However, the way this figure is calculated fails to capture a key issue: a significant portion of those classified as employed are engaged in informal, unstable work that lacks standard labor protections. The government’s claim of economic progress relies on a definition that includes anyone working as little as one hour per week, a standard Statistics Indonesia (BPS) justifies by citing its alignment with 2013 International Labour Organization guidelines. Yet this approach obscures the reality that many of these jobs emerge from personal necessity rather than structured economic growth.
When workers, such as those who lose formal employment, repurpose assets like motorcycles for deliveries or turn their kitchens into catering businesses, they remain counted as employed under the current system. Yet this transition from formal to informal work shifts financial burdens onto families, exposing them to market volatility, health risks, and the absence of benefits like paid leave or unemployment support. The government frames these adaptations as signs of economic resilience, but the data does not reflect whether these jobs are sustainable or merely survival strategies.
The disconnect between official metrics and real economic conditions highlights a deeper problem. Government statistics prioritize measuring activity over assessing stability. For example, a person preparing meals at home is classified as employed, but this activity tells little about the broader effectiveness of economic policies. The Office of the Coordinating Economy Minister attributes the low unemployment rate to real-sector initiatives and investment incentives, yet the data does not separate jobs created through policy from those born out of economic hardship.
While BPS recognizes the importance of tracking irregular work patterns, discussions rarely focus on complementary indicators such as job security or income stability. As a result, the statistical framework equates resilience with policy success, while the human cost of economic instability goes unaddressed. If the government’s programs were genuinely driving employment growth, the benefits would extend beyond counting hours worked.
