MBG and the narrative of education budget cuts

Jakarta — The Free Nutritious Meal (MBG) programme has recently become the subject of renewed debate, with critics claiming its funding “cuts education budgets”.

This accusation may sound emotionally compelling, but examination of the state budget documents and their structure tells a markedly different story.

Starting with the most fundamental facts: education budgets have not decreased; they have actually increased from Rp665 trillion in 2024 to Rp724.3 trillion in 2025. These budgets are planned to reach Rp757.8 trillion in 2026.

This means that during the 2024-2026 period, education budgets are growing at an average rate of approximately 6.8 per cent per year.

If MBG truly cut education spending, logically total education budgets should shrink. Instead, the opposite is occurring: education budgets are expanding.

Beyond this, teacher welfare budgets have also increased significantly. Total teacher welfare spending has risen from Rp175.7 trillion (2024) to Rp211.4 trillion (2026). Civil service salaries are rising, civil service allowances are increasing, and non-civil service allowances are also going up. Growth is nearly 10 per cent annually, faster than total education budget growth. This is without mentioning the construction of hundreds of Community Schools and the distribution of thousands of smart boards to schools across remote areas.

These figures are crucial because they refute the fundamental assumption that MBG sacrifices teachers or schools.

Structurally, within the 2026 state budget of Rp757.8 trillion for education, the largest portion remains educator salaries and personnel at approximately Rp274.7 trillion (36.2 per cent). MBG accounts for approximately Rp223.6 trillion (29.5 per cent). Education support, including school operational grants (BOS), education scholarships (LPDP), and endowment funds, remains at Rp161.6 trillion (21.3 per cent). Therefore, fiscally, there is no reduction in core education functions.

Human capital intervention

In public policy theory, MBG can be categorised as a human capital intervention policy.

Gary Becker’s “Human Capital” theory emphasises that investment in health and education has long-term impacts on economic productivity. Nutrition is not merely a welfare issue; it is the foundation of cognitive capacity.

Within modern public policy frameworks, governments do not only construct school buildings. Governments also ensure that children attending those schools receive adequate nutritional intake to learn optimally.

Placing MBG within education budgets is not financial manipulation. It is consistent with outcome-based policy approaches. MBG success can be measured through education indicators: student attendance, learning concentration, stunting reduction, and learning outcome quality.

This is not short-term consumption. This is human capital investment. Investment in the future.