Download fulltext HTML
Vidriza, U., & Ananta Talmera, D. (2024). How Public and Private Investment Reduces Poverty: A Case Study of Provinces with Nickel Production in Indonesia. KnE Social Sciences, 9(20), 211–222. https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v9i20.16514

https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v9i20.16514

statistics

  • 9 Abstract Views
  • 7 PDF Views
  • 0 HTML Views

authors

  • Ullya Vidriza

    Ullya Vidriza

    Universitas Pembangunan Nasional Veteran Jakarta, Jakarta, Indonesia
  • Daniel Ananta Talmera

    Daniel Ananta Talmera

    Ministry of Agrarian Affairs and Spatial Planning/National Land Agency, Jakarta, Indonesia

Published Date

  • Jul 4, 2024

How Public and Private Investment Reduces Poverty: A Case Study of Provinces with Nickel Production in Indonesia

KnE Social Sciences / The 3rd Jakarta Economic Sustainability International Conference (3rd JESICA) / Pages 211–222

Abstract

This study aims to determine the impact of government and private investment on poverty rates in Indonesia’s nickel-producing provinces (South Sulawesi, Central Sulawesi, Southeast Sulawesi, and North Maluku). By utilizing the panel data analysis approach from 2013 to 2022, we can observe how the realization of Foreign Investment (PMA), Domestic Investment (PMDN), and Government Investment (BM) affects poverty reduction. The study’s findings suggest that Domestic Investment (PMDN) has considerable impact on poverty reduction. Meanwhile, the realization of Foreign Investment (PMA) and Government Investment (BM) had no substantial impact on poverty reduction in nickel-producing provinces. Along with the increase in the amount of foreign investment and government investment in nickel-producing provinces in Indonesia, research shows that the results do not have a significant effect on alleviating poverty in these nickel-producing provinces. So investment must be encouraged to be more inclusive or encourage labor-intensive investment. The government and corporate sector can utilize this information to help determine the direction of investment in Indonesia’s nickel-producing provinces.


Keywords: poverty, foreign direct investment, domestic direct investment, public investment

References
[1] Naryono E. Nickel mine exploitation in Indonesia, between a blessing and a disaster of environmental damage. Center for Open Science 2023:1–22.

[2] Taufik Y, Adijaya S, Zainuddin Rela I. Nickel Smelter on social-economics and environmental issues. Res Sq 2022:1–25. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs- 2232605/v1.

[3] Dahlia D. The role of public expenditure and private investment on economic growth in Makassar. Point of View Research Economic Development 2021;2:1–10.

[4] Sanusi A, Dwiputranti S. Institutional arrangement and policy for improving competitivenes and innovation in local government investment. Bisnis & Birokrasi Journal 2013;20. https://doi.org/10.20476/jbb.v20i1.1864.

[5] Steven S. The effect of foreign and domestic investments on the employment availability in Indonesia. Omnibus Law Journal 2021;1:14–24.

[6] Andreica C, Maricescu DL. Foreign direct investment - support for development. Metalurgia International 2011;16:95–7.

[7] Prasetiadi Y. The effect of foreign investment on domestic investment in Indonesia. Efficient: Indonesian Journal of Development Economics 2021;4:1278– 89. https://doi.org/10.15294/efficient.v4i2.45442.

[8] Intan Primandani NP, Purbadharmaja IBP. The influence of government expenditure, investment and education level on employment opportunities and community welfare. International Journal of Social Science and Business 2023;7:425–34. https://doi.org/10.23887/ijssb.v7i2.55122.

[9] Warner AM, Berg A, Pattillo C. Public investment as an engine of growth IMF Working Paper. 2014.

[10] Thwaites G. Investment and poverty reduction practical thinking on investing for development. London: 2021.

[11] Suryadarma D, Suryahadi A. The impact of private sector growth on poverty reduction: Evidence from Indonesia. Jakarta: 2007.

[12] Tobondo CS, Nurdin D, Jokolelono E. The effect of investment on poverty with economic growth as an intervening variables in Central Sulawesi. International Journal of Social Sciences and Management 2021;8:320–32. https://doi.org/10.3126/ijssm.v8i1.34127.

[13] Gomanee K, Girma S, Morrissey O. Aid, public spending and human welfare: Evidence from Quantile Regressions. SSRN Electronic Journal 2003. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.464200.

[14] Gomanee K, Morrissey O, Mosley P, Verschoor A. Aid, government expenditure, and aggregate welfare. World Dev 2005;33:355–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2004.09.005.

[15] Wiganepdo S, Soegoto HS. Peran Pmdn Dan Pma Terhadap Penurunan Angka Kemiskinan Di Indonesia. JURISMA : Jurnal Riset Bisnis & Manajemen 2022;12:1– 15. https://doi.org/10.34010/jurisma.v12i1.5838.

[16] Jainuddin, Amalia S, Awaluddin M. The effect of government expenditure and investment on gross regional domestic product and poverty in East Kalimantan Province. Business and Accounting Research (IJEBAR) Peer Reviewed-International Journal 2023;7:821–9.

[17] Septriani S, Armelly A, Ekaputri RA, Hadiyanto H, Sunoto S, Nopiah R. The effect of government expenditure on poverty in Indonesia, 2023, p. 205–11. https://doi.org/10.2991/978-94-6463-328-3_25.