). Social licence and mining: A critical perspective. Resources Policy, 38(1), 29–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2012.06.016
Pache, A.-C., & Santos, F. (2013). Inside the hybrid organization: Selective coupling as a response to competing institutional logics. Academy of Management Journal, 56(4), 972–1001. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.0405
Pera, T., H, Y., Irvan, M, Damarjanti, L., & Yudha, S. W. (2024). Praktik tata kelola CSR.
Prno, J., & Slocombe, D. S. (2012). Exploring the origins of “social license to operate” in the mining sector: Perspectives from governance and sustainability theories. Resources Policy, 37(3), 346–357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2012.04.002
Radyati, M. R. N. (2024). Visualizing CSR & ESG: A practical guide for sustainability practitioners (1st ed.).
Rorimpandey, S. S. (2024). Implementation of YPMAK transparency and accountability as one of PTFI main social investment partner and its effect on enhancing company reputation on social responsibility aspect.
Sokoy, F. (2026). Social conflict between the Amungme and Kamoro traditional tribe and Freeport Indonesia company on environmental impact. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 13, 102432. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2025.102432
Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1995.9508080331
Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945 (1945).
Welker, M. A. (2009). ‘Corporate security begins in the community’: Mining, the corporate social responsibility industry, and environmental advocacy in Indonesia. Cultural Anthropology, 24(1), 142–179. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1548-1360.2009.00029.x
