Article Sidebar

Download
PDF (Bahasa Indonesia)
Statistic
Read Counter : 9 Download : 7

Main Article Content

Abstract

In the development of government and territorial growth of a region in a country there are three things that are likely to occur related to territorial / regional structuring reform policies, first, the area is broader because the second centripetal policy has merged or annexed due to fragmentation. territorial (centrifugal policy), third, with the same territorial area (static / constants policy). in post-reform Indonesia in 1998 there have been an increase of 223 new autonomous regions (DOB) from a total of 319 pre-reform autonomous regions to 542 autonomous regions at the provincial / district / city level after the reformation. For Central Sulawesi, there are 23 proposals / plans for the establishment of DOBs. For projections and strategies to address the issue of regional expansion in Central Sulawesi based on current conditions and dynamics (2018), appropriate policy choices are needed in the face of the growing phenomenon of demand for expansion / formation of DOBs and regional structuring strategies based on centripetal policy, centrifugal policy or Constants policy . Judging from the strength of the Centripetal policy (integrated direction) there are a number of choices in the form of Annexation, Consolidation, Amalgamition. While the Centrifugal policy in the form of policies of Detachment, Fragmentation, Proliferation, Regional Government Splitting, Partition and Political Sub Division. For Constants / static policy choices in which the government carries out a pemekaran moratorium on an ongoing basis with proactive policy instruments. To project opportunities for DOB formation in Central Sulawesi, (1) Proposal for the establishment of Moutong and Tomini Raya Districts is more likely to be realized, as seen from the process, the two DOB candidates have been approved as DOBs as proposed by the DPR-RI initiative. East has the opportunity, because the proposal of the area at the regional level has been completed. (3) Areas that are actually and factually truly for reasons of distance of service and / or because of consideration of having national strategic values and security can have opportunities for form.

Keywords

Territorial Reform Centripetal Policy Constants Policy

Article Details

How to Cite
Djaelangkara, R. (2018). POLICY OF TERITORIAL AND REGIONAL REGULATION OPPORTUNITIES IN CENTRAL SULAWESI . Social Humanity: Jurnal Ilmu Sosial Dan Humaniora, 2(1), 10-23. https://doi.org/10.22487/j.sochum.v2i1.1312

References

  1. Alesina, Alberto & Enrico Spolaore, The Size Of Nations, MIT Press, 2003
  2. Argama, Rizky, Pemberlakuan Otonomi Daerah dan Fenomena Pemekaran Wilayah di Indonesia, Makalah, Fakultas Hukum Universitas Indonesia, 2005.
  3. B.C.Smith.,Decentralization, The Territorial Dimension of state, George Allen & Urwin Ltd, London 1985
  4. Bappenas dan UNDP, Studi Evaluasi Pemekaran Daerah, July 2007,
  5. BPS, Provinsi Gorontalo Dalam Angka 2017
  6. BPS, Provinsi Sulawesi Barat Dalam Angka 2017
  7. BPS, Provinsi Sulawesi Selatan dalam Angka 2017
  8. BPS, Provinsi Sulawesi Tengah Dalam Angka 2017
  9. BPS, Provinsi Sulawesi Tenggara Dalam Angka 2017
  10. BPS, Provinsi Sulawesi Utara Dalam Angka 2017
  11. Bryant, Coralie & G.White, Louise., Managemen Pembangunan Untuk Negara berkembang, Terjemahan:Rusyanto L.Simatupang, LP3ES, Jakarta, 1989
  12. Carson, Richard, T, How many Subdivisions ?, University of California, 2003
  13. Cheema, G.Sabhir, Institutional Dimensions of Regional Development, Maruzen Asia, Nagoya, Japan, 1980
  14. Desain Besar Penataan Daerah di Indonesia, 2010-2025, Kemendagri, Juni 2010
  15. Djaelangkara, Rizali, Strategi dan Proyeksi Pemekaran Daerah di Sulawesi Tengah, Makalah, Pemda Sulawesi Tengah, 2017.
  16. Effendi, Sofian, Alternatif Kebijkansanaan Perencanaan Administrasi, Suatu Analisis Retrospektif dan Prospektif, Seri Monograf, Edisi September 1989, FISIPOL UGM, Yogyakarta, 1989
  17. Ferrazzi,Gabriele, Internal Experiences in Territorial Reform- Implication for Indonesia, DRSP, Agustus 2007
  18. Harmantyo, Djoko, Pemekaran Daerah dan Konflik Keruangan, kebijakan Otonomi Daerah dan Implementasinya di Indonesia, Makara Sains, Vol. 11, No.1, April 2007: 16-22
  19. http://news.liputan6.com/read/3074809/pemerintah-siapkan-3-skenario-pemekaran-daerah
  20. http://www.beritapalu.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1097:sulteng-dikembangan-jadi-13-kabupaten&catid=34:palu&Itemid=126
  21. http://www.mediaindonesia.com/index.php/news/read/119897/pemerintah-tunda-pemekaran-314-daerah/2017-08-29, Pemerintah Tunda Pemekaran 314 Daerah
  22. Keban, Yeremias T. Pembahasan Pemekaran dan Penggabungan Daerah, USAID-DRSP, 2007
  23. Keban, Yeremias T., Indikator Kinerja Pemerintah Daerah: Pendekatan Manajemen dan Kebijakan, makalah, Jurusan Administrasi Negara Fisipol Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, 1995
  24. Kontan.co.id, Dana Terbatas, pemerintah tunda pemekaran daerah, Rabu, 19 Juli 2017.
  25. Lembaga Administrasi Negara, Evaluasi Kinerja Penyelenggaraan Otonomi Daerah untuk periode 1999-2003, (laporan penelitian) Jakarta, 2005
  26. Liputan6.com, JK: Moratorium Pemekaran Daerah Masih Berlaku, Rabu, 19 Juli 2017.
  27. Mabuchi, Masaru. Municipal Amalgamation in Japan, World Bank, Washington, 2001
  28. Mulyawan, Rahman, Masyarakat, Wilayah dan Pembangunan, Unpad Press, Bandung, 2016
  29. Nazara, Suahasil & Nurkholis, Ukuran Optimal Pemerintahan di Indoensia: Studi Kasus Pemekaran Wilayah Kabupaten/Kota dalam Era Desentralisasi, Jurnal Ekonomi dan Pembangunan Indoensia, Vo. VII, No.2, 2007,
  30. O’Leary, Brendan, Analysing Partition: Definition, Classification and Explanation, Political Gegraphy, xx (2007) 1-23
  31. Perarturan Menteri Dalam Negeri Nomor 23 tahun 2010 Tata Cara Pelaksanaan Evaluasi Daerah Otonom Baru.
  32. Peraturan Pemerintah Nomor 6 Tahyun 2008 Pedoman Evaluasi penyelenggaraan Pemerintahan Daerah.
  33. Peraturan Pemerintah Nomor 78 Tahun 2007 tentang Tata Cara Pembentukan, Penghapusan dan Penggabungan Daerah.
  34. Perfecto L.Padilla, (ed)., Strengthening Local Government Administration and accelerating Local Development, The Asia Foundation Philippines, Manila, 1992
  35. Pratikno, Usulan Perubahan Kebijakan Penataan Daerah, Policy Paper, USAID-DRSP, February, 2008
  36. Pusat Penelitian dan Pengembangan Otonomi Daerah Departemen Dalam Negeri, Efektifitas Pemekaran Wilayah Di Era Otonomi Daerah,(laporan penelitian) Jakarta 2005.
  37. Ratnawati, Tri, Pemekaran Daerah, Politik Lokal dan Beberapa Isu Terseleksi, Pustaka Pelajar, Yogyakarta, 2009
  38. Reiljan, Janno & Aivo Ulper, The Necessity of an Administrative-Territorial Reform in a Country: The Case of Estonia, The University of Tartu Faculty of Economic and Bussiness Administration, 2010.
  39. Retnaningsih, Ning dkk (ed), Dinamika Politik Lokal di indonesia, Penataan Daerah (Territorial Reform) dan Dinamikanya, Percik, Salatiga, 2008.
  40. Rondinelli, Dennis A., Applied Methods of RegionalAnalysis, The Spatial Dimensions of Development Policy, Westview Special Study,Boulder and London, 1985
  41. Swianiewicz, Pawel (ed) Consolidation or Fragmentation? The Size of Local Governmentsin Central and Eastern Europe , First published in 2002 by Local Government and Public Service Reform Initiative, Open Society Institute Budapest.
  42. Swianiewicz, Pawel, Teritorial Fragmentation As a problem, Consolidation As a Solution ?, dalam Territorial Consolidation Reform in Europe, First published in 2010, by the Local Government and Public Service Reform Initiative, Open Society Institute–Budapest, OSI/LGI, 2010
  43. Swianiewicz, Pawel, Teritorial Fragmentation As a problem, Consolidation As a Solution ?, dalam Territorial Consolidation Reform in Europe, First published in 2010, by the Local Government and Public Service Reform Initiative, Open Society Institute–Budapest, OSI/LGI, 2010
  44. Syarifuddin, Pelitian tentang Pemetaan Makna Politik Pemekaran Daerah di Indoensia Pasca Orde Baru, Jurusan Ilmu Pemerintahan Universitas Lampung, 2009.
  45. Syarifuddin, Pelitian tentang Pemetaan Makna Politik Pemekaran Daerah di Indoensia Pasca Orde Baru, Jurusan Ilmu Pemerintahan Universitas Lampung, 2009.
  46. Tarigan, Antonius, Dampak Pemekaran Wilayah, Jurnal Perencanaan Pembangunan, Edisi 01/Tahun XVI/2010
  47. Tarigan, Ritonga, Perencanaan pembangunan Wilayah, Penerbit Bumi Aksara, Jakarta, 2005
  48. Tiebout, C M (1956) “A Pure Theory of Local Expenditure”, Journal of Political Economy.
  49. Trueblood and Beth Walter Honadle, An Overview of Factors Affecting the Size of Local Government, Staff Pape P94-7, Departemen of Agricultural and Applied Economics College of Agriculture University Of Minosota, April 1994.
  50. Undang-Undang Nomor 23 Tahun 2014 Tentang Pemerintahan Daerah (Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 2014 Nomor 244, Tambahan Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Nomor 5587) sebagaimana telah diubah terakhir dengan Undang-Undang Nomor 9 Tahun 2015 tentang Perubahan Kedua Atas Undang-Undang Nomor 23 Tahun 2014 tentang Pemerintahan Daerah (Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 2015 Nomor 58, Tambahan Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Nomor 5679);
  51. Usaid, Policy Implemntation Barriers Analysis: Conceptual Framework and Pilot Test in Three Countries, Healt Policy Initiative, Oktober, Washington DC, 2009
  52. USAID-DRSP-PERCIK, Proses dan Implikasi Sosial Politik Pemekaran, Studi Kasus Sambas dan Buton,
  53. Wirabhumi, Edy, S. Pemberdayaan Hukum Otonomi Daerah dan Potensi Wilayah: Studi Tentang kemungkinan Terbentuknya Provinsi Surakarta, Disertasi, Program Doktor Ilmu Hukum Pascasarjana Universitas Diponegoro, Tahun 2007
  54. Zhijian, Zhang & Raul P.De Gusman., Administrative Reform Toward Promoting Productivity in Bureaucratic Performance, Eropa, Manila, 1992