MBG: Maintaining Public Trust
The National Nutrition Agency (BGN) continues to take proactive steps through a series of surprise inspections (sidak) on nutrition fulfilment service units (SPPG) in various regions. This initiative is believed to ensure the continuity and quality of the free nutritious meals (MBG) programme. The step is not a reaction to various negative opinions about the implementation of the MBG programme, but rather intended to affirm the presence of the state.
Indeed, in recent months, the MBG policy has become one of the most spotlighted programmes in Indonesia’s public policy landscape. However, amid technical debates and fiscal concerns, one prominent fact has emerged: the level of public satisfaction with MBG is relatively high. Several survey institutions show high support figures for what is described as the world’s most comprehensive free school lunch programme.
For instance, the Indikator Politik Indonesia survey release indicates that 72.8% of respondents are satisfied with one of President Prabowo Subianto’s flagship government programmes. The survey, involving 1,220 people and conducted from 15 to 21 January 2026, used a simple random sampling method with a margin of error of approximately 2.9% at a 95% confidence level.
Indeed, this figure is not as high as the level of public support at the initial launch of MBG. Referring to the 2025 Indonesian Survey Institute report, public awareness of the MBG programme reached 91%. In terms of attitudes, according to that survey, public support is considered strong: 36% of respondents strongly agree, 53.6% somewhat agree, 8.1% somewhat disagree, 1.4% reject, and 0.9% did not answer. These figures are very positive amid various negative opinions, especially on social media.
This is not merely numbers, but an important signal of social legitimacy for a national-scale public policy.
Interestingly, rather than being a weakness, a clearer reading sees this as the initial phase of policy institutionalisation. In public policy theory, almost no major programme immediately gains deep support from the start. Broad support, even if not yet rooted, is a crucial initial foundation. It reflects an initial trust in society’s confidence in the state’s intentions and policy direction.
REAL BENEFITS
One of the most important findings from the above surveys is that public support for MBG is not primarily determined by technical implementation aspects. On the contrary, support is greatly influenced by perceptions of benefits.
The public that believes MBG can increase food supply, strengthen the local economy, and reduce malnutrition tends to provide stronger support. This delivers an important message that the Indonesian public is not naive. They are not merely following along or dazzled by populist rhetoric that tends to be biased against MBG. Their support is based on a rational calculation of perceived or expected benefits.
In that framework, the government is already on the right track. MBG is not understood merely as an assistance programme, but also as a social investment for the future interests of Indonesian children. It touches on nutrition, education, and local economy aspects simultaneously.
In the context of strengthening student character in schools, healthy and nutritious intake is a basic need and plays a very important role. This is reflected in the results of the implementation evaluation of character strengthening in schools conducted by the Ministry of Education (2025), which shows that healthy and nutritious eating habits have the greatest relationship with other habits in the Seven Great Indonesian Children’s Habits Movement (7KAIH), especially for elementary school students in grades 5–6 and above. This finding affirms that healthy and nutritious eating is an important node in forming student habits and character because it becomes the foundation that supports the application of other positive behaviours in daily life.
Other findings show that younger age groups and those with lower education levels tend to support MBG more. This is often read cynically as ‘support from vulnerable groups’. However, another perspective sees it as a strategic indicator. Young groups are the owners of Indonesia’s demographic future. If they have positive perceptions of state interventions in nutrition and welfare from the start, the state is building a long-term social contract.
Meanwhile, support from low-education groups does not necessarily indicate a lack of criticality. It may be that this group is the one that most directly feels the urgency of the MBG policy. In many cases, they are the ones who have been at the forefront of food vulnerability.
Interestingly, research also finds a tendency for relatively low-income groups to be less supportive of MBG and prefer more targeted assistance. This is an important signal, not a contradiction. That group may have more specific and urgent needs. For them, policy effectiveness is measured by how directly the benefits can be felt. This also explains that the government’s challenge is not in the general legitimacy of the programme, but in the precision of implementation. In other words, the main issue is not whether MBG is needed or not, but how MBG can be more on target and the benefits felt more directly.
IMPROVEMENT SUGGESTIONS
Various criticisms of MBG implementation can be identified from issues of distribution transparency, local economic involvement, and clearer public communication. For this reason, the government has taken several improvement steps. Improvements in various aspects below will help the government maintain its public trust.
First, strengthening the beneficiary database becomes a priority. Integration and updating of recipient data