Policy Evaluation OF Development
Planning and Budgeting
by Regulatory Impact Assessment
Method
AgitKristiana, Andy FeftaWijaya, ChoirulSaleh
Master of Public Administration, Faculty of
Administrative Science,
Brawijaya University
Summary
As a consequence of the authority of
autonomy, local governments have an obligation to improve the care and welfare
of society as a democratic, just, equitable and sustainable. Improved public
services and social welfare can be achieved through good performances of local
government, where it is strongly associated with the development planning and
budgeting processes. In addition to the current procedures for the
implementation of development planning and budgeting has not become an integral
and systemic, and they are regulated in many separate rules, even some of which
are contradictory. Thus, in this study, researchers focused on evaluated the
development planning and budgeting’s policy.This study used Regulatory Impact
Assessment as a method for analyzing data obtained during the study.The result
of this research showed thatthe main
problems that occur related to development planning and budgeting policies are
construction regulations in the areas of planning and budgeting are not well
ordered. This can be seen in the legal structure, legal substance, and legal
culture of each rule that tend not synergistic. To solve there problems,
researcher suggest tochoose the second alternative, the alternative
"Construction Regulation Stay Current Like, But Need to Do to Increase the
Quality Planning and Budgeting".
Keywords: development planning, budgeting, policy evaluation,
regulatory impact assessment method
Law No.
32/2004 about Local Government, as
amended several times, most recently by Law No. 12/2008, and Law No. 33/2004 on
Fiscal Balance between Central and Local Government is a legal basis in the
field of wide, real and responsible regional autonomy. Basically the policy of
local autonomy intended to improve public services and to develop the
creativity of local government (Dwiyanto, 2008). As a consequence of the
authority of autonomy, local governments have an obligation to improve the care
and welfare of society as a democratic, just, equitable and sustainable.
Improved
public services and social welfare can be achieved through good performances of
local government, where it is strongly associated with the development planning
and budgeting processes. Planning and budgeting is the most crucial process in
governance, as related to the purpose of government itself for the welfare of
its people (Lincolin, 2002). According to Lincoln, planning and budgeting is an
integrated process, because the output of the planning is budgeting.
All this
time, planning and budgeting rules do not yet have an adequate foundation.
Budgeting or financial management prior law rule refers to the reign of the
Dutch East Indies, namely IndischeComptabiliteitswet
or ICW (Ministry of Finance, 2008 p.
58). Later, this policy is considered no longer relevant to the more complex
the management of state finances. Government reacts by issuing three packs
financial state laws governing the rule of financial management, one of them
are the Law No. 17/2005 on the State Finance which also regulates local
budgeting process.
The
integration of national planning system from local to central all this time
also does not have a foundation of rules that are binding. The issuance of
autonomy policy and the abolition of the Guidelines (Guidelines of State
Policy), which is used as a basis for planning, carrying the implication of the
need for a policy framework that governs the national development planning
system that is both systematic and harmonious (Ministry of Finance, 2008). It
is the one on which the issuance of Law no. 25/2004 on National Development
Planning System.
Since the
issuance of the policy of regional autonomy through the Law no. 22/1999 and Law
no. 25/1999 on fiscal balance, quite a lot of problems that arise on the
implementation of this policy. Based on this, the central government revised
decentralization policy through Law no. 32/2004 on Regional Government and Law.
No 33 on Fiscal Balance and Regional Center. However, in both these policies,
also regulate matters relating to planning and budgeting in the area. The
fourth policy arranges the things are not much different about planning and
budgeting. Act 25 of 2004 set up a special on planning, while Law 17/2004
regulating the financial management of the state and the region, while the Law
32 and 33/2004, arrange in the areas of planning and budgeting. That is, the
process of planning and budgeting in all four areas must refer this
legislation. It is estimated that four laws that have the same legal force can lead
to powerful multi interpretation in its implementation, considering the fourth
set of inter-related substances (Bappenas, 2010).
In
addition to the current procedures for the implementation of development
planning and budgeting has not become an integral and systemic, and they are
regulated in many separate rules, even some of which are contradictory.
Discrepancy
between the planning documents ultimately also has an impact on other
development planning documents as well as the budgeting aspect anyway (Lincolin,
2002). Some things need to get attention in depth are consistency in
development planning and budgeting on SKPD level. Until now the level of
consistency between programs on RPJMD Blitar with some SKPDs Strategic Plan has
yet to reach 100%. The condition also occurs on the consistency between the
budget plans on some SKPDs also become not an ideal point.
According
to Posner (2003), the various problems that arise at this stage of
implementation of regulations concerning development planning and budgeting in
the area basically led to the policy itself. Where based on the problems that
unfold in some areas above and in particular in the city of Blitar, it can be
seen that the policies regarding development planning and budgeting today tend
to be synergistic. In the ideal aspects of the policy, a policy should be able
to solve problems that are and will happen. So that the policy-making process
in general always through the stages of policy analysis, as described Dunn
(1999 p.5) that the analysis of public policy is the activity of creating
knowledge and in the policy-making process.
The
procedures in policy analysis include problem formulation, forecasting,
recommendation, monitoring, and evaluation. The procedure is visualized as a
series of interdependent stages that agenda-setting, policy formulation, policy
adoption, policy implementation, and policy assessment (Dunn, 1999 p.22).
Various
problems related to not synergy policy or rules regarding development planning
and budgeting became the basis of the need for an evaluation of the policy.
Basically the evaluation is a systematic and objective assessment of the
design, implementation and results of a project, program or policy that is
running or that have been completed. Meanwhile, according to Stufflebeam (2003)
evaluation is the process of delinating, obtaining and providing useful
information for judging decision alternatives. So that an evaluation should
contain valid and reliable information about the performance of the policy, is
how far the needs, values and opportunities have been achieved through public
action (Dunn, 1999 p. 610).
The
purpose of the evaluation is the improvement of social, fostering democracy
carefully, mistakes and willingness, accountability and transparency, and the
development of knowledge management, organizational development, promotion of
dialogue and cooperation among stakeholders, linkage projects and / or
policies, implementation, efficiency, effectiveness, impact and sustainability
and the goal should produce learning. Where the evaluation can be implement on
an intervention to a policy, program or activity or project (Stufflebeam, 2003
p. 73).
According
to the type of evaluation can be distinguished based on the stages of the
evaluation of a policy, program or activity that is the evaluation of the
planning stage (ex-ante), the evaluation phase of implementation (on-going) and
post-implementation phase of evaluation (ex-post). In this study evaluation
will be done based on the stage of implementation or on-going, given the policy
itself has been in the implementation phase.
To
simplify the process of policy evaluation, the methodology used in this study
Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIA) developed by the Organization for Economic
Co-operation and Development (OECD). RIA is a method to assess systematically,
comprehensively and participatory positive and negative impacts of a policy
(regulatory or non- regulatory) and draft policies to be defined (Bappenas,
2011). This approach is adopted in order to encourage the creation of good
regulatory governance, where regulations may be an alternative to get the best
solution. This is important because the fact that regulation tends to be a
burden to stakeholders that ultimately backfired for the government and society
at large. This is because the regulations are often made "so long"
without regard to the various aspects around him. This method also us in
several Thus, in this study researchers are interested in analyzing the
implementation of development planning and budgeting in Blitar City, as well as
evaluating the development planning and budgeting policy itself.
RESEARCH METHOD
This research
is a descriptive study with a qualitative approach. According to Nasution in
Soejono (1998 p. 19) descriptive research methods in the study of research
methodology has always been associated with the issue of the purpose of
research. Descriptive research studying the problems in society, and ordinances
that applies to public as well as specific situations, including about
relationships, activities, attitudes, perspectives, and processes and the
ongoing effects of a phenomenon (Nazir, 2005 p. 55).This study used Regulatory
Impact Assessment as a method for analyzing data obtained during the study.In
this research, the Regulatory Impact Assessment method has been developed by
The Asia Foundation. RIA is a method to assess in systematic, comprehensive and
participatory positive and negative impacts of a policy and draft policies to
be defined. Thus, with this method the researcher can conduct a more in-depth
evaluation of the policies related to development planning and budgeting.
DATA ANALYSIS
The RIA
systematic processes to analyze and communicate the impact of new regulations
that exist include, formulating the problem. Identification and analysis of
issues related to new regulations or new regulations in force. In this stage,
the formulation of problems or issues that give rise the needed of policy
issue. Identify Goals. Set goals / objectives will be achieved by identifying
the goal, of course, waking consciousness after studying the existing
formulation of the problem. Compile the alternatives. Development of options to
solve the problems identified, namely identifying some alternative action
(option) in order to achieve the goals and objectives that have been formulated
previously. Cost and benefit analysis. Assessment of options in terms of costs
and benefits as well as the legality is to perform an analysis of the costs and
benefit for each option. Involve public participation is conducting a public
consultation, Choosing the Best Alternative. Determination of policy options by
selecting the most effective / efficient selection and implementation of
advocacy strategies. Perform strategic plan implementation stages RIA policy.
To make it easier to understand the process and procedures of RIA, here is a
picture of the RIA process.
To analyze the
RIA document, there are several methods of analysis, in this study will be used
to assess the cost benefit analysis of various alternative policies that have
been defined. Cost and benefit analysis is an approach to policy
recommendations that allow analysts to compare and advocated a policy by
calculating the total cost in terms of money and the total profits in the form
of money (Dunn, 1999 p. 447). In this study the cost and benefit analysis that
is used is very simple to consider the benefits and costs of each policy
alternative.
RESEARCH FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS
Evaluation of Policy Planning and Budgeting through Regulatory Impact
Assessment method
Any reform euphoria has changed a lot of the
life of nation and state, including changes in the development planning
process. Not only the loss of MPR which is the highest legal basis of national
development policies in the Guidelines of State Policy, but also the birth of
two (2) separate regulatory planning and budgeting process, namely Law No. 17
of 2003 on State Finance and Law Law Number 25 Year 2004 on National
Development Planning System.
Second Act is trying to connect and synergize
with each other. Article 17 paragraph (2) of Law No. 17 of 2003 said that the
preparation of the Draft Budget of the State Government based on the work plan
in order to realize the Government objective, and Article 4 of Law No. 25 of
2004 regulating the substance of the Government Work Plan and other planning
documents the Medium-Term Plan and Long Term Development Plan.
In this study, researchers used Regulatorry
Impact Assessment as a method of analysis. Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) or
Policy Impact Analysis was originally a policy tool that is used widely in the
OECD countries. RIA is a method to assess in systematic, comprehensive,
participatory positive and negative impacts of a policy (regulatory or
non-regulatory) and draft policies to be defined (OECD, 1995). So to ease the
process of analysis, in this study there are several steps that are used to
analyze, the stage has been adjusted with a list of the ten questions in the
RIA methodology, namely:
a. Is the problem correctly defined?
b. Is government action can be justified?
c. Whether the government action is the best rule?
d. Is there a legal basis for regulation?
e. What is suitable for the level of government for
this action?
f. Do the benefits of regulation justify the costs?
g. Is the distribution of effects across society
transparent?
h. Is the regulation clear, consistent, comprehensible
and accessible to users?
i. Are all interested parties have an opportunity to
express their views?
j. How will compliance be achieved?
Source: OECD (1995)
Referring to the list of questions above, the
following are the stages of the process and analysis by using the method of
Regulatory Impact Assessment.
Identification and analysis of problems
Russell L. Ackoff quoted the opinion of,
Redisigning the Future: A Systems Approach to Social Problems (1974), that
"the success adalam invention solves the problem requires an appropriate
solution to the problem is also right. Referring to the opinion, this is the
importance of the formulation of the problem both in the preparation and
evaluation of a policy.
Although both of these rules are not much
different, but when compared with the Law 32/2004, can occur in the
understanding of multi-interpretation. Of the four laws above, as illustrated
in the flow planning and budgeting, then it is possible in the areas of
planning and budgeting will vary depending on use laws. Multi-flow
interpretation of the comparison is as follows:
1) On the Law 17/2003 and Law 33/2004, working
plan on education is based on job performance, while Law 25/2004 and Law
32/2004 does not command it. Act 32 of 2004, states RKA on education which is
based on work performance. The question, whether the working plan on education
and RKPD same.
2) On the Law 25/2004, based on the working plan
on education sector plans and referring to RKPD. While in Law 32/2004 working
plan on education sector plans formulated from, without reference to RKPD
ordered. While in Law 33/2004, stating working plan on education elaboration of
RKPD without reference to sector plans
3) In the Act 32 of 2004, KDH set priorities and
ceiling. While in Law 17/2003 and Law 33/2004, priorities and ceilings covered
with Parliament and local government
4) In the Act 32 of 2004, and the priority ceiling
predefined region head used as a basis for preparing the RKA on education.
While Act 17 of 2003 and Act 33 of 2004, priorities and palofon while
Parliament discussed the preparation of the Local Government RKA referenced on
education
5) On the Law 32/2004 on education delivered to
PPKD RKA (Regional Financial Management Officer) as the basis for preparing the
proposed budget. While Law 17/2003 and Law 33/2004 on education RKA submitted
to Parliament for discussion, the results are delivered to PPKD
6) In the Act 17 of 2003, the right of Parliament
to submit proposals that result in changes in the amount of receipts and
expenditures and anticipated if RAPBD not approved. While the Act 33 of 2004
and Act 32 of 2004, not ordered it.
Based on the
description of fourth substance-related problems on the laws that tend to
multiple interpretations and multiple interpretations, the author tries to
identify these issues through three aspects. These three aspects are an effort
to identivication and unravel the problems that are so complex associated with
development planning and budgeting.Therea are substansial aspect, legal aspect,
and culture aspect.
Goal setting
Problems faced in making policy decisions
typically have coverage, so it cannot be solved only with the action (policy).
In such circumstances, the policy is usually made only intended to address
the problems encountered in part from, and should be clearly identified goals
or objectives to be achieved by the policy. This is consistent with research
conducted by AlketaPeci and Filipe Sobral (2011) which states that:
"The creation of independent regulatory
bodies represented an important institutional innovation, many regulatory
obstacles persist, Including a fragmented policy process, the heterogeneity of
institutional and organizational-adopted regulatory models in different sectors
of the economy, and the complexity of regulatory instruments. Reviews These
factors point to the need for intergovernmental coordination and improved the quality of regulation”.
Referring to the goal-setting stage in the
Regulatory Impact Assessment of this method it is necessary to review the
context of the beginning of the fourth base of the legislation. Where a
legislation can be applied effectively if the regulation has clear rules and
procedures do not overlap, have a clear substance formulation which contains
the norms and rules and sanctions are not opposed to each other, and the
presence of organs which continue to oversee the effectiveness of the implementation
of good through the enforcement of rules and regulations implementing
socialization.
Based on that premise, then the goal will be
achieved from this study is Looking for
Construction regulation of Planning and Budgeting Ability to synergize.
Construction is expected regulation rules in planning and budgeting
permbangunan has grammar rules and a clear formulation of the substance as well
as the organ that is able to oversee the effect
Development of
various options / alternative policies to achieve the goal
At this stage the possibility of identification
of the various alternative actions to achieve the goals that have been
formulated in the previous stage. This stage is not intended to determine which
method should be chosen. But the main purpose of this stage is to generate a
list recognizing the various methods or ways to achieve the intended purpose.
This is consistent with research conducted by Peter Carroll (2010) that with
existing RIA Often highlighting a variety of weaknesses upon theremedial
attention can be focused, if there is the political will to do so.
So to be able to achieve its intended
purpose as described in this step is necessary to develop a wide range of
policy alternatives. Here are the policies alternatives that are considered
able to synergize planning and budgeting are as follows:
1) Policy Alternative
I: Do Nothing (not doing anything)
One of the
characteristics of the RIA method is not eliminating the conditions that exist
today as one of the policy alternatives considered. Alternative policy called
Do nothing which is an action for "not doing anything". For the
purposes of cost-benefit analysis, do nothing condition is commonly called the
baseline condition in which these conditions will be compared with a condition
that occurs when other alternative measures are implemented.
2) Policy
Alternatives II: Construction Current Regulations As Fixed, But Need to Conduct
Quality Improvement Efforts Development Planning and Budgeting
This alternative is
an alternative option in which the rules governing the regulation remains to
maintain a variety of laws and regulations that already exist as well as the
formulation of rules to maintain its pros and cons. But to correct these
deficiencies need to be done a variety of efforts to improve the quality of
development planning and budgeting.ive implementation of these regulations.
Policy Alternatives
III: Procedure Rules Remain As Current Regulation, But Need To Repair
Formulation Harmonization and Substance regulation
In this alternative,
which consists of grammar rules of Law No. 17 of 2003, Act No. 25 of 2004 and
Act No. 32 of 2004 along with the rules of implementation remain. It just needs
to be harmonization of the rules relating to development planning and budgeting
by making improvements over substance conflicting rules and perfecting a
formula that is not clear substance and cause multiple interpretations.
4) Alternative Policy
IV: Simplification of Regulations by Publishes New Regulations as a Legal Basis
of Development Planning and Budgeting
As explained above
that the rules governing the development planning and budgeting so much and of
which there is a conflict between the rules. In addition, there are many rules
that are not clear formulation and multiple interpretations. The impact of that
is the rule becomes effective that development planning and budgeting are not
synergistic
Assessment of policy alternatives
RIA method next step is to assess various
policy alternatives that have been determined using an analysis of benefits and
costs (cost & benefit analysis). In this study the cost and benefit
analysis that is used is very simple to consider the benefits and costs of each
policy alternative. To be able to compare each policy alternative, it is necessary
to first set the following assessment variables:
|
|
Variable
|
|
|
Scores
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
BENEFIT
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
rule of law and the absence of overlap between the
regulatory
|
• If there is no legal certainty and there is a lot
of overlap between the scores given rule is 0.
• If the lack of legal certainty and there are some
rules that overlap the given score is 1-3.
• If sufficient legal certainty and there are few
rules that overlap the given score is 4-6.
If the rule of law created properly and there are no
overlapping rules, the score given is 7-10.
|
|||||
|
substance synergy between development plan documents
|
• If there is no synergy between the substance of
the development plan document is given a score of 0.
• If there is less substance sinergitaa between
development plan documents is then given a score of 1-3.
• If there is enough substance synergy between
development plan documents are then given a score of 4-6.
• If the substance of the synergy between
development planning documents so good then the score given is 7-10.
|
|||||
|
substance synergy between development planning and
budgeting
|
If there is no substance synergy between development
planning and budgeting documents, the score given was 0.
• If there is less substance synergy between
development planning and budgeting, the score given is 1-3.
|
|||||
|
|
• If there is enough substance synergy between
development planning and budgeting is then given a score of 4-6.
• If the substance synergy between pembangvunan
planning and budgeting documents so good then the score given is 7-10.
|
|||||
|
the role of the Ministry of Planning / Bappenas in
synergy coordinate planning and budgeting
|
If there is no role of the Ministry of Planning /
Bappenas in synergy coordinating development planning and budgeting, the
score given was 0.
• If the role of the Ministry of Planning / Bappenas
in synergy coordinating development planning and budgeting less then the
score given was 1-3.
• If the role of the Ministry of Planning / Bappenas
in synergy coordinating development planning and budgeting enough then given
a score is 4-6.
• If the role of the Ministry of Planning / Bappenas
in coordinating development planning and budgeting synergy stronger then the
score given is 7-10.
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
||||
|
COST
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
funds needed
|
• If no funds are needed, the score given was 0.
• If the funds needed less then the score given was
1-3.
• If the funds needed, the greater the score given
was 4-6.
• If the required funds are very large, the score
given is 7-10
|
|||||
|
time required
|
If no time is required then the score given was 0.
• If the time it takes a minute then given a score
is 1-3.
• If it takes a long time, the score given is 4-6.
• If it takes a very long time, the score given is
7-10.
|
|||||
|
Human resources required
|
• If there is no human resources required then the
score given was 0.
• If the human resources required are small, the
score given is 1-3.
• If it takes a lot of human resources, the score
given is 4-6.
• If HR is very much needed given the score was 7-10
|
|||||
|
Other efforts are needed
|
• If no other measures are required then the score
given was 0.
• If there is little effort required other then the
score given was 1-3.
• If there are other efforts necessary given the
score is 4-6.
• If there are many other measures are required then
the score given is 7-10.
|
|||||
The selection of the best
policy
Based on the results of a cost benefit analysis on the four alternative
policies described above, and compare the benefits and costs of each policy
alternative, and compared with the baseline condition (do nothing), the
obtained results of the analysis as follows:
Tabel 32
Assessment recapitulation
|
Policy Alternatives
|
Benefit
|
Cost
|
Benefits than Costs
|
Positive Changes in
Baseline
|
|
I
|
8
|
12
|
-4
|
|
|
II
|
21
|
17
|
+4
|
+4-(-4)=8
|
|
III
|
27
|
26
|
+1
|
+1-(-4)=5
|
|
IV
|
34
|
31
|
+3
|
+3-(-4)=7
|
Sources : data processed
Based on the summary judgment on the above table, it can be seen that the
greatest benefit that can provide legal certainty; synergize the development
planning documents; synergize development planning and budgeting; as well as
providing a great role to the Ministry of Planning / Bappenas is the
Alternative Policy IV (34). But it turns out that the policy alternatives can
be realized, requires also a huge cost (31). While the policy alternatives that
are low cost Alternatives Policy I (12), but the benefits if the policy
alternative selected is very small as well (8). Therefore, in this case, the
selected alternative is an alternative policy that its net benefits (benefits
minus costs) at most. Based on Table 8 it can be seen that the Policy
Alternatives II, an appropriate policy alternatives to be selected and
implemented.
Preparation of strategy
implementation
Based on the results telahaan as mentioned above, have been Alternate II
to increase synergy development planning and budgeting. The alternative namely
"Construction Equipment Regulation As Current, But Need to Conduct Quality
Improvement Efforts Planning and Budgeting". With this policy, the
alternative either Act 17 of 2003, Act No. 25 of 2004, and Act No. 2 of 2004
does not need to be changed. Steps to improve the synergy planning and
budgeting is done through a variety of activities that can improve the synergy
of planning and budgeting. By using the Friedman approach, then the activity
can be divided into 3 (three) clusters as follows:
1) Structure (Structure)
From the aspect of the structure of some things to do Ministry of Planning
/ Bappenas to increase synergy planning and budgeting are as follows:
a) repositioning the role of the Ministry of Planning / Bappenas as an
institution that has the power and influence intelectual power. Therefore, the
Ministry of Planning / Bappenas need to define the role of the Strategic Plan
of the Ministry of Planning / Bappenas.
b) In order to strengthen its role as mentioned above, it is necessary to
establish a Policy Analysis Unit which is a kitchen strategic policy
formulation in the Ministry of Planning / Bappenas.
c) Develop a variety of rules (procedures) defined by Regulation of the
Minister of Planning / Head of Bappenas as Guidelines for Preparation of
Strategic Plan, Preparation Pendoman RKP, Guidelines Musrenbang and so forth.
d) Establish a system of development planning and network that can be
accessed by executing national and local development planning and can
synchronize national and local development planning (e-planning) and to develop
a good system of public information.
e) Conduct audit planning and evaluation of the system running now
("where are we now and the implications") to enhance the system has
been running, including the revitalization of Musrenbang.
2) Substance (Substance)
From the aspect of substance, the Ministry of Planning / Bappenas need to
do some activities to increase the synergy between planning and budgeting as
follows:
a) Changing concepts of planning into scenario planning that is responsive
to change.
b) To synergize the central and regional planning through the provision of
deconcentration fund is accompanied with strong assistance and supervision.
c) Maximizing the implementation of monitoring and evaluation and using
the results of monitoring and evaluation as a material planning next.
d) Develop the concept of non-budget budgeting / budgets to support the
implementation of development planning (private cooperation).
e) Developing the concept of "Public Accountability" where
society (civil society) is more involved in the participation of national
development.
3) Culture (Culture)
In terms of culture, both of organizational culture and individual
culture, the Ministry of Planning / Bappenas and or employees need to perform
the following activities:
a) Develop a good communication pattern between the Ministry of Planning /
Bappenas with the President, other agencies and the public.
b) Preparation of a clear career pattern and put the right man on the
right place.
c) Improving the quality of both national and local planners with a
well-planned and appropriate training needs (training need analysis).
d) Changing the mindset (mindset) long into the new mindset that changes
in the strategic environment requires behavior change planner planners become
responsive and unresponsive (outward and forward looking)
e) Improve coordination among government agencies to offset the dominance
of parliament (legislative heavy) that is currently happening.
CONCLUSION AND SUGESSTION
CONCLUSION
Here are the conclusions based on the results of research and analysis of
research related to policy development planning and budgeting:
1.
In formulating annual planning document or RKPD Blitar
In 2012, there are some procedures doesn’t based on the Permendagri No. 54 of
2010 on the Implementation of Government Regulations No. 8 of 2008 on Stages,
Procedures for Preparation, Control, and Evaluation of the Implementation of
the Regional Development Plan. Here are some rules that have not been
completely carried out on the preparation of documents RKPD Blitar City in
2012:
a.
In
the early stages, still have not established the Drafting Team RKPD in the
process of preparation of the RKPD. In fact this is what the drafting team will
begin preparation phase charge up with the adoption of the draft Regulations
Regional Head RKPD year.
b. In RKPD substance, particularly in the management of
data and information as well there are still some things that have not been
described in the data processing and information point. Though based on the
preparation of technical guidelines RKPD in data processing and information in
local development planning should include some information that is data and a
general overview of the area, which includes geographic and demographic
conditions of the data areas, and data related to key performance indicators
covering local governance aspects of public welfare, public service aspects and
aspects of regional competitiveness. Then an overview of data and information
regarding the financial management area includes income data area, shopping
area, local financing, and regional balance.
c.
In
the public consultation process flow that is supposed to run in the preparation
of Blitar RKPD In 2012, it was not implemented properly, even in the process is
actually not contained in the formulation of public consultation forums.
d. On funding priority programs and activities, have not
figured out how to forecast forward for several years in the future.
2.
In addition to the unsuitable of the procedures for
preparation of documents set out in the Regulation of the Minister No. 54 of
2010, still found a mismatch between the unconformity and medium term planning
documents, annual and budgeting documents. Here is the identification of some
of the discrepancy, among others:
a.
Based
on the results of the comparison between the two documents (Year 2011-2015
RPJMD Blitar Blitar with RKPD in 2012) seen a difference in the formulation of
priorities, actions that occur because of differences related to the analysis
of the situation between the two documents.
b. Based on the comparison and analysis of data from the
annual planning document (RKPD Blitar in 2012) and the annual budget documents
(Blitar City budget for Fiscal Year 2012) appear to be any discrepancy between
the priority programs indicated on each document. Given that RKPD is an annual
planning document is the document area and local budget ceiling, then in the
event of inconsistency or discrepancy, clearly will have an impact on the
distribution of the amount of funds for the implementation of each priority
there.
3.
Based on the analysis of development planning and
budgeting policies, in particular the four laws that regulate directly about
development planning and budgeting, the law No. 32 of 2004, the law No. 33 of
2004, the law no 25 2004, and the law No. 17 of 2003 it can be concluded that the main problems that occur related to
development planning and budgeting policies are construction regulations in the
areas of planning and budgeting are not well ordered. This can be seen in the
legal structure, legal substance, and legal culture of each teresebut rules
that tend not synergistic.
4.
Through legislation tends not harmonious and synergistic
implementation implies the ineffectiveness of legislation in the field of
development planning and budgeting as well as weak enforcement of legislation
itself
SUGESTION
Based on the conclusions that the authors have described above suggestions
can be given as follows:
1.
In
the preparation of development plan documents and document annual budget ceilings,
must pay attention to the alignment and compliance among documents, where the
integration between the document it will be very supportive of the achievement
of the whole plan of the local government activities Blitar and also will
accelerate the achievement of desired goals
3.
In the preparation of planning documents should be
alignment of priorities and objectives formulation, so that the development
process will be focused
4.
In an effort to improve the construction regulation in
development planning and budgeting policies, the authors suggest to choose the
second alternative, the alternative "Construction Regulation Stay Current
Like, But Need to Do to Increase the Quality Planning and Budgeting". With
this policy, the alternative either Act 17 of 2003, Act No. 25 of 2004, and Act
No. 2 of 2004 does not need to be changed. Steps to improve the synergy
planning and budgeting is done through a variety of activities that can improve
the synergy of planning and budgeting, among others:
a.
Develop a variety of rules (procedures) defined by
Regulation of the Minister of Planning / Head of Bappenas as Guidelines for
Preparation of Strategic Plan, Preparation RKP’s guideline, Musrenbang’s Guidelines and so forth.
b.
Establish a system of development planning and network
that can be accessed by executing national and local development planning and
can synchronize national and local development planning (e-planning) and to
develop a good system of public information.
c.
Conduct audit planning and evaluation of the system
running now ("where are we now and the implications") to enhance the
system has been running, including the revitalization of Musrenbang.
REFERENCES
[1].
Ach,
Mochyi M. 1993. Metodologi Penelitian,
Umm Press, Malang.
[2].
Ackoff,
Russell L, 1974. Redesigning the Future:
A Systems Approach to Social Problems. Oxford University Press. New York.
[3].
AG.
Subarsono. 2008. Analisis Kebijakan
Publik: Konsep, Teori dan Aplikasi. Pustaka Pelajar Yogyakarta
[4].
Amo,
Pedro Andres., Sophie Richter-Devroe and Delia Rodrigo. 2007. Policy Brief on Tools to initiate RIA.
Regional Capacity-Building Seminar On Regulatory Tools And Policies And Third
Regional Meeting Of The Working Group IV On Public Service Delivery, Public
Private Partnerships And Regulatory Reform. 15-16 February 2007. Regulatory Policy Division Directorate for
Public Governance and Territorial Development. OECD.
[5].
Anderson,
James E. 2011. Public Policy Making.
Wadsworth. Boston
[6].
Arikunto, Suharsimi. 1996. Prosedur Penelitian, Suatu
Pendekatan Praktek. PT Rineka Cipta.
Jakarta
[7].
Arsyad,
Lincolin, 2002. Pengantar Perencanaan dan Pembangunan Ekonomi Daerah.
BPFE. Yogyakarta.
[8].
Bappenas.
2010. Kajian Hukum Sinergitas Perencanaan
Pembangunan dan Pengganggaran. Biro Hukum Kemenetrian Bappenas. Jakarta
[9].
Bungin,
Burhan. 2007. Metodologi Penelitian
Kualitatif. PT RajaGrafindo Persada, Jakarta.
[10]. BPS Kota Blitar. 2013. Statistik Daerah Kota Blitar Tahun 2012.
BPS Kota Blitar. Blitar
[11]. Cheema G. Shabbir & Dennis A.
Rondinelli.1983. Decentralization and
Development Policy Implementation in Developing Countries. Sage Publications. Beverly Hills/London/New Delhi
[12]. Dunn, W. 1999. Pengantar Analisis Kebijakan Publik, edisi kedua. Gajah Mada
University Press. Yogyakarta
[13]. Dye, Thomas R. 1995. Understanding Public Policy. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
[14]. Dwiyanto, Agus. 2008. Mewujudkan Good Governance Melalui Pelayanan
Publik. Gadjah Mada University
Press. Yogjakarta
[15]. Fitriani, Fitria, Hofman B. dan Kai
K. 2005. Unity in Diversity? The Creation
of New Local Government in a Decentralising Indonesia. Bulletin of
Indonesia Studies. Jakarta
[16]. Islamy. Irfan. 2003. Prinsip-prinsip Perumusan Kebijaksanaan
Negara. Bumi Aksara. Jakarta.
[17]. Miles, B. Matthew dan Huberman A.
Michael. 1992. Analisa Data Kualitatif.
UI Press. Jakarta
[18]. Muluk, M.R.K. 2005. Desentralisasi dan Pemerintahan Daerah.
Banyumedia. Malang
[19]. Mulyana, Budi. 2010. Perencanaan
dan Penganggaran Daerah. BPPK Kementrian Keuangan. Jakarta.
[20]. Munir, Badrul, 2002, Perencanaan Pembangunan Daerah dalam
Perspektif Otonomi Daerah, cetakan ke-2 2002, Bappeda Propinsi NTB,
Mataram.
[21]. Nasokah. 2010. The Implementation Of Regulatory Impact Assessment As The Effort To
Guarantee The Public’s Participation In Local Rules Formation. Partnership for Governance Reform in
Indonesia. Jogjakarta.
[22]. Nasution, S. 2007. Metode
Research (Penelitian Ilmiah).PT Bumi Aksara. Jakarta.
[23]. Nazir., Mohammad. 2005. Metode Penelitian. Ghalia Indonesia.
Bogor
[24]. Nugroho, Riant. 2012. Public Policy. Edisi Keempat. PT Elex
Media Kompetindo. Jakarta
[25]. Parsons. W. 2006. Pengantar Teori dan Praktik Analisis
Kebijakan. Kencana. Jakarta
[26]. Pollit, Christopher. Decentralization, A Central Concept in
Contemporary Public Management. Editor: Ferlie, Ewan, Laurence E. Lynn and Christopher Pollit. 2005, The Oxford Handbook
of Public Management, Oxford
University Press Inc. United States
[27]. Posner, P.L. 2003.Performance budgeting: current developments
and future prospects. United States General Accounting Office.
[28]. Santana, Septiawan. 2007. Menulis Ilmiah: Metode Penelitian
Kualitatif. Yayasan Obor Indonesia. Jakarta.
[29]. Stufflebeam, D.L. H McKee dan B
McKee. 2003. The CIPP Model for
Evaluation. Paper presented at the 2003 Annual Conference of the Oregon
Program Evaluation Network (OPEN). Portland, Oregon.
[30]. Sugiyono. 2008. Metode
Penelitian Kuantitatif Kualitatif dan R&D. Alfabeta. Bandung
[31]. Smith, B.C. 1981. The Powers and Functions of Local
Government in Nigeria 1966-1980,
[32]. International Review of
Administrative Sciences, Vol. 47, No.4.
[33]. _________. 1985. Decentralization:
The Territorial Dimension of The State. Asia Publishing House. London
[34]. Tjokroamidjojo, Bintoro. 1996.
Perencanaan Pembangunan. Gunung Agung. Jakarta
[35].
Vigoda,
E.(Ed), 2001. From Responsivenes to Collaboration: Governance, Citizen, and
the Next Generation of Public Administration. Public Administration Review.
Agit Kristiana
Email :
kristianaagit@gmail.com
Alamat : Jalan Saxophone No 43 Malang
0 komentar :
Posting Komentar