By: Theofransus Litaay

Six issues were emerging from my ongoing research in Nusa Tenggara Timur. They are 1) Autonomy and dependency, 2) Gap of policy and practice, 3) Pseudo-reality, 4) Dysfunctional bureaucracy, 5) Function, structure and communication, 6) Distortion by political competition.

1. Autonomy and dependency.
For many, Musrenbang (Musyawarah Perencanaan Pembangunan / Development Planning Deliberation) is often praised as an example of the bottom up planning method.

Diagram 1. Flow of Kabupaten-level Development Planning

The framework above only show partial process of the planning process inside the Kabupaten. In fact, the program should be approved in the provincial Musrenbang forum and national Musrenbang forum before it went back to Kabupaten.

The framework ideals to provide more participation in the planning process, however, the experiences in NTT show that this ideal is yet to be achieved. The mechanism has been used not only to filter the unsuitable projects proposed by the bottom-up process but has also been used as the opportunity to assert central government’s programs that at the end deprives regional autonomy. DPRD (local parliament) could do nothing about this issue. Local content will only comprises around 10-20 % of the APBD (Regional Development Budget). Apart from the APBD, there is “deconcentration fund,” which is much bigger than the APBD itself. All of the “deconcentration” fund’s projects are central government’s projects. The results are some failure and rejection stories during implementation of the project. This situation has led to dependent relationship from the local government to the national level.

Bias to local issues in fact occurred as the planning process moved up from the bottom. This will jeopardizes local knowledge because at the same time there is also another downward movement from the central government that able to “eat up” local planning (a term expressed by a local government planner in Kupang). In this context, it is clear that bottom-up planning alone is insufficient enough as long as the institution is weak to participate in the higher level.

2. Gap of policy and practice.
The first finding above created the gap between the government policy at one side and the community practices at the other side. Government’s programs do not answer the needs of the people, while the community practices could not serve as the source of knowledge for policymaking. Grassroots level initiatives and innovations meet difficulties to flourish due to lack of government’s support, whether in term of budgetary subsidy, market access, and linkage to government’s program.

As the result, although the community is independent enough from the government influences to manage their own life, however the limitation of resources cause them unable to improve their welfare economically. At the other side, government programs that are heavily project oriented made it ineffective when the construction is finish. In some cases, even left behind by the community.

3. Pseudo reality.
Change does not come solely from the policy but mainly from the community themselves. Policy’s impact is in small influence. Whether they want to change or not is heavily depend on the community itself. At the other hand, the government also reporting that change has done, this pseudo reality act will at the end only unsuitable atmosphere for a sound policymaking.
In this behavioral context, there are two types of policy-maker exist.

First, the policy-maker who insists that everything is fine and there is nothing wrong about the policy or its impact. I would like to name it the denial type. Second, the one who thinks and talks openly regarding difficulties or problems in development activity. This type is the open-minded.
The denial type is the person who often relating his/her performance with the position held and who want to be perceived as a successful official. It is for these reasons the denial-type person will deny all unpleasant realities and created his/her own reality. When that created-reality is imposed in governmental organization position, it will against the nature of bureaucracy as noted by Weber as rational entity.

The open-minded type could also be distinguished into two sub-types.
First sub-type is they who already pushed aside in local politics and carry no-baggage to speak freely and openly, while the second sub-type is they who are politically strong at the local level.
In the author’s observation, political power is influenced by several factors such as genealogy, cultural power, and political affiliation. Genealogical factor determined by kinship/familyship relation with influential or strong political figure who provide political patronage for the subject. Cultural factor related to traditional (adat) position in the social structure. The third factor connected to the membership of the ruling political party. At the local level, a blend of these factors will establish political power.

4. Dysfunctional bureaucracy.
There are issues of competence, work ethics, motivation, and dedication. Self-dealing occurred in the agricultural service that victimized the farmers. The quick impression is that people are sitting in their office more for the salary and lack their cause of their job.

Being government employee (PNS: pegawai negeri sipil) is still seen as a mean of social mobility. At the other side, as a social status symbol, bureaucratic position also contributes to high appreciation from the community. As the result, competition to become PNS is rarely seen as a competition to be a better servant, but to reach social position or any social status for the family. They enjoy the position more than enjoy the work to help the community.

Another issue often occurred in the provinces far out from Jakarta is high dependency to state budget, while the private sector is still weak. As the result, government bureaucracy become dominant power source and almost without control. The impact of this situation disincentive or lack of motivation for the bureaucrat to perform well, because without performance control the employees will not be worry of losing their job.

5. Function, structure and communication.
There are some existing offices in provincial and kabupaten levels that served the same function however lack coordination and communication. Duplication of function still exists. The striking example is the Research and Development section, which exist in all levels, do the same work, never coordinated with each other.

Another relating structure that lack attention is the university — whose core business is research but rarely involved in any coordinated action of the government’s research and development activities. Not to mention the private-own university, even the state-owned university herself is not involved in the government’s research activities.

6. Distortion by political competition.
Development program in one particular period often perceived partially belong to respective period, while there is a need to approach it in holistic approach. This factual situation is influenced by a wrong interpretation on the meaning of Pilkada (local election) as a form of democratization process on Kabupaten level since introduced post-1998 reform.

Pilkada which ideally serve as healthy political recruitment mechanism, in fact perceived as a competition to negate the legacy of political competitor including the competitor’s idea on development programs. Development programs are perceived more as the “leader’s program” rather than a product of the system. This way of thinking may resulted in the new leader discontinues previous leader program, including good programs needed by the people.