Indonesia’s Free Meal Programme Faces Criticism Over Processed Foods During Ramadan

Indonesia’s ambitious free meal programme for schoolchildren, a flagship initiative of President Prabowo Subianto, has come under fire as the government opts for ultra-processed foods during the fasting month of Ramadan. Launched in January 2025 to combat stunting and malnutrition, the programme initially offered balanced meals with rice, protein, fruits, and vegetables. However, recent adjustments to include long-shelf-life items like instant cereal, packaged bread, and milk have sparked criticism from nutritionists who warn of health risks and the potential to shape poor dietary habits among children.

The shift in menu, introduced to accommodate the challenges of food distribution during Ramadan, has raised questions about the programme’s commitment to nutrition. With a budget of Rp 71 trillion (approximately £3.5 billion) allocated for 2025—potentially rising to Rp 100 trillion—the initiative aims to reach 82.9 million children by year-end. Yet, as the government pushes for scale, concerns about quality and long-term impact loom large.

A Nutritional Setback During Ramadan

The free meal programme, rolled out nationwide in January, was heralded as a cornerstone of President Prabowo’s pledge to address stunting, which affects 21.5% of Indonesian children. The National Nutrition Agency (BGN), tasked with implementation, initially provided lunch boxes with wholesome options. Images from early inspections, such as one on 3 February 2025 at Jati 05 Pagi State Elementary School in East Jakarta, showed the President personally engaging with students as they received their meals.

However, with the onset of Ramadan earlier this month—a time when most of Indonesia’s predominantly Muslim population fasts from dawn to dusk—the BGN altered the menu to include ultra-processed foods. Items like instant cereal, packaged bread, and milk were chosen for their extended shelf life, a practical solution for distribution during a period when many students take meals home to break their fast in the evening.

This decision has drawn sharp criticism from experts. Jakarta-based nutritionist Dr Tan Shot Yen highlighted the irony of providing packaged milk, which she described as a “glucose-based drink containing only 30% milk.” She also pointed out that around 80% of Indonesians are lactose intolerant, making such choices potentially harmful. “Processed foods should not be an option when Indonesia has many non-perishable alternatives like otak-otak (fish cake) or lemper (steamed sticky rice with fillings),” Dr Tan argued, warning that exposing children to such foods could distort their understanding of nutrition and foster unhealthy habits.

Toto Sudargo, a nutritionist from Yogyakarta’s Gadjah Mada University, echoed these concerns, advocating for simple, safe food options that remain edible within 12 hours. Both experts stressed the need for a robust monitoring system to ensure the programme’s sustainability and nutritional integrity.

Government Response and Implementation Challenges

The BGN, led by Dadan Hindayana, has defended its approach by emphasising daily evaluations with 726 partnered kitchens nationwide. “We evaluate the programme every evening to make improvements in terms of menu and food distribution,” Dadan stated, as reported by kompas.com on 16 March 2025. However, he refrained from directly addressing the criticism over ultra-processed foods, leaving questions about whether the agency plans to revise its Ramadan menu.

Currently, over 1,000 kitchens are involved in the initiative, serving around 3 million children. The government’s target to reduce stunting to 5% by 2045—a century after Indonesia’s independence—underscores the programme’s importance. Yet, scaling up to reach nearly 83 million beneficiaries by the end of 2025 presents logistical hurdles, particularly in ensuring food safety and nutritional value across diverse regions, from urban Jakarta to remote parts of Kalimantan and Sulawesi.

Schools, meanwhile, appear to have little say in menu decisions. Untung Suripto, headmaster of Barunawati Elementary School in West Jakarta, noted that his institution closely coordinates with the BGN and its partner kitchen in Palmerah but must adhere to government directives. “We follow the government’s nutritionists,” he said, indicating that schools lack the authority to intervene in menu planning.

Mixed Reactions from Recipients

Despite the backlash from experts, feedback from students suggests a more positive reception on the ground. At Barunawati Elementary School, children expressed enthusiasm for the free meals, even during Ramadan when many are fasting and take the food home. “I’m fasting today. In the evening, I’ll drink the milk first—it’s my favourite—then I’ll eat the biscuits,” said Zea, a first-grader, on 11 March 2025. Her classmate Harun, aged six, shared similar excitement, particularly for the packaged milk and occasional fruits provided before Ramadan.

This contrast between expert concern and student satisfaction highlights a broader tension within the programme: while it addresses immediate hunger and garners goodwill among recipients, the long-term health implications of relying on processed foods could undermine its goals. Stunting, often linked to chronic malnutrition, requires not just access to food but access to quality nutrition—a balance the current Ramadan menu struggles to strike.

Broader Implications for Public Health and Policy

Indonesia’s free meal programme is not merely a nutritional intervention; it is a political statement of intent from President Prabowo Subianto, who took office in late 2024. His administration has framed the initiative as a transformative step towards human development, aligning with broader national goals like reducing poverty and improving education outcomes. The programme’s initial budget of Rp 71 trillion reflects significant political will, bolstered by austerity measures across ministries to potentially increase funding to Rp 100 trillion.

Yet, the controversy over processed foods raises questions about policy execution and oversight. Nutritionists argue that without clear guidelines and accountability, the programme risks becoming a missed opportunity. Dr Tan’s critique—that processed foods could shape children’s dietary preferences negatively—points to a deeper cultural impact. In a country as diverse as Indonesia, where traditional diets vary widely across its 17,000 islands, introducing ultra-processed options could erode local food practices and exacerbate health issues like obesity and diabetes, which are already on the rise in urban areas.

Moreover, the decision to prioritise shelf life over nutritional content during Ramadan reflects a pragmatic but shortsighted approach. The fasting month, a significant cultural and religious period for most Indonesians, demands sensitivity in policy implementation. Alternatives like non-perishable traditional foods, as suggested by experts, could better align with both cultural norms and health objectives.

Looking Ahead: Balancing Scale and Quality

As the free meal programme expands, the government faces the dual challenge of scaling operations while addressing quality concerns. The BGN’s commitment to daily evaluations is a step in the right direction, but without transparency on how feedback from nutritionists and schools is integrated, public trust may wane. Establishing a clear framework for menu planning—especially during culturally significant periods like Ramadan—could help mitigate criticism and ensure the programme’s alignment with its anti-stunting goals.

There is also a need for public education alongside food distribution. Teaching children and families about balanced diets, potentially through school-based initiatives, could counteract any negative perceptions fostered by processed foods. Partnerships with local communities to source traditional, non-perishable options might not only improve nutritional outcomes but also support regional economies—a win-win for policy and public sentiment.

For now, the programme’s success hinges on how the government responds to expert input. If concerns about ultra-processed foods are ignored, the initiative risks becoming a cautionary tale of ambition outpacing execution. Conversely, adapting to feedback could position it as a model for large-scale nutritional interventions in developing nations.

President Prabowo’s personal investment in the programme, evident from his school visits and budget expansions, suggests a willingness to prioritise it. Whether this translates into meaningful reforms remains to be seen. As Indonesia navigates these early challenges, the free meal initiative stands as a test of the administration’s ability to blend political promises with practical, sustainable outcomes for its youngest citizens.