JAKARTA, Indonesia--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Oct 8, 2025--
On 7 October 2025, the Government of Indonesia launched the National Productivity Master Plan (MPPN) 2025–2029, a whole-of-nation blueprint for accelerating innovation, strengthening industrial competitiveness, and raising living standards through sustained productivity gains. Unveiled at a ministerial ceremony in Jakarta, the plan aligns policy and execution across central agencies, provinces, and the private sector to drive a shift from input-driven growth to growth led by total factor productivity (TFP). The launch featured addresses by Asian Productivity Organization (APO) Secretary-General Dr. Indra Pradana Singawinata, Minister of Manpower Professor Yassierli, Minister of Home Affairs Muhammad Tito Karnavian, and Minister of National Development Planning/Head of the National Development Planning Agency (BAPPENAS) Professor Ir. Rachmat Pambudy, M.S., underscoring the unified commitment to productivity as the pathway to higher-quality jobs and Indonesia Emas 2045 (“Golden Indonesia 2045”).
This press release features multimedia. View the full release here: https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20251008632566/en/
The MPPN sets out an integrated agenda to boost productivity across the economy: diffusing technology and management excellence in firms; upgrading workforce skills for digital and green transitions; deepening value chains and export capabilities; improving the enabling environment (regulatory quality, infrastructure, logistics); and institutionalizing measurement, review, and accountability. BAPPENAS will serve as system integrator, coordinating ministries and local governments to align programs and budgets, while public-private collaboration and demonstration projects will speed adoption on the ground. Core to the plan is disciplined monitoring and evaluation, ensuring that productivity gains translate into competitiveness, incomes, and regional convergence.
“Over the long run, a nation’s standard of living is determined by its ability to raise output per worker, its productivity,” said Dr. Indra Pradana Singawinata, adding that “by creating more value from every hour worked and every rupiah invested, Indonesia can lift real wages, lower costs, expand opportunities, and strengthen social and economic resilience.”
“Productivity improves product quality, cost efficiency, and export competitiveness,” noted Minister Yassierli, emphasizing the need to convert stable headline growth into broad-based, quality jobs through skills upgrading, technology adoption, and stronger labor market institutions to harness Indonesia’s demographic bonus.
Minister Tito Karnavian underscored that resilient, well-coordinated local governments are the foundation of national productivity, calling for tighter alignment of central and provincial governments under the current division of functions and for stronger coordination to turn demographic and structural transitions into inclusive, sustainable growth.
Presenting the government’s roadmap, Minister Pambudy situated the MPPN within the architecture of Indonesia’s long-term development plan (RPJPN) and medium-term development plans (RPJMNs) and outlined a collaboration agenda to leap into a new era of productivity-based growth, with BAPPENAS integrating policies, budgets, and accountability so reforms translate into measurable gains nationwide.
Implementation of the MPPN will focus on (1) establishing rigorous governance with BAPPENAS as integrator; (2) alignment of central and provincial governments to ensure policy translates into delivery; (3) accelerating firm-level adoption through demonstration and diffusion projects; (4) skills and technology upgrading to raise TFP; and (5) quarterly and annual performance reviews to track outcomes and iterate. The government invited businesses, academia, and provinces to join a shared productivity agenda that scales innovations from pilots to national impact.
This initiative was developed with the support of the APO as part of its advisory role to APO member economies, which includes policy assistance, capacity building, and demonstration projects that help embed productivity as a daily practice across the economy.
Formal joint launching moment of the National Productivity Master Plan (MPPN) 2025–2029 by Vice Minister Febrian Alphyanto Ruddyard (left), Minister Tito Karnavian (second from left), Minister Pambudy (center), Minister Yassierli (second from right), and APO Secretary-General Dr. Indra (right).
About the National Productivity Master Plan (MPPN) 2025–2029
The MPPN is Indonesia’s cross-government strategy to accelerate innovation-led, TFP-driven growth. It integrates policy, budget, and delivery across ministries and provinces; supports firm-level technology and management upgrading; strengthens workforce skills for digital and green transitions; and institutionalizes productivity measurement and accountability to ensure gains translate into competitiveness, incomes, and inclusive prosperity.
About the Asian Productivity Organization (APO)
Founded in 1961, APO is an intergovernmental organization dedicated to improving productivity in the Asia-Pacific. Through research, policy advisory, capacity building, and demonstration projects, the APO supports member economies in raising productivity, competitiveness, and sustainable, inclusive growth.
Formal joint launching moment of the National Productivity Master Plan (MPPN) 2025–2029 by Vice Minister Febrian Alphyanto Ruddyard (left), Minister Tito Karnavian (second from left), Minister Pambudy (center), Minister Yassierli (second from right), and APO Secretary-General Dr. Indra (right).
ATLANTA (AP) — Donald Trump would not be the first president to invoke the Insurrection Act, as he has threatened, so that he can send U.S. military forces to Minnesota.
But he'd be the only commander in chief to use the 19th-century law to send troops to quell protests that started because of federal officers the president already has sent to the area — one of whom shot and killed a U.S. citizen.
The law, which allows presidents to use the military domestically, has been invoked on more than two dozen occasions — but rarely since the 20th Century's Civil Rights Movement.
Federal forces typically are called to quell widespread violence that has broken out on the local level — before Washington's involvement and when local authorities ask for help. When presidents acted without local requests, it was usually to enforce the rights of individuals who were being threatened or not protected by state and local governments. A third scenario is an outright insurrection — like the Confederacy during the Civil War.
Experts in constitutional and military law say none of that clearly applies in Minneapolis.
“This would be a flagrant abuse of the Insurrection Act in a way that we've never seen,” said Joseph Nunn, an attorney at the Brennan Center for Justice's Liberty and National Security Program. “None of the criteria have been met.”
William Banks, a Syracuse University professor emeritus who has written extensively on the domestic use of the military, said the situation is “a historical outlier” because the violence Trump wants to end “is being created by the federal civilian officers” he sent there.
But he also cautioned Minnesota officials would have “a tough argument to win” in court, because the judiciary is hesitant to challenge “because the courts are typically going to defer to the president” on his military decisions.
Here is a look at the law, how it's been used and comparisons to Minneapolis.
George Washington signed the first version in 1792, authorizing him to mobilize state militias — National Guard forerunners — when “laws of the United States shall be opposed, or the execution thereof obstructed.”
He and John Adams used it to quash citizen uprisings against taxes, including liquor levies and property taxes that were deemed essential to the young republic's survival.
Congress expanded the law in 1807, restating presidential authority to counter “insurrection or obstruction” of laws. Nunn said the early statutes recognized a fundamental “Anglo-American tradition against military intervention in civilian affairs” except “as a tool of last resort.”
The president argues Minnesota officials and citizens are impeding U.S. law by protesting his agenda and the presence of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers and Customs and Border Protection officers. Yet early statutes also defined circumstances for the law as unrest “too powerful to be suppressed by the ordinary course” of law enforcement.
There are between 2,000 and 3,000 federal authorities in the Minneapolis-St. Paul metro area, compared to Minneapolis, which has fewer than 600 police officers. Protesters' and bystanders' video, meanwhile, has shown violence initiated by federal officers, with the interactions growing more frequent since Renee Good was shot three times and killed.
“ICE has the legal authority to enforce federal immigration laws,” Nunn said. “But what they're doing is a sort of lawless, violent behavior” that goes beyond their legal function and “foments the situation” Trump wants to suppress.
“They can't intentionally create a crisis, then turn around to do a crackdown,” he said, adding that the Constitutional requirement for a president to “faithfully execute the laws” means Trump must wield his power, on immigration and the Insurrection Act, “in good faith.”
Courts have blocked some of Trump's efforts to deploy the National Guard, but he'd argue with the Insurrection Act that he does not need a state's permission to send troops.
That traces to President Abraham Lincoln, who held in 1861 that Southern states could not legitimately secede. So, he convinced Congress to give him express power to deploy U.S. troops, without asking, into Confederate states he contended were still in the Union. Quite literally, Lincoln used the act as a legal basis to fight the Civil War.
Nunn said situations beyond such a clear insurrection as the Confederacy still require a local request or another trigger that Congress added after the Civil War: protecting individual rights. Ulysses S. Grant used that provision to send troops to counter the Ku Klux Klan and other white supremacists who ignored the 14th and 15th amendments and civil rights statutes.
During post-war industrialization, violence erupted around strikes and expanding immigration — and governors sought help.
President Rutherford B. Hayes granted state requests during the Great Railroad Strike of 1877 after striking workers, state forces and local police clashed, leading to dozens of deaths. Grover Cleveland granted a Washington state governor's request — at that time it was a U.S. territory — to help protect Chinese citizens who were being attacked by white rioters. President Woodrow Wilson sent troops to Colorado in 1914 amid a coal strike after workers were killed.
Federal troops helped diffuse each situation.
Banks stressed that the law then and now presumes that federal resources are needed only when state and local authorities are overwhelmed — and Minnesota leaders say their cities would be stable and safe if Trump's feds left.
As Grant had done, mid-20th century presidents used the act to counter white supremacists.
Franklin Roosevelt dispatched 6,000 troops to Detroit — more than double the U.S. forces in Minneapolis — after race riots that started with whites attacking Black residents. State officials asked for FDR's aid after riots escalated, in part, Nunn said, because white local law enforcement joined in violence against Black residents. Federal troops calmed the city after dozens of deaths, including 17 Black residents killed by local police.
Once the Civil Rights Movement began, presidents sent authorities to Southern states without requests or permission, because local authorities defied U.S. civil rights law and fomented violence themselves.
Dwight Eisenhower enforced integration at Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas; John F. Kennedy sent troops to the University of Mississippi after riots over James Meredith's admission and then pre-emptively to ensure no violence upon George Wallace's “Stand in the Schoolhouse Door” to protest the University of Alabama's integration.
“There could have been significant loss of life from the rioters” in Mississippi, Nunn said.
Lyndon Johnson protected the 1965 Voting Rights March from Selma to Montgomery after Wallace's troopers attacked marchers' on their first peaceful attempt.
Johnson also sent troops to multiple U.S. cities in 1967 and 1968 after clashes between residents and police escalated. The same thing happened in Los Angeles in 1992, the last time the Insurrection Act was invoked.
Riots erupted after a jury failed to convict four white police officers of excessive use of force despite video showing them beating a Rodney King, a Black man. California Gov. Pete Wilson asked President George H.W. Bush for support.
Bush authorized about 4,000 troops — but after he had publicly expressed displeasure over the trial verdict. He promised to “restore order” yet directed the Justice Department to open a civil rights investigation, and two of the L.A. officers were later convicted in federal court.
President Donald Trump answers questions after signing a bill that returns whole milk to school cafeterias across the country, in the Oval Office of the White House, Wednesday, Jan. 14, 2026, in Washington. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)
