Teori governance
•Download as PPT, PDF•
3 likes•10,192 views
This document discusses theories of governance and explores concepts, issues, and practices of governance in Indonesia. It defines governance as the mechanisms, practices, and processes by which governments and citizens manage resources and solve public problems. Good governance requires redefining the roles of government and citizens, with greater accountability and participation from citizens in monitoring government. Governance is understood as an inclusive process rather than a structure or institution. The document then examines the history of governance concepts and their adoption and use by international development organizations. It also discusses challenges and reforms needed for good governance in the Indonesian context.
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (19)
Similar to Teori governance
Similar to Teori governance (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Teori governance
- 1. TEORI GOVERNANCE SYARIEF ARY FA’ID E-mail: riffighter@yahoo.co.id
- 2. GOOD GOVERNANCE & EKSPLORASI KONSEP, ISU DAN PRAKTIK DI INDONESIA
- 3. Memahami Governance Governance diartikan sbg mekanisme, praktek,dan tata cara pemerintah dan warga mengatur sumberdaya serta memecahkan masalah-masalah publik. Dlm Konsep governance, pemerintah hanya menjadi salah satu aktor dan tdk selalu menjadi aktor paling menentukan IMPLIKASInya: peran pemerintah sebagai pembangun maupun penyedia jasa pelayanan dan infrastruktur akan bergeser menjadi badan pendorong terciptanya lingkungan yg mampu memfasilitasi pihak lain dikomunitas dan sektor swasta utk ikut aktif melakukan upaya tersebut.
- 4. Governance menutut redefenisi peran negara, dan itu berarti adanya redefenisi pula pada peran warga. Ada tuntutan yg lebih besar pd warga yaitu memonitor akuntabilitas pemerintah. Governance scr terminologis dpt dipahami sbg kepemerintahan,----shg msh banyak yg beranggapan bahwa governance sinonim dgn government. Interpretasi dari praktek-2 governance selama ini byk mengacu pd perilaku dan kapasitas pemerintah, shg good governance sesolah-2 otomatis akan tercapai apabila ada good government.
- 5. Secara historis: ketika istlah governance pertama kali diadopsi oleh para praktisi dilembaga pembangunan internasional, konotasi governance yg digunakan mmg sgt sempit dan bersifat teknokratis; seputar kinerja yg efektif—manajemen publik dan korupsi. Sejatinya Konsep governance hrs dipahami sbg suatu proses, bukan struktur atau institusi. Governance juga menunjukan inklusivitas. Kalau government dilihat sbg “ mereka” maka governance adalah “ kita”. (Leach & Percy-Smith (2001) Government; hanya politisi dan pemerintahlah yg mengatur, melakukann sesuatu, memberikan pelayanan, sementara sisa dari “kita” adalah penerima yg pasif. Governance; meleburkan perbedaan antara “pemerintah” dan yang “diperintah” karena kita semua adlh bagian dari proses governance.
- 6. Sejarah Konsep Governance Istlah Governance pertamakali dipopulerkan oleh Bank Dunia; dlm publikasinya pd thn 1992 dgn judul: Governance and Development Defenisi Governance mnrt WB: “the manner in wich power is exercised in the management of a country’s social and economic resources for development” pengelolaan kekuasaan yg baik adalh mengelola sumber sosial dan ekonomi utk pembangunan. Menurut ADB (Asia development Bank); yg sejak th 1995 telah memiliki policy paper bertajuk Governance; sound development Management. Kebijakan ADB mengartikulasikan 4 elemen esensial dari dari Good Governance, yaitu; accountability, participation, predicabality, dan transparency.
- 7. UNDP: governance meliputi pemerintah, sektor swasta, dan civil society serta interkasi antar ketiga elemen tersebut. (lihat UND;reconseptualising governanace; Discussion paper No.2;1997) Ciri-ciri Goodgovernance menurut UNDP: Mengikutsertakan semua, transparan dan bertanggungjawab, efektif dan adil, menjamin adanya supremasi hukum, menjamin bahwa perioritas-2 politik, sosial, dan ekonomi, didasarkan pd konsensus masyarakat, serta memperhatikan kepentingan mereka yg paling miskin dan lemah dlm proses pengambilan keputusan menyangkut alokasi sumberdaya pembangunan.
- 8. Pertemuan kedua: Good Governance dlm Konteks Indonesia? Eksklusifitas dan Birokratis Hirarkis dan patologis Patron Client dan kolutif Inkonsistensi Model relasi seperti apa yg hrs dibangun antara warga dan pemeritah utk menjamin tercapainya penyelenggaraan good governance? Jwbn: “kita menginginkan pemerintahan yg demokratis, yaitu pemerintahan yg menekankan pentingnya membangun proses pengambilan keputusan publik yg sensitif terhadp suara-2 komunitas.
- 9. Good Governance: menginginkan proses pengambilan keputusan yg bersifat hirarkis berubah menjadi andil seluruh stakeholders. Aspek partisipasi dlm GG menutut adanya hubungan lgsung antara pemerintah dgn warganya, tdk semata-2 melalui perantara, representatif atau parpol GG yg baik: apabila ada kekuatan yg saling mendukung; warga yg bertanggungjawab, aktif dan memiliki kesadaran dan pemerintah yg terbuka, tanggap, mau mendengar, dan mau melibatkan (inkulusif)
- 10. GG sbg altenatif Penguatan CS, dan Meretas Kemiskinan? Katherine Marshal (direktur WB utk Governance and Social policy diwilayah Asia Timur): kualitas govenance adlh faktor penting utk menjamin suksesnya upaya menghapus kemiskinan dan membangun fondasi menuju masyarakat yg pro-org miskin dan berkeadilan. Tadao Chino (presiden ADB); Apbila org miskin ingin memiliki akses terhadap pelayanan dan fasilitas publik, meeka membutuhkan suara dan partisipasi yg lebih besar dlm badan2 pemerintah lokal atu organisasi Civil Society, pemerintah hrs melibatkan semua pihak yg memiliki kepedulian—CS, bisnis, komunitas donor dan org-2 miskin itu sendiri----dan menjamin bhw pandangan masing-2 diperhatikan. Hanya dgn membuat proses penyususnan kebijakan menjadilebih partisipaoris, transparan, dan akuntabel, maka keberhasilan bisa dicapai.
- 11. GG di Indonesia Fokus isu desentralisasi dan GG ditingkat lokal Mendorong partisipasi dan demokratisasi di tingkat lokal Elaborasi visi governance dan akuntabilitas politik dan keterlibatan kelompok miskin Governance dan birokrasi sbg publik service Penguatan kapasitas dan berkembangnya CS (pmerintah yg baik tdk akan terjadi tanpa CS yg kuat;--- (social capital)
- 12. Robert Putnam (ahli politik USA; dlm artikelnya; Bowling Alone; America’s Declining Social Capital;1995): pentignya CS yg kuat dan aktif agar demokrasi dpt berjalan. Menurut pengamatanya,ada kecenderungan dari warga USA utk menarik diri dari kegiatan sosial. Studi Robert Putnam: Pentingnya restorasi (perbaikan) civic engagement (hubungan) dan civic trust Pentingnya agar elemen SC ditingkat lokal diperkuat Negara hrs membuka relasi baru dgn CS agr
- 13. Governance hrs mampu meningkatkan rasa saling percaya (trust) antar warga masyarakat dgn pemerintah, karena hal tsb sbg komponen ptg pembentuk social capital. Fukuyama (2000): trust berfungsi seperti pelumas yg membuat kelompok organisasi masyarakat dpt berjalan scr efektif. Kepercayaan sosial adlh aset yg berharga yg berfungsi sbg perekat bhkan merupakan utk mencapai CS yg demokratis
- 14. Reformasi sbg jalan masuk GG Thn 1998: pintu masuk melakukan perubahan dan perbaikan Governance Krisis ekonomi menjadi pelajar ptg dari model pengelolaan negara yg buruk sekaligus belajar upayaupaya inovatif utk pemecahan masalah Transisi Politik: mencemaskan relasi pemerintah dan Masyarakat Transisi juga berfungsi menawarkan inovasi dan kreatifitas dari pemerintah lokal maupun CS utk menajamkan fungsi masing-2 dlm penyelenggaraan governance Isu demokrasi dan demokratisasi semakin masif dan masuk pd fase melakukan perubahan diberbagai bidang
- 15. Penyelenggara GG menuntut adanya perubahan yg ekstensif, terutama dlm peran pemerintah Meminjam istilah Osborne & Gaebler (1992): “ Steering” ketimbang “ rowing”, dan “enabling” ketimbang “providing” Pememrintah tdk perlu melakukan segalanya sendri ttp lebih memfasilitasi dan mengkoordinir, bukan mengarahkan dan mengontrol. Reformasi: dari “old government” ke “new goverment” Perubahan =recognitition stage yaitu tahap mengenali dan menyadari bahwa perubahan memang betul-betul betul-betu diperlukan
- 16. Kurt Lewin (1951)dlm teori perubahan: menyebutkan adanya dua kekuatan perubahan, yaitu kekuatan utk mendorong perubahan ( dirving forcess/DF) dan kekuatan utk menentang perubahan (restraining forces;RF) Cth DF:ketakutan kegagalan, ketakutan kurang sumberdaya Kurt Lewin: ada 3 langkah dlm proses perubahan: 1.Unfreezing ;proses pencarian kebekuan dari kondisi status quo 2. Change ; proses perubahan itu sendiri 3. Refreezing; proses konsolidasi kondisi baru
- 18. Faktor Perubahan Governance Faktor utama perubahan dlm proses governance ditentukan oleh proses governance itu sendiri. Orang-2 (aktor) bisa jd penghambat dan juga bisa jd pendukung. Wilson & Rosenfeld (1990), ada 4 alasan: 1. Kepentingan pribadi 2. Rendahnya tingkat kepercayaan dibarengi dgn salah pengertian 3. Perbedaan pandangan atau penilaian terhadap keuntungan dan perubahan 4. Rendahnya toleransi terhadap perubahan
- 19. Komunikasi antar pemrakarsa dan pemegang peranan. Pemimpin memiliki peran ptg dlm proses perubhan governance Mengelola perubahan adlh suatu proses utk menghasilkan perubahan dgn tingkat resistensi yg minimal Tugas agen perubahan: membuat orglain berubahn dn juga memotivasi agr org membuat perubahan.
- 20. Studi, Judith Tendler dlm bukunya: Good Government in the Tropics (1997): menekankan dedikasi sbg faktor yg mempengaruhi adanya kineja yg baik dan “ best practise’. Hrs ada publikasi terhadap keberhasilan pelaksanaan program---mengundang media,dll Memberikan penghargaan/hadiah bgi kinerja yg baik Dibutuhkan dukungan moral dari publik utk melindunginya dari gangguan politisi/org-2lain dipemerintahan yg memliki kekuasaan (tapi tdk mau berubah)
- 21. Jadi Inovasi dalam partisipasi dan governance adlh upaya utk memperkenalkan sesuatu yg baru; ide baru; metode baru, maupun pendekatan baru serta upaya utk mencari solusi keratif dalam rangka meningkatkan partisipasi dan memperbaiki kinerja governance Partisipasi warga—governance: proses ketika warga,sbg individu maupun kelompok sosial dan organisasi, mengambil peran serta ikut mempengaruhi perencanaan, pelaksanaan dan pemantauan kebijakn-2 yg langsung mempengaruhi kehidupan mereka. Good Governance: adalah mekanisme, praktek dan tatacara pemerintah dan warga mengatur sumberdaya dan memecahkan masalah-2 publik. Kualitas governance dinilai dari kualitas interaksi yg terjadi antara komponen governance, yaitu pemerintah, civil society, dan sektor swasta. Governance yang baik memiliki unsur-2 akuntabilitas, partisipasi, predictability, dan transparansi
- 22. Civil Society: ruang tempat kelompok-2 sosial dpt eksis dan bergerak. Secara umum yg dimaksud dgn kelompok sosial meliputi organisasi nonpemerintah/LSM, institusi masyarakat akar rumput, media, institusi pendidikan, asosiasi profesi, organisasi keagamaan, dll—yg secara keseluruhan dpt menjadi kekuatan penyeimbang dari pemerintah maupun sektor swasta.(masyarakat madani, warga masyarakat, masyarakat demokratis, masyarakat terbuka, dan masyarakat santun)
- 23. Pertemuan ke 5 INOVASI GOOD GOVERNANCE DALAM KEBIJAKAN PUBLIK & PELAYANAN PUBLIK OO00 ARIE FA’ID 00OO
- 24. Apa itu Policy (kebijakan publik)? Policy= kebijaksanaan (bagi internal struktur kekuasaan negara) sering disbt: tujuan (goals), program, keputusan, UU, ketentuan-2, usulan-2 dan rancangan-2 yg besar. PBB: policy; sebagai pedoman utk bertindak. Suatu deklarasi mengenai suatu dasar pedomana bertindak tertentu, suatu program mengenai aktivitas2 tertentu atau suatu rencana ( UN, 1975) James E. Anderson (1978); kebijakan sbg perilaku sejumlah aktor (pejabat, kelompok, instansi pemerintah) atau serangkaian aktor dlm suatu bidang kegiatan tertentu.
- 25. Perbedaan policy dan politic? Carl Friendrich: kebijakan adalah suatu tindakan yg mengarah pada tujuan yg diusulkan oleh seseorang, kelompok atau pemerintah dalam lingkungan tertentu sehubungan dgn adanya hambatan-2 tertentu seraya mencari peluang-2 utk mencapai tujuan atau mewujudkan sasaran yg diinginkan.
- 26. Apakah Kebijakan Negara itu? Chief J.O Udoji (1981): suatu tindakan bersanksi yg mengarah pada suatu tujuan tertentu ug diarahkan pd suatu masalah atau kelompok tertentu yg saling berkaitan yg mempengaruhi sebagian besar warga masyarakat. W.I. Jenkis (1978): Serangkaian keputusan yg saling berkaitan yg diambil oleh seorang /sekelompok aktor politik berkenaan dgn tujuan yg telah dipilih beserta cara-2 utk mencapainya dalam suatu situasi dimana keputusan-2 itu pd prinsipnya masih berada dlm batas-batas kewenangan kekuasaan dari para aktor tsb.
- 27. Ciri-ciri kebijakan negara David Easton: orang-2 yg memiliki wewenang dlm sistem politik, yakni para tetua adat, para ketua suku, para eksekutif, para legislator, para hakim, para administrator, para monarki, dll. Easton: mereka inilah org-2 yg dlm keseharianya terlibta dlm urusan-2 politik dari sistem politik dan dianggap sbgian besar warga sistem politik itu sbg pihak yg bertanggungjwb atas urusan-2 politik tadi dan berhak mengambil tindakan-2 dlm batas-2 peran dan kewenangan mereka.
- 28. Implikasi Konsep Easton: 1. 2. Kebijakan negara lebih merupakan tindakan yg mengarah pada tujuan dari pada perilaku/tindakan serba acak dan kebetulan Kebijakan pd hakekaatnya terdiri atas tindakan-2 yg saling berkait dan berpola yg mengarah pd tujuan tertentu yg dilakukan oleh pejabat pemerintah dan bukan merupakan keputusan-2 yg berdiri sendiri
- 29. 3. Kebijakan menyangkut berbagi apa yg dilakukan oleh pemerintah dlm bidang-2 tertentu 4. Kebijakan negara mungkin berbentuk negatif dan positif
- 30. Kebijakan sbg pintu masuk GG Butuh aktor negara yg paham ttg basic need public Butuh sistem yg mendukung pada GG Butuh partisipasi masyarakat Butuh responsibitas birokrasi dan aktor politik Include dlm perencanaan yg aspiratif
- 32. Mendefinisikan Ulang Governance Zartman (1997): governing is conflict management Esensi dasar dari g o ve rna nc e adalah pengelolaan konflik Fungsi utama pemerintahan pada dasarnya adalah mengelola konflik di antara berbagai kelompokkelompok politik, sosial, ekonomi yang ada di dalamnya Kegiatan atau proses memerintah adalah kegiatan mengelola perbedaan-perbedaan atau pertentanganpertentangan antar-berbagai kelompok, golongan dalam masyarakat. Reviu kritis terhadap konsep & praktik konvensional governance
- 33. Konteks Konvensional Governance Bergesernya era g o ve rnm e nt ke era g o ve rna nc e dalam isu-isu kebijakan dan pelayanan publik… Ciri: tidak eksklusifnya lagi tanggung jawab dan penanganan masalah-masalah publik oleh organisasi pemerintah, tetapi juga oleh organisasi bisnis dan kekuatan masyarakat sipil, serta jejaring di antara ketiganya… Ruang Lingkup: Lokal/Nasional: debirokratisasi, deregulasi, privatisasi, liberalisasi berbagai kebijakan publik, adopsi kebijakan desentralisasi politik… Regional/Internasional:intensifikasi dan ekstensifikasi fenomena globalisasi bersemangat “neo-liberal” yang pro-pasar dan antiperan pemerintah
- 34. Konsep Governance: Yang Klasik... Ac o m p le x c o nc e p t tha t inc lud e s the s ta te ins titutio ns a nd s truc ture s , d e c is io nm a king p ro c e s s e s , c a p a c ity to im p le m e nt a nd the re la tio ns hip be twe e n g o ve rnm e nt o ffic ia ls a nd the p ublic [Landell-Mills & Serageldin, 1992]
- 35. Redefinisi Konseptual Peran kelembagaan tripilar “negara/pemerintahbisnis/swasta-masyarakat sipil” Konseptualisasi liberal [e.g. UNDP, Bank Dunia, “Osbornian”, “Washington Consensus”] Konseptualisasi non-liberal [e.g. Gramscian, “Third Way”, “Fair Trade”, local wisdoms…] Pengembangan kelembagaan g o ve rna nc e Kapasitas manajemen pelayanan publik dan pengelolaan berbagai kebijakan publik di bidang-bidang sosial, ekonomi, dan politik Efektifitas peran pemerintah dalam pelayanan publik
- 36. Negara/Pemerintah Suprastruktur Negara/Pemerintah: gejalagejala politik dalam lembaga-lembaga negara, seperti parlemen, birokrasi pemerintahan, militer, dsb. I rm e d ia ry Negara/Pemerintah: gejalante gejala politik dalam lembaga-lembaga yang menjadi (atau diasumsikan sebagai) perantara politik warga, yaitu pers/media massa, partai politik, kelompok kepentingan atau penekan, lobby, dsb. Infrastruktur Negara/Pemerintah: gejala-gejala politik dalam lembaga-lembaga yang dibentuk dalam konteks komunitas atau masyarakat sipil: pemerintahan atau perwakilan warga desa, adat, dll
- 37. Negara/ Pemerintah: S ayonara? Latar 1: “Strong state”, “developmental state”, otoriterisme negara, birokrasi, militer, patronklientilisme pemerintah-bisnis Latar 2: “deetatisme”, “destatisme”, I.e. tekanan resep neo-liberal yang membatasi peran negara (re: peran negara minimalis) Respon: mewirausahakan pemerintah, re inve nting g o ve rnm e nt (to s te e r, no t to ro w… ) [re: Osborne]
- 38. Dimensi-dimensi Negara Kuat/ Lemah… The capacity of state actors & state institutions to autonomously devise & implement public policy, shaping the preferences & interests of other actors, intervening in & transforming economic & cultural structures… State strength=bureaucratic insulation (b.I.)+ policy-making coherence (p.m.C)
- 39. Praktik b.I + p.m.C Para pemimpin negara & birokrasi: industrializing strategies, restoring societal discipline, resolving ethnic imbalances, inspiring nationalist sentiments Secara ekonomi, ditandai oleh: deep & systematic state interventions into the economy atau steadfast refusal to intervene, despite special pleading from powerful interest groups
- 40. Negara/ Pemerintah: Respon Nonliberal… Negara “Jalan Ketiga” dengan ciri-ciri: Devolution: respond structurally to globalization, reassertion of state authority Double democratization Renewal of the public sphere: transparency Administrative efficiency Mechanisms of direct democracy Government as risk manager Negara “Jalan Ketiga” sebagai “Social Investment State” Demokrasi Kosmopolitan
- 41. Social Investment State Different roles of state: In classical social democracy, wealth creation is incidental to economic security & redistribution… In neo-liberal, wealth generation means competitiveness… In third way, wealth creation means essential state role in investing human resources & infrastructure needed to develop entrepreneurial culture The state foster the inclusive society, i.e. a society which regards equality as inclusion, adopts limited meritocracy, renews its public sphere (civic liberalism), goes beyond the work society, applies positive welfare, and promotes the social investment state
- 42. Masyarakat Sipil [1] Masyarakat sipil: definisi, konsep dan teori Negara dan masyarakat sipil: eksplorasi pengalaman masyarakat sipil dalam berhubungan dengan negara. Posisi masyarakat sipil dalam kehidupan ekonomi: eksplorasi pengalaman masyarakat sipil dalam mengelola perekonomian mereka. Peran masyarakat sipil dalam kehidupan sosial: bagaimana mereka berperan dalam proses perubahan sosial yang lebih luas: yang diperlukan adalah eksplorasi pengalaman masyarakat sipil dalam kehidupan sosial mereka sendiri, misalnya dalam hal s o c ia l s a fe ty .
- 43. Masyarakat Sipil [2] Keberadaan LSM dan bagaimana mereka mengembangkan strategi pemberdayaan masyarakat sipil: eksplorasi pengalaman masyarakat sipil dalam merintis dan mengembangkan LSM. Proses transnasionalisasi atau globalosasi gerakan masyarakat sipil: eksplorasi pengalaman masyarakat sipil dalam merintis dan mengembangkan jaringan transnasional atau global
- 44. Masyarakat Sipil: Berdaya, Mandiri…? Liberal: ketidakberdayaan di hadapan 2 pilar lain, o.k.i perlu diperkuat kapasitasnya, dimandirikan, dst… Non-liberal: d is c o urs e -nya yang timpang, perlu c o unte rd is c o urs e [re: Gramsci on intelectual organic, Giddens on renewed civil society & democratic family] Negara Dunia Ketiga: polarisasi masyarakat yang “overlapping” berdasar garis ideologi, primordialisme, struktur ekonomi & demografis, konsentrasi geografis Re: Indonesianya Clifford Geertz tentang varian-varian masyarakat abangan, santri, priyayi yang masih menjadi m a in d is c o urs e dalam perpolitikan dan kehidupan sosial-ekonomi dan masih menjadi acuan utama dalam berbagai literatur mengenai masyarakat sipil Indonesia, e.g. Samuel & Nordholt (2004) I o ne s ia in Tra ns itio n: Re thinking ‘Civ il So c ie ty ’, ‘Re g io n’ a nd nd ‘Cris is ’ ]
- 45. Gramsci’s Organic Intelectual Konteks: perlunya menghapus perbedaan kerja manual & kerja intelektual: di bawah kapitalisme dalam proses produksi, dalam masyarakat sipil, dan dalam aparat negara hubungan antara pengetahuan & kekuasaan: monopoli pengetahuan oleh kelas yang berkuasa Definisi: “semua orang adalah intelektual, namun tidak semua orang mempunyai fungsi intelektual…”
- 46. Giddens’ Renewed Civil Society & Democratic Family Renewed civic culture: Government & civil society in partnership Community renewal through harnessing local initiative Involvement of the third sector Protection of the local public sphere Community-based crime prevention The democratic Family: Emotional & sexual equality Mutual rights & responsibilities in relationships Co-parenting Life-long parental contracts Negotiated authority over children Obligations of children to parents The socially-integrated family
- 47. Masyarakat Sipil & Modal Sosial Contemporary Indonesian civil society: its development, changes, and continuity… The context of political reform, changes and decentralization policy The context of recent economic development policy Need to assess and adopt the concept of “social capital” in terms of its empirical context in Indonesian society
- 48. Social Capital: Brief History Traced back in the 1960s in the work of sociologist Jane Jacobs, then adopted by Pierre Bourdieu in 1986, then picked up initially by James Coleman and others… Popularized in 1990s by the World Bank through a research program devoting to develop the concept, then by Robert D. Putnam in his article, Bo wling A ne : A e ric a 's De c lining So c ia l lo m Ca p ita l (1995) and his book Bo wling A ne : The lo Co lla p s e a nd Re viva l o f A e ric a n Co m m unity m (2000).
- 49. Social Capital: Concepts Adopted #1 From Bourdieu’s (1986) three forms of capital (economic, cultural and social): social capital is the aggregate of the actual or potential resources which are linked to possession of a durable network of more or less institutionalized relationships of mutual acquaintance and recognition Coleman (1988): The function identified by the concept of ‘social capital’ is the value of these aspects of social structure to actors as resources that they can use to achieve their interests
- 50. Social Capital: Concepts Adopted #2 Putnam (1993, 1995): social capital refers to the collective value of all social networks and the inclinations that arise from these networks to do things for each other social capital as ‘trust, norms and networks’ that facilitate cooperation for mutual benefit Francis Fukuyama (1995, 1999): social capital can be defined simply as the existence of a certain set of informal values or norms shared among members of a group that permit cooperation among them families are obviously important sources of social capital everywhere
- 51. Social Capital: A Recap… Social capital is generally referred to as the set of trust, institutions, social norms, social networks, and organizations that shape the interactions of actors within a society and are an asset for the individual and collective production of well-being. At the macro level, social capital can affect the economic performance and the processes of economic growth and development [Fabio Sabatini, Social Capital Gateway]
- 52. Praktik Modal Sosial: Temuan dari GDS 1+ (Data Sources) Modules: Households, Kepala Desa Questions explored: neighbor trustworthiness (at neighborhood and neighboring village levels) types and levels of community participation, perception on police service deliveries, duration of living in the area, distance and means of transportation to the nearest asphalt road, market, kelurahan office, police station, post office, bank land and other secondary/tertiary goods ownership, house sizes and types of roofing, walls, flooring, source of lighting knowledge on political events and figures at central, provincial, and local (kabupaten, kecamatan and village) levels, and on corruption cases
- 53. GDS 1+ Civil Society GDS 1+ types and levels of civil society participation are parallel to those of GDS 1: cognitive –rather than affective– involvement in community programs: Most of respondents (52%) are aware of the existence of kelurahan or village’s community development programs, 42% not knowing it However, most of them (59%) never show up in the meeting to plan such programs, only 11 % of them always attend such meetings Most of them (56.5%) have no material (money) contribution to such programs
- 54. Trustworthiness among Close Neighbors [1] Who can be trusted (among close neighbors)? 2% 0% 10% all 47% 41% majority only minor part none don't know
- 55. Trustworthiness among Close Neighbors [2] Majority of respondents believe that their close neighbors are all can be trusted (47%) and most of them can be trusted (41%), while the remaining 10% believe that minor part of their neighbors can be trusted… It can be inferred that: level of trustworthiness among close neighbors is generally very high only very small part of the society that believe that their close neighbors are not trusted…
- 56. Trustworthiness among Distance Neighbors [1] Who can be trusted (among distance neighbors)? 24% 4% all majority only minor part 24% 32% none don't know 16%
- 57. Trustworthiness is Shifted.. Trustworthiness is shifted lower as neighbors move outward to their distance ones: Only 16% believe that all their distance neighbors can be trusted (compare to 47% in the case of close neighbors) 32% believe that majority of their distance neighbors can be trusted (compare to 41% in the case of close neighbors) Even 24% of them do not have knowledge of whether their distance neighbors can be trusted…
- 58. Trustworthiness and Community Program Awareness [Cognitive Participation] Those who are aware of the existence of community development program tends to have more positive attitude toward trustworthiness both among close and distance neighborhoods than those who are not aware of it… [See figures in the next slides]
- 59. Close Neighborhoods Community Awareness & Atittude toward Trustworthiness all 1500 1000 don’t know 500 majority 0 none aware not aware only a minor
- 60. Distance Neighborhoods Community Awareness & Atittude toward Trustworthiness all 1000 don’t know 500 majority 0 none aware not aware only a minor
- 61. Desentralisasi: Ruang Lingkup Embraces a variety of concepts and types… (ranging from reorganization of financial, administrative, to service delivery systems): each concept/type has different characteristics, policy implications, and conditions for success The transfer of authority and responsibility for public functions from the central government to subordinate or quasi-independent government organizations and/or the private sector…
- 62. Types of Decentralization Political Decentralization Administrative Decentralization Deconcentration Delegation Devolution Fiscal Decentralization Economic/Market Decentralization Privatization Deregulation
- 63. Political Decentralization Goal: giving citizens or their elected representatives more power in public decision making Parallel with pluralistic politics, representative government Support democratization, i.e. decisions made with greater participation will be better informed and more relevant to diverse interests in society Requires: constitutional reforms, development of pluralistic political parties, the strengthening of legislatures, creation of local political units, the encouragement of effective public interest groups
- 64. Administrative Decentralization [AD] Goal: redistributing authority, responsibility, and financial resources for providing public services among different levels of government The transfer of responsibility for the planning, financing and management of certain public functions from the central government and its agencies to field units of government agencies, subordinate units of levels of government, semiautonomous public authorities or corporations, or area-wide, regional or functional authorities
- 65. AD #1: Deconcentration Often considered as the weakest form of decentralization and used most frequently in unitary states Redistributes decision making authority and financial & management responsibilities among different levels of the central government: Shifting responsibilities from central government officials to those working in regions, provinces, districts Creating strong field administration or local administrative capacity under the supervision of central government ministries
- 66. AD #2: Delegation More extensive form of decentralization Transfers responsibility for decision-making and administration of public functions to semiautonomous organizations not wholly controlled by the central government, but ultimately accountable to it Examples: creation of public enterprises, housing authorities, transportation authorities, special service districts, semi-autonomous school districts, regional development corporations, special project implementation units (which have a great deal of discretion in decision making)
- 67. AD #3: Devolution When governments devolve functions, they transfer authority for decision making, finance, and management to quasi-autonomous units of local government with corporate status Transfer of responsibilities for services to municipalities that elect their own mayors and councils, raise their own revenues, have independent authority to make investment decisions Local governments have clear and legally recognized geographical boundaries Underlies most political decentralization…
- 68. Fiscal Decentralization Transfer of financial responsibility as a core component of decentralization: adequate level of revenue generation and capacity to make decisions about expenditures Forms: self-financing or cost recovery through user charge, co-financing or co-production arrangements through which the users participate in providing services and infrastructure through monetary and labor contributions, expansion of local revenues through property and sales taxes or indirect charges, intergovernmental transfers that shift general revenues from taxes collected by the central government to local governments, authorization of municipal borrowing and the mobilization of either national or local government resources through loan guarantees
- 69. Economic/Market Decentralization The most complete form of decentralization: privatization and deregulation Usually accompanied by economic liberalization and market development policies Privatization: allowing private enterprises to perform functions that had previously been monopolized by government, contracting out the provision or management of public services or facilities to commercial enterprises, financing public sector programs through the capital market, transferring responsibility for providing services from the public to the private sector through the divestiture of state-owned enterprises Deregulation: reduces the legal constraints on private participation in service provision, allows competition among private suppliers for services that in the past had been provided by the government or by regulated monopolies
- 70. Rationale for Decentralization As seen by economists: allocative efficiency, i.e. decisions about public expenditure that are taken by a level of government closer, and more responsive, to a local constituency are more likely to reflect the demand for local services than similar decisions taken by a remote central government) people are more willing to pay for services which they find to be responsive to their priorities, especially if they have been involved in the decision making process with regard to delivering the services to improve the "competitiveness" of governments and enhance innovation -- hence the likelihood that they will act to satisfy the wishes of citizens…
- 71. Obstacles of Decentralization Macro-level economic strategy: decentralization may make stabilization policies more difficult to implement, and indeed, may itself lead to destabilizing levels and composition of overall public expenditures and public debt Concern on equity: interjurisdictional and interpersonal, i.e. Some jurisdictions are better endowed with resources than others, perhaps because of size or location Intergovernmental fiscal program may be designed to shift resources to disadvantaged areas to ensure that all citizens enjoy a minimum level of service, regardless of location, or receive enhanced assistance to accelerate amelioration of deficits, because of location local governments also play very important roles in implementing central distributional programs and in determining a host of tax, expenditure and intra-locality transfer schemes Where local economies are intrinsically open and many resources, especially key human resources, are mobile, only limited success should be expected from jurisdictionally focused distributional programs…
- 72. Good politics & economics: Conditions to successful decentralization [1] Decentralization framework must link local financing and fiscal authority to the service provision responsibilities and functions of the local government - so that local politicians can bear the costs of their decisions and deliver on their promises Local community must be informed about the costs of services and service delivery options involved and the resource envelope and its sources - so that the decisions they make are meaningful. Participatory budgeting, such as in Porto Alegre, Brazil, is one way to create this condition
- 73. Good politics & economics: Conditions to successful decentralization [2] A mechanism by which the community can express its preferences in a way that is binding on the politicians --so that there is a credible incentive for people to participate A system of accountability that relies on public and transparent information which enables the community to effectively monitor the performance of the local government and react appropriately to that performanceso that politicians and local officials have an incentive to be responsive Instruments of decentralization --the legal and institutional framework, the structure of service delivery responsibilities and the intergovernmental fiscal system-- are designed to support the political objectives
- 74. Trends in Decentralization Gradual appearing of a new distribution of responsibilities among the national, regional and local levels of government through the process of deconcentration (an initial and limited form of decentralization); Disengagement of the state and economic liberalization, which favored a new wave of decentralization through devolution; Increased involvement of local jurisdictions and civil society in the management of their affairs, with new forms of participation, consultation, and partnerships
- 75. Bisnis/ Dunia Usaha: Hendak ke Mana? Latar 1: Clie ntilis t Bus ine s s e s , Priva te Se c to rs und e r Stro ng De ve lo p m e nta l Sta te …[re: ersatz capitalism-nya Yoshihara Kunio] Fenomena “Ali-Baba”… Fenomena konglomerasi bisnis… Fenomena “rent-seeking BUMN” Latar 2: Global/domestic capitalist development Globalisasi neo-liberal Washington consensus-nya IMF Fenomena “addicted to (foreign) capital” [re: Walden Bello] Fenomena “bubble economy” [re: Paul Krugman]
- 76. Bisnis yang Tercerahkan: Mungkinkah? Bisnis yang memiliki perhatian, kepedulian dan sense pegembangan masyarakat… Liberal 1: community development, corporate responsibility, good corporate governance Liberal 2: Trade unionism, serikat buruh, serikat pekerja, dll…[yang kadang-kdang didukung oleh kebijakan negara tentang perburuhan] Non-liberal: jaringan “fair trade” sebagai counter-act dari praktik “free trade”
- 77. Reference Dwiyanto dkk, Re fo rm a s i Ta ta Pe m e rinta ha n d a n O to no m i Da e ra h, “Pendahuluan” Heywood, Po litic s , Bab 1 “What is Politics?” Arfani, “Konflik, Biografi Konflik dan G o v e rna nc e ” Arfani: “Governance dan Pengelolaan Konflik” Rupesinghe, ‘Governance and Conflict Resolution in Multi-Ethnic Societies’ Fisher et al, M ng e lo la Ko nflik: Ke tra m p ila n d a n Stra te g i untuk e Be rtind a k, Zed Books & the British Council Burki, et al ‘Decentralization: Politics in Command (Chapter 1) Be y o nd the Ce nte r: De c e ntra liz ing the Sta te Burki, et al ‘Getting the Rules Right’ (Chapter 2) ibid
- 78. Reference [2] UNDP, ‘Reintegration & Governance at Local Levels’ Martinussen, ‘Decentralisation & Local-level Politics’ (Chapter 15) So c ie ty , Sta te & M rke t] a Oyamada, “Local Governance” Randle, ‘Civil Resistance & Re a lp o litik’, Civil Re s is ta nc e Cox, ‘Broadening the Viewing Point’, ATruly Civ il So c ie ty Zartman, ed. G o v e rna nc e a s Co nflic t M na g e m e nt a Tadjoeddin, Anatomi Kekerasan Sosial dalam Konteks Transisi: Kasus Indonesia 1990-2001, UNSFIR April 2002 Abdullah & Arfani, ‘Kultur & Struktur Pengelolaan Konflik di Indonesia: Kasus Pertikaian Etnis & Agama’ Cahyono & Trijono, PEMLU 2 0 0 4: Tra ns is i De m o kra s i d a n I Ke ke ra s a n, CSPS Books
- 79. Reference [3] Nordholt, AG e ne a lo g y o f Vio le nc e in I o ne s ia nd Panggabean, ‘Federalisasi & Demokratisasi di Indonesia’, JSP Maret 1998 Arfani, ‘Anatomi Otonomi Daerah’ PREMnotes WB, ‘Indonesia’s Decentralization after Crisis, Sept. 2000 Ahmad & Hofman, ‘Indonesia: Decentralization— Opportunities and Risks’, WB Indonesia, March 2000 Dwiyanto, et al, Bab 5 “Masyarakat Sipil” LSAF & TAF, G e ra ka n Ke a g a m a a n d a la m Pe ng ua ta n Civil So c ie ty Samuel & Nordholt, I o ne s ia in Tra ns itio n: Re thinking Co vil nd So c ie ty , Re g io n a nd Cris is , Pustaka Pelajar 2004
- 80. Reference [4] Bourdieu (1986), The Fo rm s o f Ca p ita l Coleman (1988), ‘Social capital in the creation of human capital’, A e ric a n Jo urna l o f So c io lo g y , vol. 94, S. 95m 120 Fukuyama (1995), Trus t: The So c ia l Virtue s a nd the Cre a tio n o f Pro s p e rity , Penguin, London. Fukuyama (1999), The G re a t Dis rup tio n: Hum a n N ture a a nd the Re c o ns titutio n o f So c ia l O rd e r, Free Press, New York Putnam (1995), ‘Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital’, Jo urna l o f De m o c ra c y , vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 65-78. Putnam (1993), M king De m o c ra c y Wo rk: Civic a Tra d itio ns in M d e rn I ly , Princeton University Press, o ta
- 81. Reference [5] Jacques Bierling & George Lafferty, “Pressure for change: capitalist development and democracy” (Chapter 12), dalam Richard Maidment, David Goldblatt & Jeremy Mitchell (1998), G o ve rna nc e in the A ia -Pa c ific (London s & NY: Routledge & the Open University) William Case, “Sa y o na ra to the Strong State: from Government to Governance in the Asia Pacific” in Maidment et al, eds (1998) G o ve rna nc e in the A ia Pa c ific (London/NY: s Routledge/Open University)