Sulaiman Zuhdi*
| Budiman Rusli | Rd Ahmad Buchari | Yogi Suprayogi Sugandi | Dodi Suryana
© 2024 The authors. This article is published by IIETA and is licensed under the CC BY 4.0 license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
OPEN ACCESS
Slum settlements have become a global issue and a challenge for city governments around the world, including the city of Pekanbaru, Indonesia. Improvement efforts have been made through the Kotaku program, which began in 2016-2019 by integrating various resources and funding, making local governments the main actors, and collaborating with stakeholders through policy networks. This study aims to explain the policy network in the Kota Tanpa Kumuh (Kotaku) program in Pekanbaru City. This research uses qualitative case studies through in-depth interviews with 23 informants (government, private sector, academics, and the community) directly involved in the Kotaku program in Pekanbaru City. The research results show that policy networks are formed through administrative arrangements and formal institutional structures. The quantity of resources of policy actors will affect the quality of interactions and interrelations in the context of public policy analysis. The resources needed for funding, knowledge, expertise, and information sharing are available in policy networks and are already used by most network actors. The actor's roles and responsibilities determine the position and boundaries of actors. The practice of policy networking in the Kotaku program has not gone well because it still encounters several obstacles, especially the lack of cooperation, coordination, commitment, institutional capacity, and the use of integrated data, which are identified as key conditions that facilitate policy networks.
policy network, urban planning, actor, local government, sustainable development, Kotaku program, slum settlements
The issue of slum areas is considered an urban disease that must be addressed, the product of poverty population growth has an impact on the government's lack of sensitivity in controlling growth and providing adequate urban services. If left unchecked, it is likely that the quality of life of the poor will remain low [1]. They will easily cause fires, provide opportunities for crime, disrupt moral norms, irregular land use and often lead to flooding, which in turn leads to further environmental degradation [2].
Uncontrolled urban population growth has posed a challenge to sustainable development. Urban areas are expected to absorb almost all of the future growth in the world's population [3]. The rapid growth of cities presents an important opportunity but also poses a challenge to implementing an ambitious urban development agenda that seeks to make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient, and sustainable (SDG 11). This challenges the government and its ability to provide its citizens with a minimum quality of life [4].
In Indonesia, urban density growth during the 2014-2019 period increased by 2.75%. This percentage is higher than the national population growth rate, only around 1.17%. In the prediction of the population in 2045, it is calculated that 82.37% of the population will live in urban areas, and only 20% will live in suburban areas [5]. This situation causes the city to be unable to accept migrants because it has exceeded its capacity, resulting in social problems such as education, health, clean water, slums, and illegal settlements. This condition is exacerbated by the inequality of development and economy, concentrated in urban areas. Slums are a condition of inadequate housing and describe poverty in urban areas, with a dense population characterized by substandard housing and poverty [6].
The Ministry of Public Works and Public Housing said that of around 64.1 million housing units in Indonesia, 15% were in bad condition. Using the measure for overcrowding (<7.2 m2 per capita), the number of substandard units is 7.5 million. Meanwhile, 45% of households, or 28,900,000 units, are considered below standard because of their size, overcrowding, and poor quality. There are 35,291 hectares of urban slum areas out of 4,108 areas spread across regencies/cities throughout Indonesia [7].
Most of the slum literature has not examined the role of networks in slum settlement programs in Indonesia potentially be strengthened by citing some of this literature to provide evidence [8]. Various programs to complete slum settlements have been carried out by the Indonesian government since 1969, including the Kampung Improvement Program (KIP), Program PengentasanKemiskinan Perkotaan (P2KP), Community-Based Initiatives for Housing and Local Development (COBILD), Neighborhood Upgrading and Shelter Sector Project (NUSSP), and the Program Nasional Pemberdayaan Masyarakat (PNPM) Mandiri. Although various slum improvement programs have improved the living conditions of people in slum areas, there have been mixed results based on the approach used. The growth of slum areas is challenging to intervene with a common approach.
The government, through the Directorate General of Cipta Karya, Ministry of Public Works and Public Housing, initiated the Kotaku program, which is implemented nationally, by integrating various resources and funding sources from the central, provincial, district/city governments, donors, the private sector, and the community. The Kotaku program aims to be a collaboration platform to complete the target of cities without slums. This program builds on the development of previous national programs that have provided important lessons for the development of the Kotaku program and valuable investments in the form of local government and community capacity building, institutional strengthening, planning, infrastructure improvement, and basic services at the city and community levels as well as technical assistance to support the achievement cities without slums according to the target of the 2015-2019 National Medium-Term Development Plan (RPJMN), namely the settlement of urban slums to 0 percent. Similar programs are also implemented in major cities around the world, including in Mumbai, India, through the Slum Rehabilitation Scheme (SRS) program [8]. Apart from India, Thailand has also implemented a slum settlement policy called the Baan Mankong program, In Malawi and Ghana, two African countries also apply slum up-grading [9].
Pekanbaru City is one of the cities implementing the Kotaku program. In general, slum settlements are inhabited by urban people with low incomes, and most of them work in the informal sector. These slums can be found in the city center and riverside areas with mostly legal home ownership. Compared to other urban communities, people living in these slums suffer more from spatial, social, and economic exclusion from the benefits and opportunities of the wider urban environment. The problems of slum settlements in the city of Pekanbaru can be seen from their physical form, such as the condition of the buildings that do not meet the requirements, are irregular and have high density; roads are dirt and muddy, little clean/drinking water, there is no waste and wastewater management. While from the non-physical form of community behavior that does not care about the slum area environment [10, 11].
Related to the paradigm shift from government to government, implementing the policies outlined in the Kotaku program must be carried out through a policy network involving various government, private, academic, and community actors. The policy network is used as a governance platform where actors interact with each other within the Kotaku program. This multi-actor platform is considered more likely to promote partnerships, governance arrangements, institutional structures, and financing to produce inclusive and sustainable programs. Most of the slum literature has not examined the role of networks in slum settlement programs in Indonesia. Little is known about how the network and the process of implementing the Kotaku program work. How many actors interact and the complexity of the network in making decisions [12].
Based on the literature review, the background of the problem, and the research gap, fulfilling the research void to be followed up as this issue should be resolved because it has become a global commitment, the research direction tends to follow up on how the policy network in the Kotaku program in Pekanbaru City? To meet the research objectives, this research uses the theory of because it will help explore the policy network in the Kotaku program through the network structure of actors, resources, interdependencies, and rules, and get a new concept about the policy network in the Kotaku program [13].
2.1 Policy network
This research explores the policy network approach in relation to the Kotaku program in the city of Pekanbaru. For this reason, a deeper understanding of the network's structure and the Kotaku program's implementation process is required. The policy network approach is well-placed to understand Kotaku's program. The complexity of policy networks relates to actors, resources, interdependencies, and rules in solving public problems and delivering public services [14]. This is in accordance with the research objectives because the policy network approach focuses on complex interactions between network actors and helps understand the process of implementing the Kotaku program in Pekanbaru.
Policy networks are a new form of governance system in contemporary society, characterized by intense interactions between public and non-public actors. Policy networks are self-regulating groups that coordinate a growing number of public (decision-makers) and private actors (interest groups) to formulate and implement public policies [15]. This framework arises from the recognition that public policy often occurs outside the government domain, so involving non-public organizations becomes a new force in addressing social problems. These actors act based on their perceptions, interests, and goals to influence problem situations and problem-solving processes [16, 17]. Therefore, the characteristics of the policy network are greatly influenced by the types and roles of actors. This is useful for ascertaining the nature of the relationship between them [18].
Due to the meeting of many actors in the network influencing the process of implementing the Kotaku program. In previous studies, some political scientists have argued that policy network theory is insufficient to explain policy change or better at explaining policy stability [19]. Because this theory is considered an approach to constantly classify the relationship between social groups and the government [20]. Then the network is considered to have been repaired when the group's interests are met after exchanging information with the government [21]. Therefore, the theory is better at explaining certain policy actions or the stability of government policies than policy changes [22]. However, some experts argue otherwise. They insist that the implementation and effects of a policy can be determined by analyzing the exchange of resources among the relevant actors after determining the network structure [23]. Resources are the entire set of formal and informal means actors have to achieve their goals, including formal competence and decision-making power (authority), identifiable resources such as money, organizations, and human resources, and less tangible such as authority, legitimacy, strategic capability, mobilization power, and others [24]. The importance of this resource substitution determines the dependency relationships among actors [25].
From a structure of interdependence, policy networks involve many organizations or parts thereof, where one unit is not formally subordinate to another in a larger hierarchical setting [26]. In a sense, policy networks are more or less stable social relations patterns between interdependent actors formed around a policy issue or program [27]. The central assumption of the policy network approach is that policies are created in complex interaction processes between many actors that occur in a network of interdependent actors. These actors are interdependent, so policies can only be realized based on cooperation. In this way, policy network theory is seen as a framework for explaining, evaluating, and improving public policy and management [28]. The rationale behind networking is the synergistic effect of collaborative efforts to obtain better results than working alone [29].
Furthermore, network rules provide insight into the institutional structure of the network and provide important information about the opportunities and constraints of actors' actions in the network [30, 31]. Many outcomes of policy games cannot be explained without knowledge of the rules relevant to the network. Interaction rules have a more procedural character and inform actors what is and is not allowed in a network. Interaction rules concern access to the network or interaction in the game. Meanwhile, arena rules determine actor positions and boundaries in the game, which concerns how actors gain access and can get out of their position [32].
The capacity of the government, such as the capacity to plan, implement, monitor and evaluate, which is actually a mandatory demand for the government, should consider the conditions and needs of the community. In this case, it is the community that will later implement the slum program that has an impact on improving their quality of life.
Top-down and bottom-up planning approaches are not mutually exclusive. In a more specific view, these two approaches address the division of roles between government and society. Integration between the two will facilitate various development actors, without necessarily negating one another, as stated that so far the two approaches between top-down and bottom-up are carried out with different applications, resulting in different effects in community development programs. The merging of the two approaches is based on the non-optimality of the two approaches when done separately [33].
The study of the integration between top-down and bottom-up approaches has actually been discussed by Lowensohn [34] in top-down and bottom-up approaches to implementation research: a critical analysis and suggested synthesis published in the journal of public policy. Study by Ingold [35] is a literature review that analyzes the strengths and weaknesses of the top-down and bottom-up approaches and offers alternatives to synthesize the two approaches. Furthermore explained that the housing program carried out by PNPM Mandiri in Yogyakarta was not carried out with a top-down or bottom-up process but was a synthesis of the two. The existence of institutions with all forms and tasks originating from the government is needed to facilitate the implementation of the bottom-up approach so that it is possible to realize independent communities, and can maintain the sustainability of the program.
2.2 City without slums (Kotaku) program
The Kotaku Program is a government intervention through the Directorate General of Human Settlement of the Ministry of Public Works and Public Housing to accelerate the settlement of urban slum settlements and support the 100-0-100 movement, which includes 100% access to safe drinking water, 0% slum settlements, and 100% access to safe sanitation, as mandated in the 2015-2019 National Medium-Term Development Plan (RPJMN).
Implementing the Kotaku program uses a collaboration platform between the central, provincial, district/city governments, communities, and other stakeholders by making local governments and communities the main actors of the program. The Kotaku program will be implemented nationally from 2016-2019 in 34 provinces and 271 regencies/cities in accordance with a decree issued by each regional head. Slum settlements in the target location of the Kotaku program cover an area of 113.56 hectares based on the Decree of the Mayor of Pekanbaru Number 878 of 2017.
The main objective of the Kotaku program is to increase access to infrastructure and basic services in urban slum areas to support the realization of livable, productive, and sustainable urban settlements. The main objective is achieved with intermediate objectives as follows:
The strategy used in dealing with slum settlements is through efforts to prevent slum settlements and improve the quality of slum settlements. While the basic principles applied in the implementation of the Kotaku program are:
Then the criteria for slum settlements are in accordance with PUPR ministerial regulation No. 14 of 2018 concerning the prevention and improvement of the quality of housing and slum settlements, including:
(1). Physical criteria, covering 7 aspects/indicators, including buildings, environmental roads, drainage, clean/drinking water, solid waste, wastewater, and fire protection.
(2). Non-physical criteria, including community behavior, certainty of living, and certainty of doing business.
Meanwhile, funding sources for the Kotaku program come from the central government, provincial governments, district/city governments, communities, and other development stakeholders, as well as from government development partner institutions (Islamic Development Bank-IsDB).
Efforts to improve the quality of the settlement environment such as; improving the quality of settlement space and the quality of settlement infrastructure. This area design concept emphasizes efforts to create a new environment that is more humane, more comfortable and healthier so that it can have an impact and added value on improving the quality of life and environmental health and local economic development. In addition to emphasizing efforts to improve the quality (rejuvenation) of the settlement environment through new development and construction activities, the handling of these slums also aims to increase the capacity and capability of the existing environmental infrastructure network through repair efforts.
This study was conducted in the city of Pekanbaru, the capital of Riau Province, located between 101°14'-101°34' East Longitude and 0°25'-0°45' North Latitude. With a height above sea level ranging from 5-50 meters. The surface of the northern area is a sloping and undulating plain with a height ranging from 5-11 meters and is bisected by the Siak River, which flows from west to east and has several tributaries.
Geographically, the city of Pekanbaru is bordered by other districts, to the north by Siak Regency and Kampar Regency, to the south by Kampar Regency and Pelalawan Regency, to the east by Siak Regency and Pelalawan Regency, to the west by Kampar Regency. Administratively, since 2021, the city of Pekanbaru has 15 Districts and 83 Villages. Spatially the city of Pekanbaru has a very strategic location as a transit city that connects the main cities on the island of Sumatra-Indonesia. The geographical location of the research is in Figure 1.
Pekanbaru City has an area of 623.31 square kilometers (km2), or 0.71 percent of the total area of Riau Province. Based on the results of records from the Pekanbaru City population and civil registration service, in 2021, the population of the city of Pekanbaru is recorded at 1,074,989 people with a population density by sub-district an average of 63,599 people/km2 [36]. The results of the 2020 population census, in the last ten years (2010-2020), the population growth rate of Pekanbaru City is 0.89 percent on average per year. There was a slowdown in the population growth rate of 3.60 percentage points compared to the population growth rate in the 2000-2010 period, which was 4.49 percent [37]. This shows that even though there is a decrease in population growth, people's interest in coming and living in the city of Pekanbaru is quite high.
As a city whose development is very rapid, and its urban physique has exceeded the city's administrative boundaries in line with its strategic position and role in regional and national contexts, the government has designated the city of Pekanbaru as the Pusat Kegiatan Nasional (PKN) in Indonesia based on Government Regulation Number 13 of 2017 regarding changes to Government Regulation Number 26 of 2008 concerning national spatial planning and national urban system [38].
Population growth accompanied by high urbanization flows and increased development of new industries have increased the burden on the urban environment, especially the problem of developing housing facilities in urban areas. The shift in spatial use for industrial activities and trade services has reduced land for settlements. The high price of land in the city center and low per capita income cause people to look for residential areas in suburban or city center areas so that access to workplaces in the informal sector is easy to achieve with an inadequate environment and very minimal supporting facilities. Consequently, many people are forced to build on land that was not originally planned, such as on the banks of rivers or illegal settlements.
This situation makes the housing environment unorganized and has no clear infrastructure such as neighborhood roads, clean water sources, sewerage, garbage disposal, etc. Although various policy efforts have been made to improve the physical and socio-economic conditions of people living in slum settlements, there has been little improvement and change in the physical area of slum settlements in the city of Pekanbaru.
This slum management planning aims to estimate the management needs in the context of slum prevention and quality improvement, both at the city scale and the area scale based on the issues, potential and problems in the slums. The planning of management needs at the city scale is formulated based on the factual conditions and strategic issues as well as the overview of slum management policies that have been identified in the previous stage. The following is the planning of slum management needs in Pekanbaru City. The following Table 1 settlement program needs planning slum program needs in Pekanbaru City.
Table 1. Settlement program needs planning slum program needs in Pekanbaru City
|
No. |
Kota Issue City |
Location |
Policy |
Program Needs |
|
|
Prevention |
Improvement |
||||
|
1 |
Housing and settlements that have not been optimally organized so that slums appear |
Residential Area in the city of Pekanbaru |
Area arrangement and development facilities and house infrastructure simple healthy house |
Socialization and Control |
development and rehabilitation healthy housing |
|
2 |
Flooding and waterlogging |
Coastal slum areas, sago river, coastal tassel and old town |
Construction drainage facilities that is integrated |
Control and empowerment community in maintaining drainage facilities |
Rejuvenation of drainage facilities that are and construction new drainage facilities |
|
3 |
Formation of settlements in places that are not designated (river border) |
Residential area along the sago river and Siak River |
Arrangement Area |
Enforcement licensing rules |
Settlements back |
|
4 |
Inadequate waste management of both liquid and solid waste |
Area residential area slum area in Pekanbaru City |
Maintain and build infrastructure facilities waste management infrastructure |
Socialization and Control |
Rehabilitation and development infrastructure facilities waste management |
This research uses a qualitative approach with case studies [39, 40]. This research seeks to understand and explore cases in real-life contexts in detail related to the implementation of the Kotaku program in the city of Pekanbaru by involving various sources of data information that were examined to obtain complete information. The qualitative approach in this study involves important parts, such as asking face-to-face and procedural questions, collecting specific data from informants, analyzing data inductively starting from themes and interpreting data, both in the form of conceptual theory, policy regulations, and the role of policy actors, which will be addressed for data needs, types, and data collection techniques from existing information.
In this research, interviews were conducted using the one-on-one interview type where submission of questions and recording of answers from only one participant at a time. time with the consideration that participants can voice their opinions, feelings, and ideas more comfortably without hesitation [36].
The previous statements represent the value of opinions, feelings, and ideas more comfortably without hesitation. Besides that, the researcher also emphasizes objectivity and honesty, which is realized by explaining the research objectives to informants. Thus, it will be possible to obtain data and information that is accurate and valid in explaining how the policy network in the Kotaku program in Pekanbaru City. In addition, we tried to obtain information from informants by exploring experiences related to handling slum areas in the city of Pekanbaru and pouring the information and data obtained into sentences and phrases.
This research explores the structure of the policy network in the Kotaku program. The interpretivism philosophy and inductive strategy were adopted through in-depth interviews to collect data from the various actors involved through thematic analysis. The writer chooses an inductive strategy because Kotaku program research in Indonesia is relatively under-researched. An inductive approach is acceptable if the research is relatively undeveloped. This study seeks to gain perspective and look into the perspective of describing typological patterns from a small sample, not from a larger sample. This strategy deals with "how" and "why". Saunders stated that when a qualitative study approach is chosen and the purpose of the research is exploratory, a case study is sufficient. We also obtain secondary data from government websites, literature reviews, and written documents.
Selection of informants using purposive sampling technique to extract samples, namely those whom researchers consider having the capacity and competence as well as master reliable information in relation to this research. This sampling strategy is preferred when a certain number of individuals bring the most relevant information sought [40]. Actor groups were identified in the Kotaku program policy network, followed by identifying actors and selecting cases within the relevant groups. The number of informants was 23 from the government, academia, the private sector, and the community with roles and involvement in the Kotaku program. Meanwhile, the key informants were (1) the head of the housing and settlement area office for the city of Pekanbaru, (2) the head of the Regional Development Planning Agency for the city of Pekanbaru, (3) the head of the city coordinator for the Kotaku program. The list of research informants is in Table 2.
Table 2. Research informants
|
Actor Type |
Actor Name |
Role and Involvement |
|
Government |
Head of Balai Prasarana Permukiman Wilayah (BPPW) Riau Province |
Conduct socialization and coordination with the Provincial and City governments regarding implementing the Kotaku program |
|
The mayor of Pekanbaru |
Carry out the Kotaku program and coordinate decentralization activities to related technical Organisasi Perangkat Daerah (OPD) |
|
|
Head of Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Daerah (BAPPEDA) |
Ensure that the planning and implementation of the Kotaku program are included in the city government's activity plans |
|
|
Head of Perumahan Rakyat dan Kawasan Permukiman (PERKIM) Office |
Planning and implementing the Kotaku program regarding housing and slum areas, Prasarana, Sarana, dan Utilitas Umum (PSU) |
|
|
Head of Pekerjaan Umum dan Penataan Ruang (PUPR) Office |
Planning and implementing Kotaku programs on infrastructure and technical assistance |
|
|
Head of Lingkungan Hidup dan Kebersihan (DLHK) Office |
Carry out solid waste, environmental and social activities |
|
|
Head of Badan Pusat Statistik (BPS) Pekanbaru City |
Provision of data and information needs of the Kotaku program |
|
|
Head of Pertanahan Kota Pekanbaru Office |
Ensuring the legality of community land in slum settlements |
|
|
Head of District Head |
Coordinate the activities of Kotaku in its working area |
|
|
Head of Urban Village |
Provide support and development of Kotaku programs |
|
|
Private |
Director Perusahaan Daerah Air Minum (PDAM) Tirta Siak |
Ensuring the availability of clean water needs for the community in slum settlements |
|
Head of Koordinator Kota (KORKOT) |
A companion team that ensures the quality of the planning process and Kotaku program activities at the city and community levels |
|
|
Academic |
Universitas Riau Lecturer, Universitas Lancang Kuning Lecturer |
Provide input and suggestions in the form of knowledge of research and development results |
|
Society |
Head of Lembaga Keswadayaan Masyarakat (LKM) |
Facilitating all stages of Kotaku activities at the community level |
|
Leader Tim Inti Perencanaan Partisipatif (TIPP) |
Coordinating the planning process at the community level and compiling a Rencana Penataan Lingkungan Permukiman (RPLP) document |
|
|
Leader Kelompok Swadaya Masyarakat (KSM) |
Make proposals and carry out Kotaku program activities at the community level |
|
|
Society Leaders/Volunteers |
Provide input and suggestions regarding community needs |
Data analysis in this case study seeks patterns, insights and concepts to produce findings based on empirical evidence. Analysis was carried out when all interview data were collected and converted into transcripts, and translated into English. The data is then analyzed to understand the policy network within the Kotaku program. The results are then compared with research questions and the concept of policy networks in the literature to develop appropriate recommendations for Kotaku programs. The quality of case studies can be measured by construct validity and reliability. We demonstrated multiple sources, generated evidence sets, and conducted informant-checked research to increase construct validity. The two strategies were adopted to increase the validity of the research construct. The steps for a model or topic can be related from several perspectives by asking many actors involved in the Kotaku program, thereby increasing the validity of the construct. According to Yin, research reliability is measured rationally. All informants were present in the interview, and the data was transferred to each informant using the same method. Dialogue is also conducted after the discussion to ensure information is understood consistently and correctly. Interview activities were stored and transcribed, which facilitated increased research reliability. One of the data validity checking techniques commonly used by qualitative researchers is triangulation [41] this technique uses various ways of checking the validity of the data collected, through different sources of information, different researchers, and different data collection methods.
Participants in this study are actors who have agreed to informed consent to provide the information needed during the study, where research data was collected through interviews, observations, audiovisuals, and documents such as frameworks and daily journals containing information about the themes under study. containing information on the theme under study. This research did not cause negative physical or psychological impact on the participants because the identities of the participants involved in this research are identity of the participants involved in this research is confidential and other data is attached based on discussions with the participants. are attached based on the results of discussions with the participants.
5.1 Policy network in the Tanpa Kumuh (Kotaku) program
The policy network is closely related to the change from traditional (top-down) government policy to a network. Policy network theory explains how implementing the Kotaku program is a process in which many actors work together to make decisions and depend on the interactions between them. Ignoring the interdependence among these actors will inevitably lead to disappointment [15]. Such an approach provides an effective method for gaining insight into policy networks and evaluating outcomes. Therefore, the following section will explain the theory of policy networks. This theory explains implementing the Kotaku program in Pekanbaru City, which includes actors, resources, dependencies and rules.
5.1.1 Network actor in city program
The government is the main actor in the Kotaku program, interacting and collaborating and networking with academic, private sector and community actors. Collaboration begins with outreach and advocacy to stakeholders and the community that is the program's target. From this activity, it is hoped that common perceptions and commitments will be achieved among stakeholders in implementing the Kotaku program, including agreeing on indications of assistance needs regarding the capacity of local government and the community and sources of funding for the Kotaku program.
The city government formed Housing and Settlement Working Group (Pokja-PKP) as a coordinating forum for network actors, consisting of elements of regional apparatus organizations (Bappeda, Perkim Office, PUPR Office, DLHK Office, Land Office), academia, the private sector and the community. Each institution has its role and responsibility in the Kotaku program. From the collaboration of network actors, data and information were obtained about the size of the slum area and the profile of the slum settlement. However, there are some difficulties in collecting slum data and information due to the lack of cooperation among network actors. In addition, the difference in data from each actor is also a problem because the existing data has never been integrated and synchronized, so the use of one integrated data (by name by address) for slums cannot be carried out. This is supported by interviews:
“Difficulties in the data collection process are due to the lack of concern and cooperation of stakeholders so that data on slum settlements is difficult to collect and compare.”
Based on the interviews, it can be understood that the difficulty of collecting data is due to the availability and lack of concern from stakeholders. Data is difficult to collect because the data is not available, and data collection in government institutions is poor. Each actor has slum settlement data based on his institutional policies. This difference in data makes cooperation difficult. This indicates that the data is still considered their own and not shared property.
The network of government actors initiated by the Pokja PKP Forum under the coordination of the Housing and Settlement Areas office, together with academia and the private sector, sat in one forum to formulate a plan (top-down), which resulted in Slum Housing Quality Improvement Prevention Plan (RP2KPKP). RP2KPKP is a document for planning activities for urban and regional scale slum handling that is comprehensive and integrated, not only planning activities for handling physical infrastructure but also includes non-physical activities (capacity building/empowerment, social and economic).
These actors meet and interact to exchange information, knowledge and resources in formulating plans. The research findings found that there was a lack of interest and government sectoral ego (related OPD) due to their understanding and perception of slum settlement problems, which ultimately made their goals and interests different. This difference in perception and sectoral ego makes network problems complex because actors come from different institutional backgrounds, so their behaviour and actions are bound by their institutional duties, rules and policies. Their attitude is inseparable from the preferences and benefits they get from the planning. This is supported from interviews:
“The problem of slum settlements is very complex, not only because of the many actors involved, but what is most important is their understanding of the problems they face and how committed they are to this program.”
From the interview above, it can be understood that Kotaku’s programs are interrelated, each institution has its policies and rules, so it is necessary to have the same understanding and perception of each stakeholder. For this reason, coordination and joint commitment of stakeholders are needed so that they do not throw responsibilities and overlap with each other in carrying out their duties. However, coordination and commitment from stakeholders are still weak because the Pokja-PKP has been unable to carry out its functions.
Furthermore, at the kelurahan/community level, planning (bottom-up) is carried out by community organizations (LKM, TIPP) in collaboration with the city and kelurahan coordinators who produce Rencana Penataan Lingkungan (RPLP) document. Thus, the community actively participates and interacts from the start of the planning process. Furthermore, these two documents are integrated to determine priority activities for the Kotaku program. Information obtained from informants is that the government provides space for the community to participate in the planning process, but at the stage of determining programs and activities, it has not accommodated suggestions from community needs. There is the government’s desire to support the creation of a participatory, adaptive, and responsive planning process but the space given to the community is only to fulfil regulatory requirements or the principles of the Kotaku program. This condition causes planning documents produced by the government to tend not to be accommodative.
Kotaku program activities in the city of Pekanbaru, which began in 2017-2019, have had an impact on reducing the slum area by 95.52 ha from the initial slum area of 113.56 ha through a policy network of government actors, academia, the private sector and the community. The stages of reducing the area of slum settlements in the city of Pekanbaru are in Figure 2.
5.1.2 Resource
Local government is the dominant actor in the network; they are equipped with resources such as rules, budgets and powers over budgeting. The local government has responsibility for the success of the Kotaku program. The local government's interest in supporting environmental improvements in Pekanbaru is an important step forward in the Kotaku program.
Local governments are responsible for solving slum settlements, providing a framework for developing their policies and planning mechanisms to deal with slum problems. The central government has spent financial resources, knowledge and information sharing on the Kotaku program. In other words, slums are a priority concern for the central government. Overall, the resources needed in the Kotaku program, especially financial resources, knowledge, expertise, and information sharing, are potentially available in policy networks and are already used by most actors. If the actors are willing to solve the problem, it will be possible to take more action than just setting up a strategic framework or making rules and policies to solve the slum problem.
For the funding resources used in the Kotaku program, there have been collaborative financing from the central government, provincial governments and city governments. This funding is very important for the sustainability of the Kotaku program. Sources of funding in the Kotaku program are in Figure 3.
From the above data, the central government has allocated a sizable budget for the Kotaku program, but the budget from the Pekanbaru City government and other stakeholders has not matched it. The city government cannot only depend on funding transfers from the central government but needs to develop a funding strategy through collaboration with the private sector and the community. This is supported from interviews:
“The Kotaku program implemented in the city of Pekanbaru requires a lot of money. If you only rely on the city's APBD, it will not be enough, so we are very dependent on funding from the central government and the provincial government”
“Actually, there is assistance and contributions from the private sector in addressing these slums, but due to the absence of an MoU between the city government and the private sector regarding the use of company CSR funds, this assistance from the private sector cannot be counted in the context of reducing slums because there is no data. Usually, the private sector directly distributes assistance to the community without coordinating with us, at best only the sub-district administration knows about it”.
Based on the interview above, it can be understood that the city government has not maximized the resources from the private sector and the community in the Kotaku program. Regarding potential resources that have not been implemented, in the absence of strong involvement from the private sector and non-governmental organizations, the main potential financial resources for slum settlements are from the central government. The central government allocates funds or shares their financial resources with provincial and municipal governments in the Kotaku program. Regarding the knowledge and information needed, even though there is a shortage from the central and provincial governments, there is potential to access knowledge and expertise in the Kotaku program through academics and following best practices from other cities in Indonesia that have successfully managed their slum settlements.
Likewise, the community who have provided resources in the form of labour and is committed to using the facilities responsibly. This is also an important factor for program sustainability. The interesting part of this program is how the government prepares local community members to take full advantage of their better environment and play an active role in the sustainability of the new facilities and infrastructure.
5.1.3 Dependence
Government programs effectively collaborate with stakeholders, especially to provide the knowledge and expertise needed, such as increasing awareness among local governments and the community in the Kotaku program. The policy network shows that actors depend on each other to achieve their goals, but the level of dependence between different actors may vary. For example, it is impossible for the Pekanbaru City government to achieve its goal of resolving slums without support from the central government and the community, but cooperation can facilitate the achievement of its targets. Thus, the level of interdependence of actors from one another can indicate the importance of cooperation in policy networks.
Local governments are very dependent on the central government in terms of resources in the form of funding, information, knowledge and expertise in implementing the Kotaku program. Likewise, the dependence of the local government on the community requires the active participation of the community in supporting and implementing the Kotaku program. This is supported from interviews:
“Actually, the government in the Kotaku program wants to promote community-based (labor-intensive) self-management patterns, namely where project activities are carried out, the community in that place must be involved.” (Housing and Settlement Area Office, 2023).
Therefore, it can be understood that the Kotaku program requires community involvement in its implementation in the form of a workforce in the community because the Kotaku program aims to empower the community so that community involvement can provide added value in the form of income sources for the community and at the same time can increase their awareness and concern in caring for and maintaining the results of development that have been built because they are the ones who make it themselves.
Dependence can also be seen between local government agencies (related to OPD) because each institution has its own rules and policies, which result in a high level of interdependence and influence between them. This can be seen when the Perkim agency wants to build clean water facilities for people in slum settlements. At the same time, the PUPR agency's authority and the authority from the PDAM are also there, so good cooperation and coordination are needed. However, because cooperation and coordination have not been properly connected, it has resulted in the work being carried out independently. In general, there is a high level of interdependence among most of the actors in the Kotaku program network, which verifies the need for collective action among actors to work together to solve the slum problem.
5.1.4 Regulation
The government is an institution that has political and administrative functions, and its function is to determine which actors are legally permitted to be involved in the Kotaku program. Regarding the position of actors in the network, it depends on their respective duties and functions. The government has developed three types of interaction mechanisms through actors, resources, and interdependence to coordinate the actions of the various agencies. These different institutions hold different positions in their roles and functions within the Kotaku program. The government is the main institution in the network, and the others as supporting institutions. Through the Pokja-PKP forum, the local government plays a very important role in facilitating the interaction of the various institutions involved and bears the main responsibility for formulating and implementing the Kotaku program.
The Pokja-PKP Forum, which consists of related regional apparatus organizations, academics, and the private sector, is the only institution established at the local level as a coordinating institution for actors involved in the interaction of the slum settlement program. Meanwhile, other regional apparatus organizations outside the Pokja-PKP are excluded. However, the interaction rules open access to information for parties who need it and are not members of the Pokja-PKP. However, the rules of entry exclude some actors from directly affecting the Kotaku program but allow them to interact with the parties. The positions of the institutions involved in this matter are equivalent, which differ only in their main duties and functions.
Furthermore, at the community level, actors who have access to and establish interaction with local government are formal community groups such as LKM, KSM, TIPP, and RT/RW, but there are also non-formal institutions involved, such as community leaders. Regarding the position of each actor, it is the same in Kotaku programs at the local level by placing a predetermined agenda. They have access to and interact with the government, private sector, and academia because the slum settlement program is designed to increase the active involvement of the community in development. Participation and support of community groups are key to ensuring effective commitment from the government. This affects the level of community involvement and determines the sustainability of the actions implemented. The involvement of community groups can strengthen the possibility of building institutional structures to support program development. This strengthening should include mentoring and training to keep the group motivated and committed to implementing the slum program.
The local community has benefited from the infrastructure improvements, such as road improvements that make it easier for people to mobilize, good drainage, and the availability of clean water facilities that make it easier for people to get clean water. However, changes in people's behavior to live clean and healthy are still lacking. This is supported by interviews:
“The majority of the community has been able to take advantage of the results of the construction of basic social facilities and infrastructure, but public awareness to maintain and maintain the facilities built is still quite low.” [19].
From the interviews, it can be understood that the community is already able to enjoy the results of the development carried out, such as the roads are no longer potholes, the residents' houses look clean and neat and not seedy anymore, there are already landfills, the drainage is smooth so it doesn't cause flooding in the road. However, what needs to be paid attention to is how residents can use and maintain the facilities that have been built in a good way because instilling clean and healthy living habits in residents is rather difficult because the habit so far residents throw away to the side of the road that is not intended so that it disturbs the health and beauty of the city. Therefore, cooperation and commitment from all parties are needed to increase understanding and awareness in maintaining the facilities and infrastructure that have been built.
5.1.5 Limitations of the study
Due to limited resources, this study only focuses on one city, therefore it is necessary to conduct an in-depth study of policy networks in slum management by comparing with other cities in Indonesia that are also implementing slum management policies. Do not conduct research on network structures affecting slum management policy outcomes by expanding the analysis to include more actors, especially non-facil actors such as LSM (non-governmental organizations) and community leaders. Thus, how network complexity affects slum management policy outcomes can be better captured.
6.1 Stakeholder commitment
The Kotaku program policy network is important to implement based on stakeholders' needs, desires, and problems. This approach is an effort to involve all actors from the beginning of the process so that every decision is a joint decision and encourages the involvement and commitment of all stakeholders to implement the Kotaku program to increase community access to basic urban infrastructure and services.
The policy network in the Kotaku program is characterized by various interactions between government, private, academic, and community actors. Each actor has their roles, interests, perceptions, and interests. The interaction between them is generally caused by the exchange of resources, especially information, knowledge, expertise, and budget, which causes high dependency and influence among actors, so actors need to design strategies to maximize opportunities in realizing their interests. Therefore, rules are needed to regulate policy actors and the interactions between them. Related to the actor's position, the government has developed an interaction mechanism through actors, resources, and interdependence to coordinate the actions of various stakeholders. These different actors hold different positions in their roles in Kotaku programs.
In its rules, the Kotaku program involves collaboration across actors and sectors, such as government agencies (related OPDs), academia, the private sector, and the community. What is of concern is that one policy object is handled by several actors and institutions so that coordination and cooperation are needed so that they do not collide with each other, but coordination and cooperation are lacking because each actor prioritizes sectoral egos and their respective interests. The existence of sectoral actor egos is caused by a lack of information and knowledge about the nature of the problem, thus causing a lack of interest and perceptions of actors, which ultimately makes the goals and interests of actors also different. Thus, the character of the interaction is adjusted between the different institutional regimes. The interaction process is a search in which actors from different organizations learn about the nature of problems and identify strategic characteristics and the institutional context in which problem-solving develops. Collaboration teaches learning between actors across organizational boundaries, networks, and coalitions [42]. This is referred to in the literature as cross-frame reflection and learning between advocacy coalitions and can be viewed as the ongoing development of shared insights, working methods, and institutions [35].
Kotaku's program planning scheme requires integration between planning systems at the city and community levels. There are two challenges faced; first, the challenge of coordination and cooperation between the government and the community, which requires a mixed top-down and bottom-up approach to approach the needs of the citizens. Second, the challenge of dual horizontal governance that must face crosses between sectors (housing and settlement area services, public works and spatial planning services, and so on) and crosses between various actors (public organizations, community groups, and the private sector). Based on researchers' findings, planning at the community level has not been integrated with planning at the city level. Proposed activities made by the community have not been properly accommodated. This is inseparable from the low capacity of the government, which triggers a gap between spatial (urban village) based planning that uses a participatory approach and sectoral (city) based planning that reflects technocratization. This inability to integrate planning is related to the capacity and capability of the government, which has not been able to adequately diagnose the challenges of sustainable development and develop adequate planning.
6.2 Top-down vs. bottom-up planning
The top-down and bottom-up planning approaches are inseparable from one another. In a more specific view, these two approaches discuss the division of roles between government and society. Integration between the two will facilitate various development actors without excluding one from the other. So far, both top-down and bottom-up approaches have been implemented with different applications resulting in different effects on community development programs. The combination of the two approaches is based on the fact that the two approaches are not optimal when carried out separately.
The success of the Kotaku program in Pekanbaru is highly dependent on the commitment of the local government and stakeholders. Even though the government has allocated a sizable budget, if it is not supported by the commitment and willingness of other stakeholders, it will be in vain. Therefore, the government needs to make a breakthrough in building the commitment of various parties, especially in sharing programs and activities that support community involvement. The biggest challenge is building government commitment in synergizing activity planning at the community level so that it is realized within the framework of government programs and activities. This is in line with the research results. The activities of slum dwellers are related to environmental issues, in which he highlights the government's commitment to improving slum areas [6]. The importance of stakeholder engagement is one of the core conditions for successful slum management [33].
Although Kotaku programs have attempted to include communities as stakeholders, this has often proven problematic because program implementation guidelines have not taken into account design principles that promote social learning, knowledge exchange, and power-sharing public participation may not always result in mutually acceptable solutions, especially when the stakeholders' interests are diverse and conflicting. But in this case, other studies show there is agreement and acknowledgment from the local government that there is a large amount of community involvement in development [43].
Overall, these findings expand on the existing literature on slum program policy networks in explaining the role of networks in the Kotaku program. Then, the study of the slum settlement program policy network continued to change and was adapted to the strategic conditions.
Studies on policy networks have been carried out by many previous researchers. From the search for articles, journals and dissertations found several studies related to this research including, participatory networks have not been as expected where the private sector has not played a role. Different opinions are found in research [44] participatory networks will produce more environmental innovations. Furthermore, governance network structures can make a difference in policy making, but they are often overlooked and continuous multi-actor dialog can improve network governance.
Then said, the challenge of cities to meet the quality of life of the poor and economic development is carried out through a simultaneous governance network approach of conflict and negotiation and cooperation of all actors [44]. factor networks and social community capital through cooperation have weakened the government's political control over policy [45]. It is found that Public-Private Partnership (PPP) networks contribute new concepts to policymakers and bring benefits and skills. However, a different view comes [33] private sector participation in PPP is still lacking in slum policies.
The change in traditional governance policies from top-down to networking in slum management policy has led to policy innovation with a new role of local government as the main actor and collaborating with all stakeholders in formulating slum management policies in Pekanbaru City. The Pekanbaru City government is committed to slum management policy through efforts to strengthen the regulatory framework by issuing the Pekanbaru City Regional Regulation No. 13 of 2016 concerning Prevention and Improvement of the Quality of Housing and Slum Settlement Areas and the formation of the PKP Working Group as a forum for coordination among stakeholders and formulating slum management policies. However, the government faces obstacles and challenges in the form of: a) lack of coordination; b) high sectoral ego; c) low government and community capacity; c) lack of integrated slum data.
The slum management policy network in Pekanbaru City is largely influenced by administrative arrangements and formal institutional structures among the government, academia, private sector and community. This is due to the absence of a developed institutional framework so that other non-formal actors and institutions cannot participate in slum management policy in Pekanbaru City due to their weak relationship and access with the government.
Slum management policies cannot stand alone, but are interrelated with other sectors and are interdependent. With limited resources to achieve effectiveness, efficiency and maximum results in achieving the target of slum-free cities, policies must be synchronized in all sectors. However, due to weak and ineffective.
The authors are grateful for the contributions of all interviewed informants to this study. Finally, the authors also thank the anonymous reviewers for their valuable reviews and suggestions. The authors thank the Directorate of Community Service Research (DRPM) Universitas Padjadjaran for funding the APC research and the Ministry of Research, Technology and Higher Education of the Republic of Indonesia through the Domestic Postgraduate Education Scholarship (BPPDN) for supporting this research.
[1] Long, H. (2014). Effects of land use transitions due to rapid urbanization on ecosystem services: Implications for urban planning in the new developing area of China. Habitat International, 44: 536-544. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2014.10.011
[2] Graham, V., Nurhidayah, L., Astuti, R. (2020). Reducing emissions from tropical deforestation and forest degradation. In Encyclopedia of the World’s Biomes, 3-5: 260-268. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-409548-9.11928-1
[3] Dear, M. (1981). Urbanization and urban planning in capitalist society. https://api.elsevier.com/content/abstract/scopus_id/85031482986.
[4] Mossberger, K. (2013). Connecting citizens and local governments? Social media and interactivity in major U.S. cities. Government Information Quarterly, 30(4): 351-358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2013.05.016
[5] Douglass, M. (1998). A regional network strategy for reciprocal rural-urban linkages: An agenda for policy research with reference to Indonesia. Third World Planning Review, 20(1): 1-33. https://doi.org/10.3828/twpr.20.1.f2827602h503k5j6
[6] Roy, D., Lees, M.H., Pfeffer, K., Sloot, P.M.A. (2018). Spatial segregation, inequality, and opportunity bias in the slums of Bengaluru. Cities, 74: 269-276. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2017.12.014
[7] Fitrani, F. (2005). Unity in diversity? The creation of new local governments in a decentralising Indonesia. Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies, 41(1): 57-79. https://doi.org/10.1080/00074910500072690
[8] UN-Habitat. (2003). The Challenge of Slums. Earthscan Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1006/abio.1996.0254
[9] Surya, B., Syafri, S., Hadijah, H., Baharuddin, B., Fitriyah, A.T., Sakti, H.H. (2020). Management of slum-based urban farming and economic empowerment of the community of Makassar City, South Sulawesi, Indonesia. Sustainability, 12(18): 7324. https://doi.org/10.3390/SU12187324
[10] Minnery, J., Argo, T., Winarso, H., Hau, D., Veneracion, C.C., Forbes, D., Childs, I. (2013). Slum upgrading and urban governance: Case studies in three South East Asian cities. Habitat International, 39: 162-169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2012.12.002
[11] Devika, J. (2016). Aspects of socioeconomic exclusion in Kerala, India: Reflections from an urban slum. Critical Asian Studies, 48(2): 193-214. https://doi.org/10.1080/14672715.2016.1151801
[12] Kleinknecht, R.H. (2015). Employee participation in corporate governance: Implications for company resilience. European Journal of Industrial Relations, 21(1): 57-72. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959680114523820
[13] Verma, D.C. (2002). Simplifying network administration using policy-based management. IEEE Network, 16(2): 20-26. https://doi.org/10.1109/65.993219
[14] Carroll, W.K. (2010). The global corporate elite and the transnational policy-planning network, 1996-2006: A structural analysis. International Sociology, 25(4): 501-538. https://doi.org/10.1177/0268580909351326
[15] Stone, D. (2008). Global public policy, transnational policy communities, and their networks. Policy Studies Journal, 36(1): 19-38. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.2007.00251.x
[16] Kassim, H. (1994). Policy networks, networks and European Union policy making: A sceptical view. West European Politics, 17(4): 15-27. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402389408425041
[17] Sandström, A. (2008). The performance of policy networks: The relation between network structure and network performance. Policy Studies Journal, 36(4): 497-524. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.2008.00281.x
[18] Blanco, I. (2011). Policy networks and governance networks: Towards greater conceptual clarity. Political Studies Review, 9(3): 297-308. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1478-9302.2011.00239.x
[19] Maggetti, M. (2011). The policy-making structure of European regulatory networks and the domestic adoption of standards. Journal of European Public Policy, 18(6): 830-847. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2011.593311
[20] Considine, M. (2009). Networks, innovation and public policy: Politicians, bureaucrats and the pathways to change inside government. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230595040
[21] Atkinson, M.M. (1992). Policy networks, policy communities and the problems of governance. Governance, 5(2): 154-180. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0491.1992.tb00034.x
[22] Howlett, M. (2002). Do networks matter? Linking policy network structure to policy outcomes: Evidence from four Canadian policy sectors 1990-2000. Canadian Journal of Political Science, 35(2): 235-267. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0008423902778232
[23] Rutland, T. (2008). The work of policy: Actor networks, governmentality, and local action on climate change in Portland, Oregon. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 26(4): 627-646. https://doi.org/10.1068/d6907
[24] Marsh, D. (2000). Understanding policy networks: Towards a dialectical approach. Political Studies, 48(1): 4-21. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9248.00247
[25] Coleman, W.D. (1996). Paradigm shifts and policy networks: Cumulative change in agriculture. Journal of Public Policy, 16(3): 273-301. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0143814x00007777
[26] Lee, Y. (2012). Interorganizational collaboration networks in economic development policy: An exponential random graph model analysis. Policy Studies Journal, 40(3): 547-573. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.2012.00464.x
[27] Coleman, W.D. (1999). Internationalized policy environments and policy network analysis. Political Studies, 47(4): 691-709. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9248.00225
[28] Leifeld, P. (2012). Information exchange in policy networks. American Journal of Political Science, 56(3): 731-744. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2011.00580.x
[29] Berardo, R. (2010). Self-organizing policy networks: Risk, partner selection, and cooperation in estuaries. American Journal of Political Science, 54(3): 632-649. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2010.00451.x
[30] Jordan, G. (1992). A preliminary ordering of policy network labels. European Journal of Political Research, 21(1): 7-27. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6765.1992.tb00286.x
[31] Waarden, F.V.A.N. (1992). Dimensions and types of policy networks. European Journal of Political Research, 21(1): 29-52. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6765.1992.tb00287.x
[32] Gandal, N. (2002). Compatibility, standardization, and network effects: Some policy implications. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 18(1): 80-91. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/18.1.80
[33] Athanassiou, N. (2000). Internationalization, tacit knowledge and the top management teams of MNCs. Journal of International Business Studies, 31(3): 471-487. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490917
[34] Lowensohn, S. (2007). Auditor specialization, perceived audit quality, and audit fees in the local government audit market. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 26(6): 705-732. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2007.10.004
[35] Ingold, K. (2016). Structural and institutional determinants of influence reputation: A comparison of collaborative and adversarial policy networks in decision making and implementation. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 26(1): 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muu043
[36] Creswell, J.W. (2013). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (4th ed.). London: Sage Publications, Inc.
[37] Badan Pusat, S. (2021). Pekanbaru city 2020 population census results. Bps.Go.Id, 7: 1-52. https://papua.bps.go.id/pressrelease/2018/05/07/336/indeks-pembangunan-manusia-provinsi-papua-tahun-2017.html.
[38] Noy, C. (2008). Sampling knowledge: The hermeneutics of snowball sampling in qualitative research. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 11(4): 327-344. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645570701401305
[39] Suwanda, D., Suryana, D. (2021). Human resource development in local governments: Increased transparency and public accountability. Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 8(1): 1063-1069. https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2021.vol8.no1.1063
[40] Suwanda, D., Suryana, D., Suherman, U., Nadhirah, N.A., Dahlan, T.H., Ahmad, A.B. (2023). Effect of tacit knowledge on student self-determination in indonesia: A mixed-methods study. Education Research International, 2023(1): 6122547. https://doi.org/10.1155/2023/6122547
[41] Maher, L., Dertadian, G. (2018). Qualitative research. Addiction, 113(1): 167-172. https://doi.org/10.1111/add.13931
[42] Cousineau, J.M. (2021). An evaluation of the effect of the Tax Credit for Career Extension on labor force participation and employment rates of workers aged 60 and over in Quebec. Canadian Public Policy, 47(4): 523-536. https://doi.org/10.3138/cpp.2020-020
[43] Nalbandian, J. (1999). Facilitating community, enabling democracy: New roles for local government managers. Public Administration Review, 59(3): 187-197. https://doi.org/10.2307/3109948
[44] Giles-Corti, B. (2008). Evaluation of the implementation of a state government community design policy aimed at increasing local walking: Design issues and baseline results from RESIDE, Perth Western Australia. Preventive Medicine, 46(1): 46-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2007.08.002
[45] Ham, J.C. (2011). Government programs can improve local labor markets: Evidence from State Enterprise Zones, Federal Empowerment Zones, and Federal Enterprise Community. Journal of Public Economics, 95(7): 779-797. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2010.11.027
