Challenges and Problems of Decentralization in Infrastructure Development to Improve Public Welfare (Case Study at Rokan Hilir District, Indonesia)

Ali Asfar; Soesilo Zauhar; Siti Rochmah; Hermawan

doi:doi:10.11648/j.jppa.20210502.13

| Peer-Reviewed

Challenges and Problems of Decentralization in Infrastructure Development to Improve Public Welfare (Case Study at Rokan Hilir District, Indonesia)

Ali Asfar, Soesilo Zauhar, Siti Rochmah, Hermawan

Published in Journal of Public Policy and Administration (Volume 5, Issue 2)

Received: 14 April 2021 Accepted: 5 May 2021 Published: 14 May 2021

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to describe and analyze the challenges and problems of implementing decentralization in infrastructure development. In this case the question is related to central and regional development regulations, the interests between the central government and local governments in infrastructure development and related development budget issues. This study uses a descriptive approach (descriptive research) with qualitative research methods (qualitative research). Research findings show the challenges and problems faced in the decentralization of infrastructure development, among others: First, related to differences in regulations between the central government and local governments, central government regulations that are not in accordance with the wishes and make it difficult for the Regional Government of Rokan Hilir District to carry out regional development. Second, there are differences in the interests of the Government which prioritize the interests of the state as a whole compared to the interests of the people in the regions. Third, Actors who have a dominant role in compiling programs, budgets and implementing infrastructure development in the Rokan Hilir District are the executive and legislative. Other actors such as Business Actors, Religious Leaders/Organizations, Educational Institutions/Providers, and Non-Governmental Organizations are less involved in preparing programs, budgets and implementing infrastructure development.. Fourth, the operating budget to pay temporary staff salaries at the Government Office and routine expenditures for the benefit of the government is bigger than the budget used for development. In addition, there are relatively few financial assistance funds from the Provincial Government to the Rokan Hilir district government, so that it does not support the infrastructure development budget.

Published in	Journal of Public Policy and Administration (Volume 5, Issue 2)
DOI	10.11648/j.jppa.20210502.13
Page(s)	44-52
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Decentralization, Infrastructure Development, Publik Welfare, Rokan Hilir District

References

[1]	Cheema, G. S. dan Rondinelli, D. A., (1983). Decentralization and Development: Policy Implementation in Developing Countries. Beverly Hills; London; New Delhi: Sage Publications.
[2]	Nurcholis, Hanif. (2007). Teori dan Praktik Pemerintahan Dan Otonomi Daerah. Jakarta, Grasindo.
[3]	Dick-Sagoe, C. (2020). Decentralization for improving the provision of public services in developing countries: A critical review. Cogent Economics & Finance. 8: 1, 1804036, DOI: 10.1080/23322039.2020.1804036.
[4]	Bahl, R and Bird, R. (2013). Decentralization and Infrastructure in Developing Countries: Reconciling Principles and Practice. IMFG Paper s on Municipal Finance and Gover nance. No. 16, 2013. Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University, and Institute on Municipal Finance and Governance.
[5]	Arikan GG., (2004), “Fiscal decentralization: A remedy for corruption?” dalam International Tax and Public Finance 11 (2): 175-195.
[6]	Braathen, Einar, 2008, Decentralisation and Poverty Reduction, A Review of the Linkages in Tanzania and the International Literature, Norad Report 22b/2008 Discussion, Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation. Tersedia online http://www.norad.no/items/14184/38/2084279701/Decentralisation%20and%20Poverty%20Reduction.pdf.
[7]	World Bank (2005) “Decentralization and Governance: Does Decentralization Improve Public Service Delivery?” in Prem Notes No. 55. http://www1.worldbank org/prem/PREMNotes/premnote55. Pdf.
[8]	World Bank, 2001 Decentralization and governance: Does decentralization improve public service delivery? Working Paper Series.
[9]	Sasaoka, Yuichi, 2007, Decentralization and Conflict, The 889^th Wilton Park Conference, Japan International Cooperation Agency.
[10]	Brinkerhoff, Derick W and Omar Azfar. 2006, Decentralization and Community Empowerment: Does community empowerment deepen democracy and improve service delivery? U.S. Agency for International Development Office of Democracy and Governance.
[11]	Talitha, Tessa., Tommy, F & Delik, H. (2019). Welcoming two decades of decentralization in Indonesia: a regional development perspective. Territory, Politics, Governance https://doi.org/10.1080/21622671.2019.1601595
[12]	Brilantes Jr., Alex, 2004, Decentralization Imperatives, Lessons from Some Asian Countries, Journal of International Cooperation Studies, Vo. 12 No. 1, August.
[13]	Dillinger, William, 1994, Decentralization and Its Implications for Urban Service Delivery. Urban Management Program Discussion Paper 16, Washington, DC: World Bank.
[14]	Purwadi, Ari. (2013). Harmonisasi Pengaturan Perencanaan Pembangunan antara Pemerintah Pusat dan Daerah Era Otonomi Daerah [online] Available at: ejournal. uwks. ac. Id/myfile/201308321915161512/5.
[15]	Devas, N. (1997). Indonesia: What do we mean by decentralization? Public Administration and Development, 17 (3), 351–367.
[16]	Faguet, J.-P. (2014). Decentralization and governance. World Development, 53, 2–13. doi: 10.1016/j.worlddev. 2013.01.002.
[17]	Bardhan, P. (2002). Decentralization of governance and development. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 16 (4), 185–205.
[18]	Rondinelli, D. A. (1981). Government decentralization in comparative perspective: Theory and practice in developing countries. International Review for Administrative Sciences.
[19]	Cheema, G. S, and Rondinelli, Dennis A., (eds.), 2008. Decentralizing Governance: Emerging Concepts and Practices. Washington, D. C., Brookings Institution Press.
[20]	Riggs, Fred W. (ed.). 1994. Fronties of Development Administration. Durham, North Carolina: Duke University.
[21]	Shen, J. (2004). Urban Competitiveness and urban governance in the Globalizing world. Asian Geographer, 23 (1–2), 19–36. doi: 10.1080/10225706.2004.9684110.
[22]	Prud’ Homme, R. (1995). The dangers of decentralization. The World Bank Research Observer, 10 (2), 201–220.
[23]	Rodriguez-Pose, A., & Ezcurra, R. (2010). Does decentralization matter for regional disparities? A Cross-Country Analysis. Journal of Economic Geography, 10 (5), 619–644. doi: 10.1093/jeg/lbp049.
[24]	Hadiz, V. R. (2004). Decentralization and Democracy in Indonesia: A Critique of Neo-Institutionalist Perspectives. Development and Change, 35 (4), 697–718.
[25]	McNabb, David E. (2002), Research Method in Public Administration and Nonprofit Management, Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches. ME.
[26]	Arfan, F. M. (2017). Penataan Regulasi Dalam Mendukung Pembangunan Ekonomi Nasional (Regulatory Reform to Support National Economic Development), Jurnal Rechtsvinding Media Pembinaan Hukum Nasional, 6.(3), 349-367.
[27]	Pepinsky, T. B., & Wihardja, M. M. (2011). Decentralization and economic performance in Indonesia. Journal of East Asian Studies, 11 (3), 337–371.
[28]	Anderson, James E, (1979). Public Policy Making, Thirds Edition, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York Prees.
[29]	Lindblom, Charles E. (1980). The Policy-making Process. UK: Prentice Hall.
[30]	Lester, James P., and Stewart, J. (2000). Public Policy: An Evolutionary Approach. California: Wadsworth Thomson Learning.
[31]	Winarno, Budi. (2008). Kebijakan Publik: Teori dan Proses. Yogyakarta MedPres.
[32]	Madani, Muhlis. (2011). Dimensi Interaksi Aktor Dalam Proses Perumusan Kebijakan Publik, Yogyakarta: Graha Ilmu.
[33]	Wahab, A. S. (2012). Analisis Kebijaksanaan dari Formulasi ke Implementasi Kebijaksanaan Negara. Jakarta: Bumi Aksara.
[34]	Siagian S, P. (2016). Administrasi Pembangunan. Gunung Agung. Jakarta.
[35]	Held, David, (1989). Political Theory and The Modern State: Essays on State, Power, and Democracy, Stanford University Press, California, USA.
[36]	Burns, D. R. Humbleton dan P. Hoggell, (1994). The Politics of Decentralization: Revitalising Local Democracy, McMillan, Basingstoke.
[37]	Mardiasmo. (2002). Akuntansi Sektor Publik. Yogyakarta. Penerbit Andi.
[38]	Beier dan Ferrazzi (1998 Beier dan Ferrazzi, 1998, Fiscal Decentralization in Indonesia: A Comment on Smoked Lewis, World Development Report, 26 (12), 2201-2211.
[39]	Robert Ebel, 2000, The Economic of Fiscal Decentralization, The World Bank (Paper).

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Ali Asfar, Soesilo Zauhar, Siti Rochmah, Hermawan. (2021). Challenges and Problems of Decentralization in Infrastructure Development to Improve Public Welfare (Case Study at Rokan Hilir District, Indonesia). Journal of Public Policy and Administration, 5(2), 44-52. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jppa.20210502.13

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Ali Asfar; Soesilo Zauhar; Siti Rochmah; Hermawan. Challenges and Problems of Decentralization in Infrastructure Development to Improve Public Welfare (Case Study at Rokan Hilir District, Indonesia). J. Public Policy Adm. 2021, 5(2), 44-52. doi: 10.11648/j.jppa.20210502.13

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Ali Asfar, Soesilo Zauhar, Siti Rochmah, Hermawan. Challenges and Problems of Decentralization in Infrastructure Development to Improve Public Welfare (Case Study at Rokan Hilir District, Indonesia). J Public Policy Adm. 2021;5(2):44-52. doi: 10.11648/j.jppa.20210502.13

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.jppa.20210502.13,
  author = {Ali Asfar and Soesilo Zauhar and Siti Rochmah and Hermawan},
  title = {Challenges and Problems of Decentralization in Infrastructure Development to Improve Public Welfare (Case Study at Rokan Hilir District, Indonesia)},
  journal = {Journal of Public Policy and Administration},
  volume = {5},
  number = {2},
  pages = {44-52},
  doi = {10.11648/j.jppa.20210502.13},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jppa.20210502.13},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.jppa.20210502.13},
  abstract = {The purpose of this study is to describe and analyze the challenges and problems of implementing decentralization in infrastructure development. In this case the question is related to central and regional development regulations, the interests between the central government and local governments in infrastructure development and related development budget issues. This study uses a descriptive approach (descriptive research) with qualitative research methods (qualitative research). Research findings show the challenges and problems faced in the decentralization of infrastructure development, among others: First, related to differences in regulations between the central government and local governments, central government regulations that are not in accordance with the wishes and make it difficult for the Regional Government of Rokan Hilir District to carry out regional development. Second, there are differences in the interests of the Government which prioritize the interests of the state as a whole compared to the interests of the people in the regions. Third, Actors who have a dominant role in compiling programs, budgets and implementing infrastructure development in the Rokan Hilir District are the executive and legislative. Other actors such as Business Actors, Religious Leaders/Organizations, Educational Institutions/Providers, and Non-Governmental Organizations are less involved in preparing programs, budgets and implementing infrastructure development.. Fourth, the operating budget to pay temporary staff salaries at the Government Office and routine expenditures for the benefit of the government is bigger than the budget used for development. In addition, there are relatively few financial assistance funds from the Provincial Government to the Rokan Hilir district government, so that it does not support the infrastructure development budget.},
 year = {2021}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Challenges and Problems of Decentralization in Infrastructure Development to Improve Public Welfare (Case Study at Rokan Hilir District, Indonesia)
AU  - Ali Asfar
AU  - Soesilo Zauhar
AU  - Siti Rochmah
AU  - Hermawan
Y1  - 2021/05/14
PY  - 2021
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jppa.20210502.13
DO  - 10.11648/j.jppa.20210502.13
T2  - Journal of Public Policy and Administration
JF  - Journal of Public Policy and Administration
JO  - Journal of Public Policy and Administration
SP  - 44
EP  - 52
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2640-2696
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jppa.20210502.13
AB  - The purpose of this study is to describe and analyze the challenges and problems of implementing decentralization in infrastructure development. In this case the question is related to central and regional development regulations, the interests between the central government and local governments in infrastructure development and related development budget issues. This study uses a descriptive approach (descriptive research) with qualitative research methods (qualitative research). Research findings show the challenges and problems faced in the decentralization of infrastructure development, among others: First, related to differences in regulations between the central government and local governments, central government regulations that are not in accordance with the wishes and make it difficult for the Regional Government of Rokan Hilir District to carry out regional development. Second, there are differences in the interests of the Government which prioritize the interests of the state as a whole compared to the interests of the people in the regions. Third, Actors who have a dominant role in compiling programs, budgets and implementing infrastructure development in the Rokan Hilir District are the executive and legislative. Other actors such as Business Actors, Religious Leaders/Organizations, Educational Institutions/Providers, and Non-Governmental Organizations are less involved in preparing programs, budgets and implementing infrastructure development.. Fourth, the operating budget to pay temporary staff salaries at the Government Office and routine expenditures for the benefit of the government is bigger than the budget used for development. In addition, there are relatively few financial assistance funds from the Provincial Government to the Rokan Hilir district government, so that it does not support the infrastructure development budget.
VL  - 5
IS  - 2
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Ali Asfar

Doctoral Program of Public Administration, Brawijaya University, Malang, Indonesia
Soesilo Zauhar

Faculty of Public Administration Science, University of Brawijaya, Malang, Indonesia
Siti Rochmah

Faculty of Public Administration Science, University of Brawijaya, Malang, Indonesia
Hermawan

Faculty of Public Administration Science, University of Brawijaya, Malang, Indonesia

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Ali Asfar, Soesilo Zauhar, Siti Rochmah, Hermawan. (2021). Challenges and Problems of Decentralization in Infrastructure Development to Improve Public Welfare (Case Study at Rokan Hilir District, Indonesia). Journal of Public Policy and Administration, 5(2), 44-52. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jppa.20210502.13

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Ali Asfar; Soesilo Zauhar; Siti Rochmah; Hermawan. Challenges and Problems of Decentralization in Infrastructure Development to Improve Public Welfare (Case Study at Rokan Hilir District, Indonesia). J. Public Policy Adm. 2021, 5(2), 44-52. doi: 10.11648/j.jppa.20210502.13

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Ali Asfar, Soesilo Zauhar, Siti Rochmah, Hermawan. Challenges and Problems of Decentralization in Infrastructure Development to Improve Public Welfare (Case Study at Rokan Hilir District, Indonesia). J Public Policy Adm. 2021;5(2):44-52. doi: 10.11648/j.jppa.20210502.13

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.jppa.20210502.13,
  author = {Ali Asfar and Soesilo Zauhar and Siti Rochmah and Hermawan},
  title = {Challenges and Problems of Decentralization in Infrastructure Development to Improve Public Welfare (Case Study at Rokan Hilir District, Indonesia)},
  journal = {Journal of Public Policy and Administration},
  volume = {5},
  number = {2},
  pages = {44-52},
  doi = {10.11648/j.jppa.20210502.13},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jppa.20210502.13},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.jppa.20210502.13},
  abstract = {The purpose of this study is to describe and analyze the challenges and problems of implementing decentralization in infrastructure development. In this case the question is related to central and regional development regulations, the interests between the central government and local governments in infrastructure development and related development budget issues. This study uses a descriptive approach (descriptive research) with qualitative research methods (qualitative research). Research findings show the challenges and problems faced in the decentralization of infrastructure development, among others: First, related to differences in regulations between the central government and local governments, central government regulations that are not in accordance with the wishes and make it difficult for the Regional Government of Rokan Hilir District to carry out regional development. Second, there are differences in the interests of the Government which prioritize the interests of the state as a whole compared to the interests of the people in the regions. Third, Actors who have a dominant role in compiling programs, budgets and implementing infrastructure development in the Rokan Hilir District are the executive and legislative. Other actors such as Business Actors, Religious Leaders/Organizations, Educational Institutions/Providers, and Non-Governmental Organizations are less involved in preparing programs, budgets and implementing infrastructure development.. Fourth, the operating budget to pay temporary staff salaries at the Government Office and routine expenditures for the benefit of the government is bigger than the budget used for development. In addition, there are relatively few financial assistance funds from the Provincial Government to the Rokan Hilir district government, so that it does not support the infrastructure development budget.},
 year = {2021}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Challenges and Problems of Decentralization in Infrastructure Development to Improve Public Welfare (Case Study at Rokan Hilir District, Indonesia)
AU  - Ali Asfar
AU  - Soesilo Zauhar
AU  - Siti Rochmah
AU  - Hermawan
Y1  - 2021/05/14
PY  - 2021
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jppa.20210502.13
DO  - 10.11648/j.jppa.20210502.13
T2  - Journal of Public Policy and Administration
JF  - Journal of Public Policy and Administration
JO  - Journal of Public Policy and Administration
SP  - 44
EP  - 52
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2640-2696
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jppa.20210502.13
AB  - The purpose of this study is to describe and analyze the challenges and problems of implementing decentralization in infrastructure development. In this case the question is related to central and regional development regulations, the interests between the central government and local governments in infrastructure development and related development budget issues. This study uses a descriptive approach (descriptive research) with qualitative research methods (qualitative research). Research findings show the challenges and problems faced in the decentralization of infrastructure development, among others: First, related to differences in regulations between the central government and local governments, central government regulations that are not in accordance with the wishes and make it difficult for the Regional Government of Rokan Hilir District to carry out regional development. Second, there are differences in the interests of the Government which prioritize the interests of the state as a whole compared to the interests of the people in the regions. Third, Actors who have a dominant role in compiling programs, budgets and implementing infrastructure development in the Rokan Hilir District are the executive and legislative. Other actors such as Business Actors, Religious Leaders/Organizations, Educational Institutions/Providers, and Non-Governmental Organizations are less involved in preparing programs, budgets and implementing infrastructure development.. Fourth, the operating budget to pay temporary staff salaries at the Government Office and routine expenditures for the benefit of the government is bigger than the budget used for development. In addition, there are relatively few financial assistance funds from the Provincial Government to the Rokan Hilir district government, so that it does not support the infrastructure development budget.
VL  - 5
IS  - 2
ER  -

Copy | Download