Bureaucratic Reform and Changes in Public Service Paradigm Post-Decentralization in Indonesia: 2001-2010
Abstract
This paper aimed to explain the link between bureaucracy and public services. The focus of the research was on bureaucratic reform and changes in the paradigm of public services after decentralization in Indonesia in the period 2001-2010. Several regions carried out bureaucratic reforms in order to provide optimal services, but of the approximately 440 regencies/cities in Indonesia at that time, most did not do so. By using qualitative methods, the authors found the following results: post-decentralization, bureaucratic behavior in public services did not undergo a paradigm shift; and bureaucratic reform as an effort to develop better public services could be achieved through building bureaucratic capacity and accountability. Based on the results, the authors provide recommendations: first, the pattern of personnel recruitment must change to a merit system; second, work standards and a system of rewards and punishments need to be developed; and third, the regional head must reform the bureaucracy with the support of the regional legislature.
Keywords: decentralization policy, bureaucracy, public service, paradigm change
References
[1] Arko-Cobbah A. Civil society and good governance: Challenges for public libraries in South Africa. Libr Rev. 2006;55(6):349–62.
[2] Gamlath S. Humanomics Article information?: Humanomics [Internet]. 2013;29(4):240–59. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/H-03-2013-0015
[3] Tjokrowinoto M. Birokrasi dalam polemik. Pusat Studi Kewilayahan Universitas Muhammadiyah Malang; 2001.
[4] Fuller A, Unwin L. What counts as good practice in contemporary apprenticeships?: Evidence from two contrasting sectors in England. Educ Train. 2007;49(6):447–58.
[5] Torfing J, Sørensen E, Røiseland A. Transforming the Public Sector Into an Arena for Co-Creation: Barriers, Drivers, Benefits, and Ways Forward. Adm Soc. 2019;51(5):795–825.
[6] Chittoo HB, Ramphul N, Nowbutsing B. Globalization and Public Sector Reforms in a Developing Country. Culture. 2009;8(2):30–51.
[7] Haruna PF. Reforming Ghana ’ s Co Public Service?: Issues and Experiences in pa rative Perspective. 2012;63(3):343–54.
[8] Neshkova MI. Th e Eff ectiveness of Administrative Reform in New Democracies. 2012;72( June):324–33.
[9] Prasojo E, Kurniawan Teguh. Reformasi Birokrasi dan Good Governance: Kasus Best Practices dari Sejumlah Daerah di Indonesia. Makalah the 5th international Symposium of Antropologi Indonesia. 2008.
[10] Pribadi U. Bureaucratic reform, public service performance, and citizens’ satisfaction: The case of Yogyakarta, Indonesia. Public Policy Adm. 2021;20(2):312–26.
[11] Moe TM. Power and Political Institutions. Perspect Polit. 2005;3(2):215–33.
[12] Hacker JS. Privatizing risk without privatizing the welfare state: the hidden politics of social policy retrenchment in the United States. Am Polit Sci Rev [Internet]. 2004;98(2):243–60. Available from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4145310
[13] Effendi S. Pelayanan Publik, Pemerataan dan Administrasi Negara Baru. Prisma. 1986;38.
[14] Dwiyanto A. Kinerja Organisasi Pelayanan Publik di DIY dan Jawa Tengah. Res Rep. 1993;UGM, Yogya.
[15] Harrison L. Metodologi penelitian politik. Prenada Media; 2016.
[16] Patton MQ. Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice. Sage Publ. 2014.
[17] Antara News. Pengamat: Reformasi Birokrasi Lima Tahun Terakhir Tidak Jalan. 2009 Aug 4; Available from: https://www.antaranews.com/berita/149750/pengamatreformasi- birokrasi-lima-tahun-terakhir-tidak-jalan
[18] Subarsono AG. Pelayanan Publik yang Efisien, Responsif dan Non-Partisan. In: Mewujudkan Good Governance Melalui Pelayanan Publik. 2021. p. 135.
[19] World Bank Group. Doing Business 2005: Removing obstables to growth [Internet]. 2005. 161 p. Available from: https://www.doingbusiness.org/content/dam/doingBusiness/media/Annual- Reports/English/DB05-FullReport.pdf
[20] Quah JST. Ensuring good governance in Singapore: Is this experience transferable to other Asian countries? Int J Public Sect Manag. 2013;26(5):401–20.
[21] Kaufmann D, Kraay A, Mastruzzi M. Governance matters VIII: aggregate and individual governance indicators. World bank policy Res Work Pap. 2009;4978.
[22] Keban YT. Enam dimensi strategis administrasi publik: konsep, teori dan isu. Gava Media. 2004.