This question should be simple. However, so far, the answer has been hard to find. I’ve asked about this several times in various scientific forums, but to no avail. My fellow science journalists at SISJ have also posed similar questions to several key figures who should know the answer, but they haven’t found an answer yet either.
Indonesia had previously been announced as the host of the World Science Forum (WSF) 2026. In fact, BRIN made the announcement on its official website. This international forum is one of the key events that brings together scientists, policymakers, international organizations, and various other stakeholders to discuss the relationship between science and global issues. In short, during the WSF 2024 in Hungary, Jakarta was announced as the host city for the 2026 edition. Jakarta is scheduled to host the WSF 2026 on November 10–13, 2026, with the theme Science for Global Resilience and Equity.
Indonesia’s selection was made through an official process. Also, while the WSF was taking place in Budapest, BRIN was involved as the host institution for the next edition. Preparations were subsequently discussed with various international organizations. On July 8–9, 2025, L.T. Handoko, then Chair of BRIN, held a meeting with the WSF Steering Committee (SC) at the BRIN office in Jakarta. That meeting was also posted on his Instagram account. As of December 2025, the WSF Steering Committee was still meeting at UNESCO in Paris to discuss the agenda and organizational framework for the forum in Jakarta.
However, now that November 2026 is drawing near, the World Science Forum Jakarta has disappeared from the calendar. The official WSF website has, in fact, announced that the next forum will take place in Istanbul, Türkiye, on March 17–20, 2027, with a new theme: Science in Times of Global Crises: Transcending Boundaries in a Fragmented World. Preparations are already underway. An organizing committee has been formed, and calls for various side events have been opened.
In other words, the question is no longer whether WSF 2026 in Jakarta will still take place. The answer seems clear: no. But why?
Various questions have emerged in conversations among scientists and science journalists.
Did Indonesia withdraw as the host? Are there funding issues? Has there been a shift in government priorities? Was the event deemed logistically unfeasible? Or did the WSF Steering Committee decide to reschedule and move the forum to Türkiye?
All of these possibilities can occur in the organization of international events. Changes to conference schedules are not unusual. Governments can shift priorities, budgets can change, and international organizations can adjust their calendars. The problem is not simply that the event was canceled.
The problem is that, to date, there has been no explanation readily available to the public regarding why the decision was changed. There has been no press release openly explaining this change, neither from BRIN nor from the WSF Steering Committee.
This is important because hosting the World Science Forum is not merely a matter of renting a conference venue and inviting delegates. The WSF is part of science diplomacy. When Indonesia put itself forward as a host, the country indirectly expressed its willingness to play a role in the global conversation about the future of science.
More importantly, holding the event in Jakarta carries its own significance. The WSF has historically been deeply rooted in Europe. Indonesia has the opportunity to bring the forum closer to the experiences of Global South countries, where issues such as disparities in research funding, access to technology, the capacity of scientific institutions, publications, and representation in global science governance are all too real.
The theme chosen by Indonesia is no small matter: Science for Global Resilience and Equity. It holds a promise of both global resilience and equity within the science system. Therefore, when this opportunity is lost, the public—including scientists—has the right to know how the process unfolded.
For the public, there are several simple questions that are actually worth asking regarding the cancellation of the WSF in Jakarta.
First, who decided on this change? Was it the Indonesian government, BRIN, the World Science Forum Steering Committee, or a joint decision?
Second, when was that decision made? As of December 2025, preparations for Jakarta were still being discussed. By 2026, Türkiye was already preparing for the 2027 WSF. Between those two points in time, there must have been an institutional decision that altered the direction of the event.
Third, what is the reason? If the obstacle is budgetary, the public can understand that the government’s priorities have shifted. If the issue is organizational, an explanation of these challenges could actually serve as a learning opportunity. If the decision originated from the international organizers, that too could be communicated openly.
Fourth, have public resources already been used to prepare for the 2026 WSF? If there have been trips, meetings, program preparations, coordination, or other expenditures using the state budget, then questions regarding the results and accountability become relevant.
These questions do not necessarily stem from suspicion. Transparency is, in fact, necessary so that we do not have to fill the information gap with speculation. In science governance, transparency should not only be demanded of researchers when they disclose data, methods, or conflicts of interest. Institutions that manage science also need to explain their key decisions to the public.
The World Science Forum itself addresses the relationship between science, society, and public policy. It would be somewhat ironic if major changes in the organization of such a forum were to take place without adequate public explanation.
It would certainly be a great pity if the opportunity to host the World Science Forum ultimately did not materialize in Indonesia. Because if a forum that discusses the future of science, public trust, and the governance of knowledge can be moved from one country to another without adequate explanation, then the very question of transparency itself becomes even more relevant. Hopefully, following this, there will be a clear explanation from both BRIN and the WSF Steering Committee.
