Strategies and Steps for Developing the Sharia Economy

There are three scenarios for implementing the Sharia Economy in Indonesia. The most challenging scenario is making it a national economic system. This is low-probability, as it requires national political consensus, a redefinition of the economic system, changes in ownership and market structures, and the courage to face global pressures. A less challenging scenario is if it merely becomes a pillar of the national economic system, where Sharia Economy must be content with being the main operational pillar within the Pancasila Economic framework, applying it to the people's economy (agriculture, MSMEs, and inclusive finance).

The least challenging scenario is sectoral and symbolic implementation, namely in Sharia finance, halal lifestyle, and Sharia economic events. Here, it only serves as a market niche, cultural identity, and moral legitimacy for the state. This is the safest political option, but the weakest in terms of transformational power. Therefore, the real option for Indonesia is to make Sharia Economy sufficient as the most concrete operational tool for translating the values ​​of the Pancasila Economy and its support for the People's Economy into policy practice.

We have made this choice. Various strategic planning documents for the development of the national Islamic economy do not promote it as a totalizing economic system, but rather integrate sharia principles into the national economic ecosystem. These documents include the 2019-2024 Indonesian Islamic Economic Masterplan (MEKSI), which outlines the vision, mission, and four main pillars (halal industry, Islamic finance, Islamic MSMEs, and the Islamic digital economy); the 2020-2024 KNEKS Work Plan, which contains strategic programs such as strengthening the halal value chain, optimizing ZISWAF (Ziswaf), and sharia literacy; and the 2025-2029 MEKSI, which has been aligned with the 2025-2029 National Medium-Term Development Plan (RPJMN) and the 2025-2045 National Medium-Term Development Plan (RPJPN).

We face a fundamental problem in the form of uncertainty regarding the economic system we are currently implementing and will implement. Article 33 of the 1945 Constitution affirms the principles of kinship, social justice, and state control over important sectors of production. However, economic policy practices tend to be pragmatic and eclectic (a mix of liberal, statist, and populist). There is no consistent and operational grand design for the economic system. Sharia economics develops in a normative space that has not yet been ideologically integrated with the national economic system.

Sharia economics is growing rapidly across sectors, but has not yet become part of the national economic system due to the lack of a clear Indonesian economic paradigm. Sharia economics could potentially function as an operationalization of Pancasila Economics and People's Economy, but it is currently positioned as an "alternative sub-sector," not a system architecture.

The implementation of sharia economics in Indonesia began in the financial sector, with the establishment of Bank Muamalah Indonesia (BMI) in 1991, initiated by the Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI) and the Association of Indonesian Muslim Intellectuals (ICMI). This was then followed by the establishment of Sharia Rural Credit Banks (BPRS), Baitul Maal wat Tamwil (BMT), and the Islamic Boarding School Cooperative (Kopontren). Healthy economic development requires a close link between the financial sector (banking, capital markets, insurance) and the real sector (activities producing goods and services that generate real added value).

The main weakness is not the lack of regulation, but rather the lack of a consistent economic system orientation. Regulation is a social agreement. Without a clear national economic system, the acceleration of the sharia economy will continue to be fragmented. Conversely, by repositioning the sharia economy within the framework of the Pancasila Economy and the People's Economy, Indonesia has the opportunity to build a just, inclusive, and sustainable economic system.

*****

Strategi dan langkah untuk pengembangan ekonomi syariah

 Ada tiga skenario peluang penerapan Ekonomi Syariah di Indonesia, skenario terberat jika menjadikannya sebagai sistem ekonomi nasional.  Probabilitasnya rendah, karena membutuhkan konsensus politik nasional, redefinisi sistem ekonomi, perubahan struktur kepemilikan dan pasar, dan keberanian menghadapi tekanan global. Skenario lebih ringan adalah jika hanya menjadi pilar sistem ekonomi nasional, dimana Ekonomi Syariah harus puas menjadi pilar operasional utama dalam kerangka Ekonomi Pancasila dengan menerapkan pada ekonomi rakyat (pertanian, UMKM, keuangan inklusif.)

Skenario paling ringan adalah penerapan pada sektoral dan simbolik, yakni pada keuangan syariah, halal lifestyle, event ekonomi syariah. Disini ia hanya berfungsi sebagai ceruk pasar, identitas kultural, dan legitimasi moral negara. Ini paling aman secara politik, namun paling lemah daya transformasinya. Maka, opsi yang riel untuk Indonesia adalah menjadikan Ekonomi Syariah cukup sebagai perangkat operasional paling konkret untuk menerjemahkan nilai Ekonomi Pancasila dan keberpihakan Ekonomi Kerakyatan ke dalam praktik kebijakan.

Pilihan ini telah kita ambil. Berbagai dokumen rencana strategis pengembangan ekonomi syariah nasional tidak mengangkatnya sebagai sistem ekonomi berideologi total, melainkan mengintegrasikan prinsip syariah ke dalam ekosistem ekonomi nasional. Dokumen tersebut adalah Masterplan Ekonomi Syariah Indonesia (MEKSI) 2019-2024 yang menguraikan visi, misi, dan empat pilar utama (industri halal, keuangan syariah, UMKM syariah, ekonomi digital syariah); Rencana Kerja KNEKS 2020-2024 berisi program strategis seperti penguatan rantai nilai halal, optimalisasi ZISWAF, dan literasi syariah; dan  MEKSI 2025-2029 yang telah diselaraskan dengan RPJMN 2025-2029 dan RPJPN 2025-2045.

Kondisi menghadapi masalah fundamental berupa ketidakjelasan sistem ekonomi yang sedang dan akan kita terapkan. Pasal 33 UUD 1945  menegaskan asas kekeluargaan, keadilan sosial, dan penguasaan negara atas cabang produksi penting; namun praktik kebijakan ekonomi cenderung pragmatis dan eklektik (campuran liberal–etatistik–populis). Tidak ada grand design sistem ekonomi yang konsisten dan operasional. Ekonomi syariah berkembang di ruang normatif yang belum terintegrasi dengan sistem ekonomi nasional secara ideologis.

Ekonomi syariah berkembang pesat secara sektoral, tetapi belum menjadi bagian dari sistem ekonomi nasional karena absennya kejelasan paradigma ekonomi Indonesia. Ekonomi syariah sejatinya dapat berfungsi sebagai bentuk operasionalisasi Ekonomi Pancasila dan Ekonomi Kerakyatan, namun saat ini masih diposisikan sebagai “sub-sektor alternatif”, bukan arsitektur sistem.

Implementasi ekonomi syariah di Indonesia diawali oleh sektor finansial, yakni dengan berdirinya Bank Muamalah Indonesia (BMI) tahun 1991 dengan prakarsa Majelis Ulama Indonesia (MUI) dan Ikatan Cendekiawan Muslim se-Indonesia (ICMI). Ini lalu diikuti oleh pendirian Bank Perkreditan Rakyat Syariah (BPRS), Baitul Maal wat Tamwil (BMT),  dan juga Koperasi Pondok Pesantren (Kopontren). Perkembangan ekonomi yang sehat menuntut keterkaitan erat antara sektor finansial (perbankan, pasar modal, asuransi) dengan sektor riel (kegiatan produksi barang dan jasa yang menghasilkan nilai tambah nyata).

Kelemahan utama bukan ketiadaan regulasi, melainkan ketiadaan orientasi sistem ekonomi yang konsisten. Regulasi adalah kesepakatan sosial. Tanpa kejelasan sistem ekonomi nasional, akselerasi ekonomi syariah akan terus bersifat fragmentaris; sebaliknya, dengan reposisi ekonomi syariah dalam kerangka Ekonomi Pancasila dan Ekonomi Kerakyatan, Indonesia memiliki peluang membangun sistem ekonomi yang adil, inklusif, dan berkelanjutan.

******

Sharia Economics is Needed as an Economic System

Implementing a sharia economy in Indonesia requires an appropriate institutional environment, namely a "sharia economic system." The problem is, we are currently reluctant to discuss this economic system. The enthusiasm of several decades, starting in the 1960s among academics, has not been rekindled, when many proposed the Pancasila Economic System or People's Economy as our economic system.

"People's Economy," "Pancasila Economy," and "Sharia Economy" actually have strong parallels (Syahyuti, 2024). Although Sharia Economics or Islamic Economics is certainly an older practice, and its science should also be older (dating back to the 7th century in Medina), However, its scientific discourse in Indonesia was later (it became popular in the 1980s), while People's Economy began in 1930, and Pancasila Economy around 1965.

Furthermore, upon closer examination, People's Economy and Pancasila Economy share a strong parallel, supporting each other as two complementary entities. This can be traced back to 1945, when Sukarno presented the initial idea of ​​People's Economy at the Investigating Committee for Preparatory Work for Independence. In that speech, Sukarno based People's Economy on the principles of Pancasila. Then, in 1980, People's Economy was conceptualized as Pancasila Economy. The foundational values, objectives, economic principles, and the role of the state are the elements that connect the two. "In the Pancasila economic system, the economy is of the people, by the people, and for the people."

Sharia economics has an inclusive character. A representative scientific review of business ethics from various interfaith perspectives found that the Islamic business ethics perspective, derived from two primary sources: the Qur'an and the Hadith, states that business as a human activity is both material and immaterial. Similarly, business ethics from a Christian perspective does not accept the separation of work and life (Wong and Senjaya, 2024), which aligns with Hindu business ethics, where economic activity is essentially about fulfilling the dignity of humankind as a divine creation.

In addition to an Islamic economic system, a new measurement tool, namely the Islamic Gross National Product, is also needed. This measurement is not solely based on GDP figures but also considers social justice, community welfare, and environmental sustainability. Islam emphasizes the equitable distribution of wealth, social inclusion, and business ethics in accordance with Sharia principles. Sharia economics is suitable as an alternative model for a new GDP, as it offers a values-based approach with four main pillars: a rabbaniyah economy (based on divinity), an akhlaki economy (based on morals), a humanitarian economy (oriented towards human welfare), and a middle-ground economy (tawazzun) that balances individual and societal interests.

This idea has been initiated in recent years by the National Committee for Sharia Economics and Finance (KNEKS). In the latest RPJMN (2024-2029), KNEKS successfully incorporated Sharia economic and financial indicators. At various events, KNEKS claimed this proposed "Sharia GRDP" was the first of its kind in the world.

Regarding regulations and programs, Appendix 1 of Presidential Regulation No. 12 of 2025 concerning the 2025-2029 RPJMN found 18 entries for "Sharia economy." "Sharia economy" is one of four economic phrases: "Sharia Economy," "Digital Economy," "Green Economy," and "Blue Economy." The vision is to make Indonesia the global center of the Islamic economy. However, the impression that arises is that we are developing the Islamic economy primarily because of the market (demand-driven) or that it is still merely a form of "market-driven Islamic economics" or "value-driven Islamic economy," not yet a genuine path of Islamic propagation.

*****

Dibutuhkan Ekonomi Syariah sebagai Sistem Ekonomi

Menjalankan ekonomi syariah di Indonesia membutuhkan institutional environment yang sesuai, yakni “sistem ekonomi syariah”. Masalahnya, saat ini kita sedang malas membicarakan sistem ekonomi. Gairah selama beberapa dekade mulai tahun 1960-an di kalangan kademis dulu tidak terulang lagi, saat  banyak yang mengajukan sistem Ekonomi Pancasila atau Ekonomi Kerakyatan sebagai sistem ekonomi untuk kita.

‘Ekonomi Kerakyatan’, ‘Ekonomi Pancasila’ dan ‘Ekonomi Syariah’ sebenarnya memiliki kesejajaran yang kuat (Syahyuti, 2024). Meskipun Ekonomi Syariah atau Ekonomi Islam tentu saja praktek yang lebih tua, dan mestinya ilmunya juga lebih dahulu (abad ke 7 masa Medinah); namun dirkursus keilmuannya di Indonesia lebih terlambat (ramai tahun 1980 an), sedangkan Ekonomi Kerakyatan mulainya tahun 1930, dan Ekonomi Pancasila sekitar 1965.

Lebih jauh, jika dicermati secara mendalam, Ekonomi Kerakyatan dan Ekonomi Pancasila memiliki kesejajaran yang kuat, yakni saling mendukung, sebagai dua entitas dalam satu paket yang saling melengkapi. Ini bisa dirujuk ke tahun 1945, ketika gagasan awal Ekonomi Kerakyatan disampaikan oleh Soekarno dalam sidang Badan Penyelidik Usaha-Usaha Persiapan Kemerdekaan. Dalam pidato itu, Soekarno melandasi Ekonomi Kerakyatan dengan asas Pancasila. Lalu, pada tahun 1980, Ekonomi Kerakyatan dikonsepkan menjadi Ekonomi Pancasila. Landasan nilai, tujuan, prinsip ekonomi, dan peran negara adalah elemen-elemen yang menghubungkan keduanya. “Dalam sistem ekonomi Pancasila, ekonomi berasal dari rakyat, oleh rakyat dan untuk rakyat”  .

Ekonomi syariah memiliki kakrakter yang inklusif. Scientific review yang cukup representatif  tentang etika bisnis dalam berbagai perspektif lintas agama,  menemukan bahwa perspektif etika bisnis Islam dari dua sumber utama Al-Qur’an dan Hadits, menyebutkan bahwa bisnis sebagai suatu aktivitas manusia bersifat material dan immaterial. Demikian pula, etika bisnis dalam perspektif Kristen tidak menerima pemisahan antara pekerjaan dan kehidupan (Wong dan Senjaya, 2024), yang sejalan pula dengan etika bisnis Hindu dimana kegiatan berekonomi pada hakekatnya adalah menjalankan kemuliaan manusia sebagai ciptaan Illahi.

Selain sistem ekonomi yang Islami, dibutuhkan pula alat ukur baru, yakni ‘Islamic Gross National Product’, dimana keberhasilan ekonomi tidak hanya diukur dari angka GDP, tetapi penting melihat keadilan sosial, kesejahteraan masyarakat, dan keberlanjutan lingkungan. Islam menekankan distribusi kekayaan yang adil, inklusi sosial, serta etika bisnis yang sesuai dengan prinsip syariah. Ekonomi syariah cocok menjadi model alternatif GDP baru, karena menawarkan pendekatan berbasis nilai dengan empat pilar utama: ekonomi rabbaniyah (berbasis ketuhanan), ekonomi akhlaki (berlandaskan moral), ekonomi kemanusiaan (berorientasi pada kesejahteraan manusia), dan ekonomi pertengahan (tawazzun) yang menyeimbangkan kepentingan individu dan masyarakat .

Ide ini sudah diinisiasi beberapa tahun terakhir oleh KNEKS (Komite Nasional Ekonomi dan Keuangan Syariah) .  Pada RPJMN terakhir (2024-2029), KNEKS telah berhasil memasukkan indikator-indikator ekonomi keuangan syariah di dalamnya. Dalam berbagai acara KNEKS mengklaim usulan ‘PDRB Syariah’ ini adalah yang pertama di dunia.

Terkait regulasi dan program, pada Lampiran 1 Perpres No 12 tahun 2025 tentang RPJMN 2025-2029 ditemukan 18 entry ‘ekonomi syariah’. ‘Ekonomi syariah’ merupakan satu dari empat frasa di bidang ekonomi, yaitu ‘Ekonomi Syariah’, ‘Ekonomi Digital’, ‘Ekonomi Hijau’, dan ‘Ekonomi Biru’. Visinya adalah menjadikan Indonesia sebagai pusat ekonomi syariah dunia. Namun, kesan yang muncul adalah ekonomi syariah kita kembangkan lebih karena ada pasarnya (demand driven) atau masih sebatas bentuk “Market-driven Islamic economics” atau "Value driven Islamic Economy", belum menjadi jalan dakwah yang hakiki.

******

What are the Opportunities for Implementing Sharia Economics as a National Economic System?

 Indonesia—and the world—is currently uninterested in discussing its national economic system. Although the global halal economy is gaining ground, and Islamic banking is positively appreciated in Europe, to date, no modern country has comprehensively implemented Sharia economics as a national economic system. Existing practice shows that Sharia economics is more developed as a sectoral approach and policy instrument within a pragmatic market economy and state framework.

Several non-Muslim countries, such as the UK, Japan, and China, have adopted Sharia instruments; issuing sukuk (Islamic bonds), establishing Sharia banks, and also promoting the halal industry. This is purely rational-economic, devoid of Islamic ideology. Here, Sharia economics is separated from the economic system and treated as a mere financial and industrial product. Sharia economics is successful as a sector, but weak as a state system. Sharia elements are implemented partially, sectorally, or symbolically. Therefore, the important question is not which countries implement it, but to what extent are they willing to allow Sharia principles to transform their economic power structures?

Political economists have long argued that modern economic systems are hybrid systems. There is no pure liberalism, pure socialism, or single ideological system. Countries generally choose a combination of market mechanisms, the role of the state, and social values, based on their history, political structure, and national interests.

The Islamic Economic System, or Sharia Economic System, is more comprehensive, extending beyond the role of the state and the market. It encompasses the formal prohibition of usury (riba), zakat (alms) and waqf (waqf) as social instruments, and the Islamic financial system.

In Muslim countries, the systems used vary depending on their political choices and history. Resource-based state capitalism (Rentier State) is found in Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar, and Kuwait; post-colonial (pragmatic) mixed economies in Malaysia, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Egypt, and Indonesia; and Islamic socialism in Iran (post-1979), Libya (Gaddafi era), and Sudan (certain periods) (Awan et al., 2023). Authoritarian capitalism with sharia symbols was implemented in Turkey (early AKP era) and Malaysia (post-1990s) (Khotimah, 2024).

Why didn't they implement Sharia Economics as a system? The answer lies in the political constraints of power, because Sharia economics—even Pancasila Economics in the case of Indonesia—demands rent-sharing restrictions, asset distribution, and structural justice. This is extremely threatening to the economic and political elite. Therefore, the state plays it safe: choosing the "symbol" of Sharia, without structural implications.

At the global level, Sharia economics as an economic system is inconsistent because the global economy operates under the laws of capitalism (international trade, the financial system, foreign investment). The academic landscape is also immature, with no single agreement on how a "Sharia state" will regulate taxes, labor markets, international trade, and so on. Classical fiqh is understood as having emerged in a pre-modern economy and is considered outdated for a modern macro system. Similarly, social and pluralism barriers exist, as many countries are Muslim, multiethnic, and multifaith. If conditions are not conducive, the Islamic economy will be perceived as an exclusive economy.

However, the general global trend toward a hybrid-pragmatic economic system should be seen as an opportunity. The global economy following the 2008 global crisis, the COVID-19 pandemic, and geopolitical crises is moving not toward a single economic system, but toward systemic pragmatism—countries choosing a mix of market, state, and community based on national interests. There is a resurgence in the role of the state, but the market remains dominant. The state has not abandoned capitalism, but the market is no longer trusted to fully manage crises. Therefore, it can be said that classical liberal economics has lost its absolute legitimacy, but has not been replaced by a new ideological system. Capitalism remains, but it is more nationalistic, protectionist, and state-controlled (read: neo-industrial policy or strategic capitalism).

Therefore, efforts to establish the Islamic economy as a national system have very little chance of success. The realistic approach is to make the Islamic economy a corrective and operational pillar, especially for the people's economy. The experience of Muslim countries shows that Islamic economics is easier to implement as a set of moral and sectoral instruments than as a complete national economic system, because implementing the system requires changes in power structures and global integration that countries are rarely willing to undertake.

*****

Bagaimana Peluang Penerapan Ekonomi Syariah sebagai Sistem Ekonomi Nasional?

Indonesia - dan juga dunia – saat ini sedang tidak tertarik membicarakan sistem ekonomi nasionalnya. Meskipun ekonomi halal dunia semakin mendapat tempat, dan bank syariah diapresiasi positif di Eropa; namun hingga saat ini tidak terdapat negara modern yang secara komprehensif menerapkan ekonomi syariah sebagai sistem ekonomi nasional. Praktik yang ada menunjukkan bahwa ekonomi syariah lebih berkembang sebagai pendekatan sektoral dan instrumen kebijakan dalam kerangka ekonomi pasar dan negara yang pragmatis.

Beberapa negara non-Muslim yang mengadopsi instrumen syariah misal Inggris, Jepang, dan China; menerbitkan sukuk, membuka bank syariah, dan juga mendorong industri halal. Ini sebenarnya murni rasional-ekonomis, tanpa ideologi Islam. Disini ekonomi syariah dipisahkan dari sistem ekonomi, dan diperlakukan sebagai produk keuangan dan industri belaka. Ekonomi Syariah berhasil sebagai sektor, namun lemah sebagai sistem negara. Elemen syariah diterapkan secara parsial, sektoral, atau simbolik. Maka, pertanyaan penting bukan negara mana yang menerapkan, tetapi sampai sejauh mana negara bersedia memberi ruang prinsip syariah mengubah struktur kekuasaan ekonomi mereka?

Para ahli ekonomi politik sudah lama menyebut bahwa sistem ekonomi modern adalah sistem hibrida. Tidak ada liberal murni, sosialis murni, atau sistem ideologis yang tunggal. Negara umumnya memilih kombinasi antara mekanisme pasar, peran negara, dan nilai sosial, sesuai sejarah, struktur politik, dan kepentingan nasionalnya.

Sistem Ekonomi Islam atau Ekonomi Syariah (Sharia Ecocomic system) lebih lengkap, lebih jauh dari sekedar apa peran negara dan apa peran pasar. Yaitu larangan riba (secara formal), zakat dan wakaf sebagai instrumen sosial, sistem keuangan syariah. 

Untuk negara-negara muslim, sistem yang dipakai beragam bergantung pilihan politik dan sejarahnya. Sistem kapitalisme negara berbasis sumber daya (Rentier State) dijumpai di Arab Saudi, UEA, Qatar, Kuwait; ekonomi campuran pasca-kolonial (pragmatis) di  Malaysia, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Mesir, dan termasuk Indonesia; serta sosialisme Islam di  Iran (pasca 1979), Libya (era Gaddafi), Sudan (periode tertentu) (Awan et al., 2023). Kapitalisme otoriter dengan simbol syariah pernah diterapkan di  Turki (era AKP awal), dan  Malaysia (pasca 1990-an) (Khotimah, 2024).

Mengapa mereka tidak menerapkan Ekonomi Syariah sebagai sistem? Jawabannya adalah  pada hambatan politik kekuasaan, karena ekonomi syariah – bahkan Ekonomi Pancasila untuk kasus di Indonesia - menuntut pembatasan rente, distribusi aset, dan keadilan struktural. Ini sangat-sangat mengancam elite ekonomi dan politik.  Maka negara bermain aman: memilih “simbol” syariah, tanpa implikasi struktural.

Di level global, ekonomi syariah sebagai sistem ekonomi tidak sejalan karena ekonomi global beroperasi dengan hukum kapitalisme (perdagangan internasional, sistem keuangan, investasi asing). Sisi akademis pun belum matang, belum ada kesepakatan tunggal bagaimana “negara syariah” akan mengatur pajak, pasar tenaga kerja, perdagangan internasional, dan seterusnya. Fiqh klasik difahami sebagai lahir dalam ekonomi pra-modern, dan dianggap kuno untuk sistem makro modern. Demikian pula, hambatan sosial dan pluralisme, dimana banyak negara muslim, multietnis, dan multikeyakinan. Jika kondisi belum kondusif, maka ekonomi syariah akan dipersepsikan sebagai ekonomi eksklusif.

Namun demikian, tren global umum yang menuju sistem ekonomi hibrida-pragmatis mestinya dapat dijadikan kesempatan. Ekonomi dunia pasca-krisis global 2008, pandemi covid-19, dan krisis geopolitik; dunia tidak bergerak menuju satu sistem ekonomi tertentu, tetapi menuju pragmatisme sistemik—negara memilih campuran pasar, negara, dan komunitas sesuai kepentingan nasional. Ada kebangkitan peran negara, namun pasar tetap dominan. Negara tidak meninggalkan kapitalisme, namun pasar tidak lagi dipercaya sepenuhnya mengatur krisis. Jadi, dapat dikatakan ekonomi liberal klasik kehilangan legitimasi absolut, tetapi tidak digantikan sistem ideologis baru. Kapitalisme tetap, tetapi lebih nasionalis, protektif, dan dikendalikan negara (baca: neo-industrial policy atau strategic capitalism).

Jadi, upaya menjadikan ekonomi syariah sebagai  sistem nasional berpeluang sangat kecil. Yang realistis adalah menjadikan ekonomi syariah sebagai pilar korektif dan operasional, terutama untuk ekonomi rakyat. Pengalaman negara-negara Muslim menunjukkan bahwa ekonomi syariah lebih mudah diterapkan sebagai seperangkat instrumen moral dan sektoral daripada sebagai sistem ekonomi nasional yang utuh, karena penerapan sistem menuntut perubahan struktur kekuasaan dan integrasi global yang jarang bersedia dilakukan oleh negara.

********

Sharia economics has long been embedded in the agricultural sector in Indonesia.

A study of the development of economic thought reveals a pattern that suggests that "Sharia economics" in Indonesia as a discipline is relatively new. This is because Indonesian-language books on the subject are relatively new, despite dozens of similar books having been published. Consequently, many people assume that the practice of Sharia economics is also new in Indonesia. In fact, agrarian communities (primarily in agriculture and fisheries) are already accustomed to practicing it. Sharia economics may seem new in the formal, modern-based economic sector (industry and services in urban areas), but it is actually a classical-traditional practice at the grassroots level.

The practice of agricultural profit-sharing (muzara'ah and mukhabarah) has been practiced for a very long time. Scheltema's (1985; "Sharing the Profit in the Dutch East Indies") identified various common patterns, namely "maro" (half-sharing), "mertelu" (three-sharing), and "mrapat" (four-sharing). Although the prevailing profit-sharing system divides the gross profit (Dutch: deelbouw) rather than the net profit (deelwinning) (Syahyuti, 2004). The government has also long issued Profit-Sharing Laws, namely Law No. 2 of 1960 for agricultural profit-sharing and Law No. 16 of 1964 for fisheries.

In addition to profit-sharing, grassroots communities have also long implemented zakat and waqf, primarily in agricultural businesses. As of June 2017, for example, the area of ​​waqf land in Indonesia was 4.36 million hectares, consisting of 435,768 plots (Report of the Director of Waqf Empowerment, January 4, 2017). Furthermore, cash waqf has also collected IDR 2.9 trillion. Waqf in Indonesia has experienced significant growth in the past five years. The management and utilization of waqf assets is developing rapidly, encompassing the education, social, and economic sectors (Firdaus et al., 2021).

The main issue currently is how to transform waqf into a financing scheme. Until now, waqf land has generally been limited to the use of the "3Ms": mosques, prayer rooms, and cemeteries. Waqf can be in the form of land or money, as well as buildings and objects; and waqf can be permanent or term-based (Listiana et al., 2025). Regulations regarding waqf have been regulated, including Law Number 41 of 2004 concerning Waqf and Government Regulation Number 42 of 2006 for its implementation.

Therefore, the practice of Islamic economics is actually something natural in Indonesia and has long been practiced, particularly in agriculture, fisheries, trading activities, and Islamic socio-economic institutions. We simply need to push it further (a push-the-wave strategy). For example, the Minangkabau ethnic group has implemented Islamic economics (which aligns with the values ​​of the People's Economy and the Pancasila Economy) in its customary regulations and agrarian practices (Syahyuti et al., 2022).

The practice of profit-sharing is also deeply rooted in the fisheries value chain. In general, this traditional Islamic economic practice is certainly born from established Islamic values ​​and serves as a guiding principle in economics. Agriculture and fisheries, which are full of risks, will be more equitable for all stakeholders if profit-sharing is implemented. Furthermore, zakat on agricultural produce and other social zakat (alms), as well as pawning, are also practiced, especially regarding the halal status of food, which is a highly emotional issue for our society.

Regulations for this are also quite adequate. We already have various regulations to support the implementation of Islamic economics in the banking, insurance, capital markets, and halal commodity sectors. Regulations on Islamic Banking, primarily Law No. 21 of 2008 concerning Islamic Banking, Law No. 40 of 2014 concerning Insurance, which accommodates Islamic insurance, and regulations on Capital Markets and Sukuk, namely Law No. 19 of 2008 concerning State Sharia Securities (Sukuk Negara). There is also Law No. 33 of 2014 concerning Halal Product Guarantees, and Government Regulation No. 39 of 2021 concerning the Implementation of Halal Product Assurance. Furthermore, KNEKS has twice developed the Indonesian Sharia Economic Masterplan (MEKSI) with strategic pillars including the halal value chain, finance, economic inclusion, and digital empowerment.

Various incentives and policies needed to further accelerate the development include financial incentives, including tax incentives, financing facilities, and sharia capital market instruments. Non-financial incentives include facilitating training and certification of sharia workforce competencies, strengthening e-commerce and digital platforms for halal product distribution, harmonizing policies across ministries, and collaborating with international institutions. Furthermore, institutional and capacity strengthening of halal audit institutions, sharia financial inclusion in regional banking, and education and research are also needed.

******