Lessons from Implementing Sustainable Development Policies in Indonesian Cities: Rethinking the Sub-National Institutional Architecture and Agency on Collaborative Governance for Urban Infrastructure
Mahesti Okitasari United Nations University Institute for the Advance Study of Sustainability (IAS) April 11th, 2015 1
TODAY’S PRESENTATION
FOCUS: COLLABORATIVE GOVERNANCE AND INSTITUTIONS TO IMPLEMENT SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT POLICIES IN INDONESIA 1. BACKGROUND: SD policies in Indonesian cities (Water and Sanitation) 2. CASE STUDY: region-wide intergovernmental collaboration 3. LESSONS LEARNED
2
Indonesian’s perspective on sustainable development ….a development model that ensure sustainable, inclusive, and fair economy. (Coordinating Ministry of National Development Planning, 2013, UN Special Event towards Achieving MDGs)
which sustainable development policies in cities? MDGs goal #7: Ensure environmental sustainability target 7C: sustainable access to safe drinking water and sanitation
3
ways of achieving sustainable development in cities 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Localising sustainable development Formulating sustainable development-related development plan Ensuring maximized community participation Building accountability Invest in monitoring mechanism
6.
Mobilising local resources
7. 8. 9.
Reforming public service Gender equality and women empowerment Advocacy to accelerate sustainable development attainment
10. Forging partnership to attain sustainable development
issue for implementing in cities LACK OF CAPACITY - Financing - Technical - Institutional CROSS BORDER IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES - Regional disparity - Policy incoherence - Fragmented decision making
4
BACKGROUND: SD policies implementation in Indonesian cities (water and sanitation)
DISPARITY ACROSS CITIES AND IN REGIONS Decentralised planning and implementation
ACCESS TO CLEAN WATER 2011
2012
2013
Jakarta MA
Surabaya MA
Gowa
Takalar
Maros
Makassar
Tabanan
Badung
Gianyar
Bantul
Denpasar
Sleman
Grobogan
Semarang MA
Yogyakarta
Salatiga
Semarang (Reg)
Kendal
Demak
Semarang (City)
Sidoarjo
Lamongan
Mojokerto (Reg)
Mojokerto (City)
Gresik
Bangkalan
Surabaya
Tangerang (Reg)
South Tangerang
Depok (City)
Tangerang (City)
Bogor (Reg)
Bogor (City)
Bekasi (Reg)
Jakarta
Bekasi (City)
100.00 90.00 80.00 70.00 60.00 50.00 40.00 30.00 20.00 10.00 0.00
Yogyakarta Denpasar MA Makassar MA MA
ACCESS TO SANITATION 2011
2012
2013
Surabaya MA
Semarang MA
Gowa
Takalar
Maros
Makassar
Tabanan
Badung
Gianyar
Bantul
Denpasar
Sleman
Yogyakarta
Grobogan
Salatiga
Semarang (Reg)
Kendal
Demak
Semarang (City)
Lamongan
Sidoarjo
Mojokerto (Reg)
Mojokerto (City)
Gresik
Bangkalan
Surabaya
South Tangerang
Tangerang (Reg)
Depok (City)
Jakarta MA
Tangerang (City)
Bogor (Reg)
Bogor (City)
Bekasi (Reg)
Jakarta
Bekasi (City)
100.00 90.00 80.00 70.00 60.00 50.00 40.00 30.00 20.00 10.00 0.00
Yogyakarta Denpasar MA Makassar MA MA
YOGYAKARTA METROPOLITAN AREA (KARTAMANTUL) Low regional disparity on water and sanitation provision 2001 started intergovernmental collaboration
GOOD GOVERNANCE? BETTER INSTITUTIONS? 5
CASE STUDY: region-wide intergovernmental collaboration research methodology Questionnaire survey Semi-structured interview. Samples: 6 metro regions
1. Measuring the interaction among local actors 2. Analysing policy tools coherence 3. Analysing the institutional structure
Urban planning framework
The current institutional structure of collaborative governance
Policy making and strategy making
Monitoring
Current architecture Strategic objective and outcome Future Policy architecture setting
Resource pooling and sharing
Impleme ntation 6
Policymaking and strategy making
CASE STUDY RESULTS: YOGYAKARTA REGION 1. measuring interaction between local actors
60 NGO 40 20 U 0
Intergovernmental Interaction
30 25 20
OC D SOC
PCD
CC
15
REC
10
Resource pooling and sharing
5
Jakarta
Surabaya
Semarang
Denpasar
Gowa
Takalar
Maros
Makassar
Tabanan
Badung
Gianyar
Bantul
Yogyakarta
Denpasar
Sleman
Jogja
Grobogan
Salatiga
Demak
Semarang Kab
Kendal
Semarang Kota
Sidoarjo
Lamongan
Kota Mojokerto
Kab Mojokerto
Gresik
Bangkalan
Surabaya
Tangerang Selatan
Kab Tangerang
Kota Depok
Kota Tangerang
Kab Bogor
Kota Bogor
Kab Bekasi
Jakarta
Kota Bekasi
0
Makassar
60 NGO 40 20 U 0
OC D SOC
PCD
CC
REC
Stronger than average intergovernmental interaction Similar approach on dealing with interaction with other actors The more similar cities on how they pursue and structure their institutions, THE EASIER FOR CITIES TO COLLABORATE
AND IMPLEMENT?
Implementation and monitoring 60 NGO 40 20 U 0
OC D SOC
PCD
CC REC
7
Authority Procedural guideline Sub-district and village collaboration
CASE STUDY RESULTS: YOGYAKARTA REGION 2. analysing policy tools coherence
Regulation
POLICY TOOLS COHERENCE All Regions
Covering all sectors Nongovernmental sectors only Local enterprise only
Yogyakarta
Authority
Contract
Regulation
Consolidated issuance Evaluation scheme Conflict solving
Contract Fiscal/Subsidy/Tax
Fiscal/Subsidy/Tax
Direct Provision
Grants Incentives In-kind transfer
Exhortation 0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
70.00%
80.00%
90.00% 100.00%
Strong OVERALL POLICY COHERENCE, less conflicting policies Similar orientation on FISCAL POLICY ACTIVE ADVOCACY on development plans CONSOLIDATED POLICY TOOLS for implementation
Direct Provision Sharing funding (state enterprise) Sharing funding (third parties) Local budgeting authority Infrastructure transfer Management of local assets Exhortation Master Plan Midterm Development Plan Long-term Development 8 Plan Working Programme
CASE STUDY RESULTS: YOGYAKARTA REGION 3. analysing the institutional structure
NGOs
Three tiers coordination (mayoral level and 2 technical levels), inter-sectoral, non-silos Formal and informal coordinating settings, integrated decision making Collaborating body is managed by professional nongovernmental Involvement of nongovernmental actors 9
LESSONS LEARNED: factors for implementing SD policies through collaborative governance Intensifying interaction to lessen asymmetrical institutional situation and political transaction cost.
Lessening fragmented decision making, moving from silos approach Promoting policy coherence and active advocacy.
Improving coherence on fiscal orientation. Encouraging the involvement of nongovernmental actors, better civic participation
Advancing civic capital through capacity building.
10
thank you for your kind attention
[email protected]
11
