Beralih ke bagian utama
Artikel Riset Asli Akses Terbuka Terakreditasi SINTA 2

The Relation Between Multi Actors and Local Reform in Solo City During Joko Widodo’s Leadership Era (2005-2012)

Penulis

  • Wahidah R. Bulan
  • Department of Communication Studies Universitas Pembangunan Nasional “Veteran” Jakarta
DOI
10.21787/jbp.08.2016.149-161
Tanggal Terbit & Halaman
31 Mei 2016 · Hlm. 149-161
Baca PDF 930 KB Kutip

641 Dilihat 734 Diunduh

Abstrak

The Relation Between Multi Actors and Local Reform in Solo City During Joko Widodo’s Leadership Era (2005-2012)

This study explored power relation of Jokowi as mayor of Solo City and his efforts to create inclusive populist policies in the case of street vendors’ arrangement and resettlement of people on the banks of Solo River. Specifically, this study explores how Jokowi build his relations with many actors, namely, how the relations can be established, who were they, how were the relationships between Jokowi and CSO (Civil Society Organization) and CSA (Civil Society Activist) as the agencies with serious interest in pursuing reform, and how these relations contribute to achieving local reform agenda. By using qualitative approach with case study strategy as the methodology, this study was conducted from December 2010 to early 2012 and obtained some results as follows: there are some strong enough relations between Jokowi with state and non-state actors, which exist as the attempt to overcome the structural constraints (limited human resources) and because of the similar agendas between Jokowi and those actors (especially with CSO and CSA), and that the relations (with CSO and CSA) are proven effective in helping to achieve local reform agenda progressively. The study also refines Tilly’s theory (1978) on several aspects, namely: the variant of member and challenger, the radical challenger, and neutral, and that the positions of challenger or member are not permanent (depend on the issues).

Kata Kunci:

Baca Naskah Lengkap

Isi lengkap artikel ini tersedia dalam format PDF. Versi resmi yang diterbitkan pada Vol 8 No 1 (2016).

Buka PDF

Daftar Pustaka

102 rujukan
  1. Amin, M. 39. Partisipasi Masyarakat dalam Pengelolaan Dana Pembangunan Kelurahan.
  2. Retrieved 1 June 2016, from http://www.konsorsiumsolo.com/
  3. Antwi-Boasiako, K. (2010). Dollery, Brian E., and Lorenzo Robotti, eds. The Theory and Practice of Local Government Reform (Book review).International Social Science Review, 85(1-2),62-63.
  4. Arif, A. 40. Perkuat Kembali Musrenbang, Rayakan Kebersamaan dengan Masyarakat Marginal.Retrieved 31 October 2010, from http://www.kompip.com
  5. Asgart, S. & Samadhy, W. (2005). Pendulum dari Konsentrasi ke Dekosentrasi. Tempo.
  6. Blau, P. & Meyer, M. (2000). Birokrasi dalam Masyarakat Modern. Jakarta: Penerbit Prestasi
  7. Pustakaraya.
  8. Burns, D., Hambleton, R., & Hoggett, P. (1994).The Politics of Decentralisation. Basingstoke:
  9. Macmillan.
  10. Clark, J., Yuwono, G., & Umaya, F. (1995). NGO dan Pembangunan Demokrasi. Yogyakarta: Tiara Wacana.
  11. Constantino-David, K. (1997). Intra-Civil Society Relations. In M. Ferrel, Philippine Democracy Agenda Vol. 3: Civil Society Making Civil Society (1st ed.). Quezon City, Ph.: Third World Studies Center, University of the Phillipines.
  12. Creswell, J. (2003). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approach (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications.
  13. Creswell, J. (2007). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design (2nd ed.). London: SAGE Publications. Edisi Khusus Kepala Daerah Pilihan 2012. (2012).Tempo.
  14. Eldridge, P. (1995). Non-Government Organizations and Democratic Participation in Indonesia. New York: Oxford University Press.
  15. Eschborn, N., Hackel, S., & Richardson, J. (2004).Indonesia Today: Problems and Perspectives:
  16. Politics and Society Five Years into Reformasi. Jakarta, Indonesia: Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung.
  17. Eyermen, R. & Jamison, A. (1991). Social Movements: A Cognitive Approach. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
  18. Fakih, M. (2010). Masyarakat Sipil untuk Transformasi Sosial: Pergolakan Ideologi LSM
  19. (5th ed.). Yogyakarta: INSISTPress.
  20. Farrington, J. & Bebbington, A. (1993). Reluctant partners? Non-Governmental Organizations, the State and Sustainable Agricultural Development. London: Routledge.
  21. Gabris, G., Grenell, K., & Kaatz, J. (1998). Reinventing Local Government Human Services
  22. Management: A Conceptual Analysis. Public Administration Quarterly, 22(1), 74-97.
  23. Ganie-Rochman, M. (2002). An Uphill Struggle: Advocacy NGOs Under Soeharto’s New Order.
  24. Depok: Lab. Sosio Pusat Kajian Sosiologi FISIP UI.
  25. Gellner, E. (1995). Membangun Masyarakat Sipil:Prasyarat Menuju Kebebasan. Bandung: Mizan.
  26. Giddens, A. (1995). The Constitution of Society:The Outline of the Theory of Structuration.
  27. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
  28. Goodman, D. (2004). Teori Sosiologi Modern. Jakarta:Prenada Media.
  29. Grindle, M. (2009). Going Local: Decentralization,Democratization, and the Promise of Good
  30. Governance. Princeton, NJ [etc.]: Princeton University Press.
  31. Gunawan, J. (2005). Desentralisasi, Globalisasi dan Demokrasi Lokal. Jakarta: LP3ES.
  32. Gunawan, P. (2008). Demokrasi Deliberatif yang Menyejahterakan: Revitalisasi Demokrasi Lokal. Jakarta: Kaukus 17++.
  33. Hadisiswaya, A. (2011). Pergolakan Raja Mataram (2nd ed.). Yogyakarta: Interprebook.
  34. Hadiwinata, B. (2003). The Politics of NGOs in Indonesia. London: RoutledgeCurzon.
  35. Hardojo, A. (2008). Mendahulukan Si Miskin : Buku Sumber bagi Anggaran Pro Rakyat. Yogyakarta:Prakarsa.
  36. Harriss, J., Stokke, K., & Törnquist, O. (2005).Politisasi Demokrasi Politik Lokal Baru. Jakarta:
  37. Penerbit Demos.
  38. Hines, C. (2005). Mengganti Globalisasi Ekonomi menjadi Lokalisasi Demokrasi. Yogyakarta:
  39. INSIST press.
  40. Janoski, T. (2005). The Handbook of Political Sociology. New York: Cambridge.
  41. Joko Widodo, Walikota Surakarta: Wali Kaki Lima.(2008). Tempo, 37(44).
  42. Kumorotomo, W. & Pramusinto, A. (2009).Governance Reform di Indonesia: Mencari Arah
  43. Kelembagaan Politik yang Demokratis dan Birokrasi yang Profesional. Jakarta: Kerjasama
  44. Penerbit Gava Media [dan] MAP-UGM.LIPI,. (1993). Demokrasi Politik, Makalah Seminar
  45. Perkembangan Demokrasi di Indonesia Sejak 1945. Jakarta: Widyagraha, LIPI.
  46. LPPM UNS,. (2005). Laporan Penelitian Hibah Bersaing Tahun I. Surakarta: LPPM UNS.
  47. LPPM UNS,. (2006). Laporan Penelitian Hibah Tahun II. Surakarta: LPPM UNS.
  48. Marijan, K. (2006). Demokratiasasi di Daerah:Pelajaran dari Pilkada Secara Langsung. Surabaya: Pustaka Eureka.
  49. Maula, M. & A.F., F. (2001). Ngesuhi deso sak kukuban:Lokalitas, Pluralism, Modal Sosial Demokrasi.Yogyakarta: LKIS.
  50. McClosky, H. (1972). Political Participation,International Encyclopedia of The Social
  51. Sciences, (2nd ed.). New York: The MacMillan Company and The Free Press.
  52. Ministry of Communication and Informatics, City Gov. of Surakarta,. (2007). Memboyong 989 PKL:Dari Banjarsari ke Semanggi. Solo: Ministry of Communication and Informatics, City Gov. of Surakarta.
  53. Mustafa, A. (2008). Transformasi Sosial Sektor Informal: Sejarah, Teori, dan Praksis Pedagang Kaki Lima. Malang: In-Trans Publishing;INSPIRE.
  54. Nordholt, H. & van Klinken, G. (2007). Politik Lokal di Indonesia. Jakarta: Yayasan Obor Indonesia.
  55. Prasetyantoko, A., Budiantoro, S., & Bahagijo, S.(2016). Pembangunan Inklusif: Prospek dan
  56. Tantangan. Jakarta: Perkumpulan Prakarsa.
  57. Qomarun, & Prayitno, B. (2007). Morfologi Kota Solo Tahun 500-2000. Dimensi Teknik Arsitektur,35(1).
  58. Rahayu, M. & Rutiana, D. (2007). Strategi Perencanaan Pembangunan Permukiman
  59. Kumuh, Kasus Pemukiman Bantaran Sungai Bengawan Solo, Kelurahan Pucang Sawit,
  60. Surakarta. Gema Teknik, 1(10).
  61. Rifai, A., Gunawan, P., & Bachry, S. (2009). Geliat Partisipasi Kelompok Sektoral: Studi Kasus
  62. Kota Surakarta. In Suhirman, Partisipasi,Reformasi Kelembagaan, dan Alokasi Anggaran:
  63. Pembelajaran dari Lima Daerah (1st ed.).Jakarta: FPPM.
  64. Ritzer, G. (1996). Modern Sociological Theory (4th ed.). Boston: McGraw Hill International.
  65. Ritzer, G. & Goodman, D. (1996). Sociology Theory (6th ed.). Boston: McGraw Hill International.
  66. Salamm, A. (2007). Desentralisasi & Otonomi Daerah:Desentralisasi, Demokratisasi & Akuntabilitas Pemerintah Daerah. Jakarta: LIPI Press.
  67. Samrono, I. (2010). Daerah Istimewa Surakarta:Wacana Pembentukan Propinsi Daerah
  68. Istimewa Surakarta Ditinjau dari Perspektif Historis, Sosiologis, Filosofis, dan Yuridis.
  69. Yogyakarta: Pura Pustaka.
  70. Samuel, H. & Nordholt, H. (2004). Indonesia in Transition: Rethinking ‘Civil Society’, ‘Region’,
  71. and ‘Crisis’. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.
  72. Sedikit Orang Baik di Republik yang Luas. (2008).Tempo, 37(44).
  73. Siraishi, T. (2005). Zaman Bergerak: Radikalisme Rakyat di Jawa Tengah 1912-1926. Jakarta:
  74. Grafiti.
  75. Sobari, W. (2004). Inovasi Referensi: Tiga Tahun Otonomi Daerah dan Otonomi Award. Jakarta:Partnership.
  76. Stiftung, B. (2010). Sustainable Governance indicators 2009: Policy Performance and
  77. Executive Capacity in the OECD. Guetersloh:Verlag Bertelsmann Stiftung.
  78. Sugiartoto, A. (2003). Perencanaan Pembangunan Parsitipatif Kota Surakarta: Pendekatan
  79. Pembangunan Nguwongke-Uwong. Surakarta:IPGI.
  80. Suharko,. (2005). Merajut Demokrasi: Hubungan NGO, Pemerintah, dan Pengembangan Tata
  81. Pemerintahan Demokratis (1966-2001).Yogyakarta: Tiara Wacana.
  82. Sumarto, H. (2009). Inovasi, Partisipasi, dan Good Governance: 20 Prakarsa Inovatif dan
  83. Partisipatif di Indonesia. Jakarta: Yayasan Obor Indonesia.
  84. Suwondo, K. (2005). Civil Society di aras Lokal:Perkembangan Hubungan antara Rakyat (2nd
  85. ed.). Salatiga: Pustaka Percik.
  86. Tilly, C. (1978). From Mobilization to Revolution.New York: Random House.
  87. Tjandra, W. (2005). Peningkatan Kapasitas Pemerintah Daerah dalam Pelayanan Publik.
  88. Jakarta: Pembaruan.
  89. Triwibowo, D. (2002). Gerakan Sosial: Wahana Civil Society bagi Demokratisasi. Jakarta: LP3ES & Perkumpulan Prakarsa.
  90. Turner, J. (1990). The Structure of Sociological Theory. California: Wadsworth PublishinCompany.
  91. Turner, M. & Podger, O. (2003). Decentralization in Indonesia: Redesigning the State. Canberra:Asia Pacific Press Asia Pacific School of Economics and Government the Australia
  92. National University.
  93. van Ufford, P. & Giri, A. (2009). Kritik Moral Pembangunan. Jakarta: Kanisius.
  94. Wallis, J. & Dollery, B. (2005). The Impact of Alternative Styles of Policy Leadership on
  95. the Direction of Local Government Reform. International Journal Of Social Economics,
  96. (4), 291.
  97. Wibawa, S. (2009). Evaluasi Kebijakan Publik.Jakarta: PT. RajaGrafindo Persada.
  98. Yin, R. (2002). Studi Kasus Desain & Metode. Jakarta:PT. RajaGrafindo Persada.
  99. Zuhro, R. (2009). Demokrasi Lokal: Peran Aktor dalam Demokratisasi. Yogyakarta: Peerbit
  100. Ombak.
  101. Zuhro, R. (2009). Demokrasi Lokal: Perubahan dan Kesinambungan Nilai-nilai Budaya Politik
  102. Lokal di Jawa Timur, Sumatera Barat, Sulawesi Selatan, dan Bali. Yogyakarta: Penerbit Ombak

Artikel paling banyak dibaca berdasarkan penulis yang sama