Anchoring in Kepulauan Riau: Between Economic Potential and Jurisdictional Disputes

Authors

  • Liza Novianty Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji
  • Raja Qorryna Dwi Putri Nur Asmah Central Kalimantan Provincial Government

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31629/

Keywords:

Achoring, Economic Potential, Jurisdictional Disputes

Abstract

This study stems from the increasing intensity of anchorage activities in the waters of the Riau Islands Province, which has dual implications: it opens up significant economic opportunities for the region, but also raises the potential for conflicts of authority between different levels of government. This situation confirms that anchorage has not only an economic dimension, but is also closely related to the issue of marine spatial management, which has yet to be fully and comprehensively managed. Therefore, this study aims to comprehensively assess the economic potential generated by anchorage activities and identify the main issues related to overlapping authorities in its management. The method used is a literature study with a descriptive approach, through research and analysis of regulations, official government reports, secondary data, and various relevant previous studies. The results of the study show that anchorage activities have the potential to be a significant source of regional income, but their utilisation has not been optimal due to policy inconsistencies, differences in regulatory interpretations, and conflicts over maritime spatial management authority. Therefore, optimising anchorage requires regulatory harmonisation, clarity in the division of authority, and strengthened intergovernmental coordination so that economic benefits can be maximised without triggering ongoing administrative conflicts

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Acciaro, M., Ghiara, H., & Cusano, M. I. (2014). Energy management in seaports: A new role for port authorities. Energy Policy, 71, 4–12. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2014.04.013

Andersson, P., & Ivehammar, P. (2017). Dynamic route planning in the Baltic Sea Region: A cost-benefit analysis based on AIS data. Maritime Economics & Logistics, 19(4). http://doi.org/10.1057/mel.2016.18

Bodin, Ö. (2017). Collaborative environmental governance: Achieving collective action in social-ecological systems. Science, 357(6352), eaan1114. http://doi.org/10.1126/science.aan1114

Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27–40. http://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027

Cariou, P., & Wolff, F.-C. (2015). Identifying substandard vessels through port state control inspections: A new methodology for concentrated inspection campaigns. Marine Policy, 60, 27–39. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2015.05.013

Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.

de Langen, P. W. (2020). Towards a better port industry: Port development, management and policy. Routledge. http://doi.org/10.4324/9780203797501

Emerson, K., & Nabatchi, T. (2015). Collaborative governance regimes. Georgetown University Press.

Flannery, W., Healy, N., & Luna, M. (2018). Exclusion and non-participation in marine spatial planning. Marine Policy, 88, 32–40. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2017.11.001

Hidalgo-Gallego, S., Núñez-Sánchez, R., & Coto-Millán, P. (2022). Port allocative efficiency and port devolution: A study for Spanish port authorities. Maritime Policy & Management, 49(1), 39–61.

Jansen, M., van Tulder, R., & Afrianto, R. (2018). Exploring the conditions for inclusive port development: The case of Indonesia. Maritime Policy & Management, 45(7), 924–943. http://doi.org/10.1080/03088839.2018.1472824

Johnston, M. P. (2014). Secondary data analysis: A method of which the time has come. Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Libraries, 3(3), 619–626.

Jouffray, J. B., Blasiak, R., Norström, A. V., Österblom, H., & Nyström, M. (2020). The blue acceleration: The trajectory of human expansion into the ocean. One Earth, 2(1), 43–54. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2019.12.016

Monios, J. (2019). Polycentric port governance. Transport Policy, 83, 26–36. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2019.08.005

Monios, J., & Wilmsmeier, G. (2012). Giving a direction to port regionalisation. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 46(10), 1551–1561. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2012.07.008

Notteboom, T. E., & Rodrigue, J.-P. (2005). Port regionalization: Towards a new phase in port development. Maritime Policy & Management, 32(3), 297–313. http://doi.org/10.1080/03088830500139885

Nugraha, A., & Chen, R. L. (2024). The current legal regime of the Indonesian outer small islands. Griffith Law Review. http://doi.org/10.1080/10383441.2024.2362499

Partelow, S., Schlüter, A., Armitage, D., Bavinck, M., Carlisle, K., Gruby, R. L., Hornidge, A.-K., Le Tissier, M., Pittman, J. B., Song, A. M., Sousa, L. P., Văidianu, N., & Van Assche, K. (2020). Environmental governance theories: A review and application to coastal systems. Ecology and Society, 25(4), Article 19. http://doi.org/10.5751/ES-12067-250419

Poulsen, R. T., & Sampson, H. (2019). “Swinging on the anchor”: The difficulties in achieving greenhouse gas abatement in shipping via virtual arrival. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 73, 230–244. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2019.07.007

Poulsen, R. T., & Sampson, H. (2020). A swift turnaround? Abating shipping greenhouse gas emissions via port call optimization. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 86, Article 102460. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2020.102460

Robinson, R. (2002). Ports as elements in value-driven chain systems: The new paradigm. Maritime Policy & Management, 29(3), 241–255. http://doi.org/10.1080/03088830210132623

Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039

Sodik, D. M. (2012). The Indonesian legal framework on baselines, archipelagic passage, and innocent passage. Ocean Development & International Law, 43(4), 330–341. http://doi.org/10.1080/00908320.2012.726830

Tijan, E., Jović, M., Aksentijević, S., & Pucihar, A. (2021). Digital transformation in the maritime transport sector. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 170, Article 120879. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120879

Tijan, E., Jović, M., Panjako, A., & Žgaljić, D. (2021). The role of port authority in port governance and port community system implementation. Sustainability, 13(5), Article 2795. http://doi.org/10.3390/su13052795

van der Lugt, L. M., de Langen, P. W., & Hagdorn, L. (2017). Strategic beliefs of port authorities. Transport Reviews, 37(4), 412–441. http://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2016.1245685

van Tatenhove, J. P. M. (2017). Transboundary marine spatial planning: A reflexive marine governance experiment? Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 19(6), 783–794. http://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2017.1292120

Yoga, P. R. A., & Bautista, L. (2025). Legal analysis of the establishment of exclusion zones for submarines in Indonesia’s archipelagic sea lanes. Ocean Development & International Law, 56(3), 290–318. http://doi.org/10.1080/00908320.2025.2529801

Downloads

Published

2026-06-10

How to Cite

Novianty, L., & Asmah, R. Q. D. P. N. (2026). Anchoring in Kepulauan Riau: Between Economic Potential and Jurisdictional Disputes. Journal Governance Bureaucratic Review, 3(2), 92-105. https://doi.org/10.31629/