Mobilization of Actors and Precipitating Factors in the Implementation of Affirmative Policies for the Economic Advancement of Indigenous Papuan Communities in Sorong City
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v10i18.19555Keywords:
trust, precipitating factors, policy implementation, policy affirmationAbstract
Collective action refers to the concept of relationships among members within a network who depend on each other’s resources. Field realities indicate that the economic conditions of the indigenous Papuan communities remain underdeveloped and require serious attention from the government. Based on this, the study aims to examine the role of trust and participation in the implementation of affirmative policies intended to promote economic improvement for indigenous Papuan communities in Sorong City. This study employs a qualitative approach, using data collection techniques such as observation, in-depth interviews, and documentation. The data used includes both primary and secondary sources, and it is analyzed using an interactive method. Informants in this study consist of key actors who are directly involved in the implementation of the affirmative policy. The findings of this study show that actor mobilization is carried out by the local government by involving traditional leaders, the Papuan People’s Assembly (MRP), and Papuan community groups in deliberative forums related to affirmative-based economic improvement policies. The identified precipitating factors include social pressure, economic disparities, and the push from special autonomy policies. The interactions among actors in the policy process further strengthen the formation of a policy network as a manifestation of collective action. However, the effectiveness of policy implementation in the field still faces obstacles such as capacity imbalances among actors and weak coordination among the involved parties.
References
[1] Adams JS. Inequity in Social Exchange. In: Berkowitz L, editor. hlm. 267–299). Academic Press. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. Volume 2. 1965.
[2] Allison GT. Public Policy Implementation: A Comparative Analysis. Sage Publications; 1999.
[3] Badan Pusat Statistik Kota Sorong. Statistik Daerah Kota Sorong 2024. BPS Kota Sorong; 2024.
[4] Bouckaert G, Van de Walle S. Comparing measures of citizen trust and user satisfaction as indicators of “good governance”: difficulties in linking trust and satisfaction indicators. Int Rev Adm Sci. 2003;69(3):329–43.
[5] Carlsson L. Collective action and the development of policy networks. J Public Adm Res Theory. 2000;10(2):281–303.
[6] Creswell JW. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. 4th ed. SAGE Publications; 2014.
[7] de Soto H. The Other Path: The Invisible Revolution in the Third World. Harper & Row; 1989.
[8] Downs A. Inside Bureaucracy. Little, Brown and Company; 1967. https://doi.org/10.7249/CB156.
[9] Dunn WN. Public Policy Analysis: An Introduction. 3rd ed. Pearson Education; 2003.
[10] Galtung J. Violence, peace, and peace research. J Peace Res. 1969;6(3):167–91.
[11] Gedeona I. Pendekatan Tindakan Kolektif dalam Kebijakan Publik. Jakarta: Lembaga Pengkajian Kebijakan; 2013.
[12] Kickert WJ. The Theory and Practice of Policy Networks. Routledge; 1999.
[13] Klinik E. Affirmative action and public policy: A historical perspective. J Soc Policy. 2009;39(2):309–27.
[14] Kiser L, Ostrom E. The three worlds of action: A metatheoretical synthesis of institutional approaches. In: Ostrom E, editor. Strategies of Political Inquiry. Sage Publications; 1982. pp. 1–22.
[15] Lee ES. A theory of migration. Demography. 1966;3(1):47–57.
[16] Lester TW, Stewart L. Theories of Public Policy Implementation. Prentice Hall; 2000.
[17] Lincoln YS, Guba EG. Naturalistic Inquiry. SAGE Publications; 1985. https://doi.org/10.1016/0147-1767(85)90062-8.
[18] North DC. Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge University Press; 1991.
[19] O’Toole LJ. Inter-organizational Coordination in Public Policy Implementation. Routledge; 2012.
[20] Olson M. The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups. Harvard University Press; 1965. https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674041660.
[21] Ostrom E. Collective action and the evolution of social norms. J Econ Perspect. 2004;14(3):137–58.
[22] Pemerintah Indonesia. (2021). Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 2 Tahun 2021 tentang Otonomi Khusus bagi Provinsi Papua. Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 2021 Nomor 155; Tambahan Lembaran Negara Nomor 6573.
[23] Pemerintah Indonesia. (2021). Peraturan Pemerintah Nomor 106 Tahun 2021 tentang Pelaksanaan Otonomi Khusus bagi Provinsi Papua. Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 2021 Nomor 238; Tambahan Lembaran Negara Nomor 6730.
[24] Pemerintah Indonesia. (2022). Peraturan Presiden Republik Indonesia Nomor 29 Tahun 2022 tentang Pembentukan Provinsi Papua Barat Daya. Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 2022 Nomor; 223.
[25] Pemerintah Kota Sorong. Rencana Pembangunan Daerah Kota Sorong 2023–2026. Bappeda Kota Sorong; 2023.
[26] Putnam RD. Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. Princeton University Press; 1993.
[27] Rawls J. A Theory of Justice. Harvard University Press; 1971. https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674042605.
[28] Rhodes RA. Understanding Governance: Policy Networks, Governance, Reflexivity and Accountability. Open University Press; 1997.
[29] Rhodes RA. Understanding governance: ten years on. Public Adm. 2017;95(1):1–20.
[30] Silver H. Social exclusion and social solidarity: three paradigms. Int Labour Rev. 1994;133(5–6):531–78.
[31] Suwitri H. Pendekatan Jejaring dalam Kebijakan Publik: Peran dan Dampak. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar; 2008.
[32] Vanni F. The role of collective action in public policy implementation. Policy Stud J. 2014;42(1):80–100.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Tamrin Tajuddin, Sukri, Muh. Akmal Ibrahim
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
