The Politicization of Population Data Governance in the Perspective of Principal-Agent

Case Study in Indonesia

Authors

  • Misran Mindanao State University – Iligan Institute of Technology
  • Isnaini Muallidin Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta
  • Marilou Siton Nanaman Mindanao State University – Iligan Institute of Technology
  • Satria Iman Prasetyo Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21787/jbp.14.2022.275-287

Keywords:

politicization, data, Indonesia

Abstract

Indonesia is one of the list of developing countries in the world. The thing that is most often found in developing countries is vast populations. As one of the countries with the highest demographic bonus, Indonesia ranks at the top of the list for the world's population density. The complexity of the problem of population data in Indonesia has become an enormous homework for the government. The issue of this occupation data has haunted the Indonesian government for a long time. This study aims to analyze the politicization of Indonesian population data governance from the moral agent perspective. This study uses a qualitative approach. Sources of data were collected from previous studies related to the research topic by analyzing the phenomena in Indonesia. The findings of this study reveal the game of politicians and bureaucracy in playing population data. The game is in the form of politicizing data based on political interests. In the principal-agent perspective, where the contract is signed under asymmetric information when one party knows certain relevant things that the other party does not know

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Berenschot, W. (2018). The Political Economy of Clientelism: A Comparative Study of Indonesia’s Patronage Democracy. Comparative Political Studies, 51(12), 1563–1593. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414018758756

Chang, C.-Y. (2014). Principal-Agent Model of Risk Allocation in Construction Contracts and Its Critique. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 140(1), 04013032. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000779

Damayanti, R. A. (2018). Hubungan Keagenan Pemerintahan Daerah dalam Konteks Anggaran: Sebuah Agenda Rekonstruksi. EKUITAS (Jurnal Ekonomi dan Keuangan), 15(2), 149–171. https://doi.org/10.24034/j25485024.y2011.v15.i2.225

De Donder, P., & Hindriks, J. (2009). Adverse Selection, Moral Hazard and Propitious Selection. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 38(1), 73–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11166-008-9056-7

Decker, R. (1985). Agency Law Revisited. Hospital Purchasing Management, 10(7), 15–17. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10271829

Hardani, H., Andriani, H., Fardani, R. A., Ustiawaty, J., Utami, E. F., Sukmana, D. J., & Istiqomah, R. R. (2020). Metode Penelitian Kualitatif & Kuantitatif. Pustaka Ilmu.

Hardiningsih, & Oktaviani. (2012). Determinan Kebijakan Hutang: Dalam Agency Theory dan Pecking Order Theory. Dinamika Akuntansi, Keungan dan Perbankan, 1(1), 14.

Hastuti, S. H. D. (2020). Pentingnya Pemanfaatan Data Kependudukan di Era Digital. Jurnal TEKNIMEDIA: Teknologi Informasi dan Multimedia, 1(1), 18–21. https://doi.org/10.46764/teknimedia.v1i1.9

Herdiansah, A. G. (2017). Politisasi Identitas dalam Kompetisi Pemilu di Indonesia Pasca 2014. Jurnal Bawaslu: Pengawal Pemilu Terpercaya, 3(2), 169–183.

Hidayat, E. R., KY, I. G. S., & Astawa, I. N. (2017). Kepemimpinan yang Efektif untuk Masyarakat Multikultur di Indonesia.

Holmstrom, B. (1982). Moral Hazard in Teams. The Bell Journal of Economics, 13(2), 324–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/3003457

Holmstrom, B., & Milgrom, P. (2009). Multitask Principal–Agent Analyses: Incentive Contracts, Asset Ownership, and Job Design. In The Economic Nature of the Firm (Vol. 7, Issue May, pp. 232–244). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511817410.018

ICW. (2020, September 17). Hasil Pemantauan Bansos: 239 Temuan dan Aduan Warga, Tertinggi Terkait Pemotongan dan Pungutan Liar. Indonesia Corruption Watch. https://antikorupsi.org/id/article/hasil-pemantauan-bansos-239-temuan-dan-aduan-warga-tertinggi-terkait-pemotongan-dan

Inkeles, A. (1969). Participant Citizenship in Six Developing Countries. American Political Science Review, 63(4), 1120–1141. https://doi.org/10.2307/1955075

Itoh, H. (2004). Moral Hazard and Otherâ€Regarding Preferences. The Japanese Economic Review, 55(1), 18–45. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5876.2004.00273.x

Jensen, M., & Meckling, W. (2009). Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs, and Ownership Structure. In The Economic Nature of the Firm (pp. 283–303). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511817410.023

Junaidi, A. (2017). Optimalisasi Fungsi Kartu Tanda Penduduk Elektronik (KTP-EL) Berdasarkan Undang-Undang Nomor 24 Tahun 2013 tentang Perubahan atas Undang-Undang Nomor 23 Tahun 2006 tentang Administrasi Kependudukan (Studi pada Dinas Kependudukan dan Catatan Sipil Kota Singkawang). Nestor. https://jurnal.untan.ac.id/index.php/nestor/article/view/21013

Keser, C., & Willinger, M. (2007). Theories of Behavior in Principal–Agent Relationships With Hidden Action. European Economic Review, 51(6), 1514–1533. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2006.10.007

Laffont, J.-J., & Tirole, J. (1990). Adverse Selection and Renegotiation in Procurement. The Review of Economic Studies, 57(4), 597–625. https://doi.org/10.2307/2298088

Lane, J.-E. (2014). Organisation Theory: The Principal-Agent Perspective. Global Journal of Human Social Science, 14(7), 44–51. https://globaljournals.org/item/4332-organisation-theory-the-principal-agent-perspective

Macho-Stadler, I., & Pérez-Castrillo, J. D. (2001). An Introduction to the Economics of Information: Incentives and Contract. OUP Oxford.

Mishra, D. P., Heide, J. B., & Cort, S. G. (1998). Information Asymmetry and Levels of Agency Relationships. Journal of Marketing Research, 35(3), 277–295. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224379803500301

Muadi, S., MH, I., & Sofwani, A. (2016). Konsep dan Kajian Teori Perumusan Kebijakan Publik. JRP (Jurnal Review Politik), 6(2), 195–224. http://jurnalfuf.uinsby.ac.id/index.php/JRP/article/view/1078

Namazi, M. (2013). Role of the Agency Theory in Implementing Managements Control. Journal of Accounting and Taxation, 5(2), 38–47. https://doi.org/10.5897/JAT11.032

Purdwiastuti, M. M., & Nofiyanti, R. (2012). Biaya Keagenan dan Kebijakan Deviden: Implikasi Afiliasi Grup Bisnis. UG Jurnal, 6(2), 16–21. https://ejournal.gunadarma.ac.id/index.php/ugjournal/article/view/825/0

Putra, H. S. (2017). Tata Kelola Pemerintahan Desa dalam Mewujudkan Good Governace di Desa Kalibelo Kabupaten Kediri. Politik Muda, 6(2), 110–119.

Raso, J. (2019). Unity in the Eye of the Beholder? Reasons for Decision in Theory and Practice in the Ontario Works Program. University of Toronto Law Journal, 70(1), 1–39. https://doi.org/10.3138/utlj.2018-0022

Ross, S. A. (1973). The Economic Theory of Agency: The Principal’s Problem. The American Economic Review, 63(2), 134–139. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1817064

Rubiyanto, Selo, & Widyawan. (2017). Implementasi Role-Based Access Control (RBAC) pada Pemanfaatan Data Kependudukan di Tingkat Kabupaten. Prosiding Semnastek (Seminar Nasional Sains dan Teknologi), 1–10. https://jurnal.umj.ac.id/index.php/semnastek/article/view/2054

Rumlus, M. H., & Hartadi, H. (2020). Kebijakan Penanggulangan Pencurian Data Pribadi dalam Media Elektronik. Jurnal HAM, 11(2), 285–299. https://doi.org/10.30641/ham.2020.11.285-299

Saragintan, A., & Hidayat, S. (2017). Politik Pork Barrel di Indonesia: Kasus Hibah dan Bantuan Sosial di Provinsi Banten tahun 2011. Jurnal Politik, 2(1), 137. https://doi.org/10.7454/jp.v2i1.85

Tambovtsev, V. L. (2019). Management Without Measurement. Terra Economicus, 17(3), 6–29. https://doi.org/10.23683/2073-6606-2019-17-3-6-29

Wijayati, F. L. (2015). Analisis Pengaruh Kepemilikan Manajerial, Kepemilikan Institusional, Ukuran Dewan Direksi, dan Ukuran Dewan Komisaris Terhadap Biaya Keagenan. EBBANK: Jurnal Ilmiah Bidang Ekonomi, Bisnis dan Perbankan, 6(2), 1–16. http://ebbank.stiebbank.ac.id/index.php/EBBANK/article/view/72

Yuniarti, S. (2019). Perlindungan Hukum Data Pribadi di Indonesia. Business Economic, Communication, and Social Sciences Journal (BECOSS), 1(1), 147–154. https://doi.org/10.21512/becossjournal.v1i1.6030

Downloads

Published

2022-09-09

How to Cite

Misran, Muallidin, I., Nanaman, M. S., & Prasetyo, S. I. (2022). The Politicization of Population Data Governance in the Perspective of Principal-Agent: Case Study in Indonesia. Jurnal Bina Praja, 14(2), 275–287. https://doi.org/10.21787/jbp.14.2022.275-287

Issue

Vol. 14 No. 2 (2022)

Section

Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2022 Author(s)

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Most read articles by the same author(s)