Power Determinants among Policy Community Members

Introduction

Policy community is a group of specialists (organizations and/or individuals) that are considered to be the key policy actors in a specific field of government activity or policy area from both through and outside of government (Pross 1985, p. 253; Kingdon 1984, p. 123). Power is the capacity to influence others’ behaviour and to prevent one’s own behaviour from being modified in an unwanted manner (Smith 1976, p. 16).

Some scholars in policy and political and economic science have identified factors that determine power of policy community members. These are: the linkage to authority, control on economic resources, the stake in the political outcome, knowledge and expertise, the strength of policy network, capability to organize effective political influence, and the share in the dominance of 'mainstream' idea.

This paper will argue that although power in policy making process is not equally distributed among the policy community members, the degree of power dispersion – is influenced by power determinants mentioned above – varies from one society to another depending on their social and political pattern.


Power Determinants

Policy community does not only exist in a pluralist country but also in an elitist country such as China. However, the influence of the leadership (authority) on policy community has diminished from time to time as the Chinese State structure has become more pluralist (Halpern 1989, p. 39). From this it could be concluded that power determinants that have more influence on authority, hereafter called "vertical determinants" are more important in an elitist society, while those which have more effect on horizontal actors i.e. other policy community members and public in general, hereafter called "horizontal determinants", are more significant in a pluralist society.

This typology will be used throughout this paper along with Colebatch’s two dimensions of policy; these are vertical and horizontal (Colebatch 2002, pp. 23-24).

Vertical power determinants:
• The linkage to authority
Public policy is a decision of public authority. Therefore, it highlights hierarchy. In terms of policy style, there are many variations in the way of doing policy. One of the styles was argued by Heclo and Wildavsky (1974, cited in Colebatch 2002, p. 14) in their study on Treasury control in Britain. They found that policy work rested on personal links and trust. The personal linkage to authority can result from the control of capital in the economy. Those who control capital have more opportunity to contribute financially to party funds (Smith 1976, p. 182).

• Control of economic resources.
In many cases, actors who control economic resources, particularly capital, are those who enjoy more power in policy community. This happens because it is a common perception that the business sector which controls capital is more representative of ‘national interest' than other actors such as labour groups (Smith 1976, p. 181). In addition, in rent-seeking economy, the business sector that controls capital can easily cooperate with authority to set and enforce certain policy economy to derive rent. Therefore, the business sector is a strong force in determining economic policy (Levaux, pp. 24-30)

• The stake in the political outcome
Policy instrument aims to achieve political outcome. The group with similar and strong interests in regard to certain policy issues will be more likely to organize themselves as well as contribute their resources to policy debate, particularly in relation to their influence to authority. Therefore, power of policy community is not determined by the number of members, rather it is determined by their per capita stakes (Komesar 1994, p. 55)

Horizontal power determinant:
• Knowledge and expertise
Colebatch argues that expert groups can claim responsibility for policy in any given area (Colebatch 2002, pp. 25-30). This is in line with other scholars’ arguments that knowledge is power in policy making (Richardson 2000, p. 1019; Haas 1992, p. 2; Smith 1976, p. 19). Epistemic community (expert network) has important role in defining and framing issues as well as advising policy makers of possible policy solutions. Moreover, epistemic community also has important role in international policy coordination because their new ideas and information can lead to new patterns of behaviour which is important in policy coordination (Haas 1992, pp. 2-3).

• The strength of policy network
Policy community works within a particular issue cluster. Each members may work with their own policy network consists of people and organizations with similar interests. The power of each member depends on the strength of their network. For example, policy makers and experts with centre-left political ideology manage an effective network facility in the form of an international thinktank called "policy network" -dedicated to promoting progressive policies and the renewal of social democracy (Policy Network n.d.). Whilst in U.S. foreign policy making, groups with a strong network, such as human rights groups, can dominate the policy making process (Hersman 2000, pp. 47-50).

• Capability to organize effective political influence
Members of policy community with capability to organize political influence (of those who are within and outside their network) have more power in policy making process (Komesar 1994, p. 56). The case of devaluation policy from Ghana in 1970s show that the negative reaction from public – which then triggered a military coup – resulted in failure of the policy (Grindle & Thomas 1990, p. 1168).

• The share in the dominance of 'mainstream' idea.
Colebatch argues that the powerful protect their interests through the dominance of 'mainstream' ideas and symbols (2002, p. 46). This dominance controls the policy agenda setting. Power is not only about deciding something, but also about ignoring something (Bachrach & Baratz 1962, p. 949). Members whose ideology is in line with the 'mainstream' will enjoy more power.
Those power determinants and their effect on power of policy community members confirm the argument of Parsons (1995, p. 125) and Davis et al (1993, p. 157) that power is not equaly distributed.

Conclusion

Those who have better links to authority, more control of economic resources, more stakes in political outcome, better knowledge and expertise, more capability to organize political influence, and are stronger in their policy network and better alignment to the mainstream will enjoy more power in policy community.

The distinction between vertical and horizontal determinants in relation to social and political pattern of a society made in this paper does not mean that any determinant is only relevant to its typology, but rather, indicates the tendency. For example, "the stake in the political outcome" works in both a pluralist and elitist society, but its influence is more significant in an elitist society. In other words, those in vertical dimension are more significant in influencing authority, while others in horizontal are more significant to horizontal actors.


References

Bachrach, P & Baratz, MS 1962, 'Two faces of power', The American Political Science Review, vol. 56, no. 4, pp. 947-952.

Colebatch, HK 2002, Policy, 2nd edn, Open University Press, Philadephia.

Davis, G. et al. (eds) 1993, Public policy in Australia, 2nd edn, Allen & Unwin, Melbourne.

Grindle, MS & Thomas, JW 1990, ‘After the decision: implementing policy reforms in developing countries’, World Development, vol. 18, no. 8, pp. 1163-1181.

Haas, PM 1992, 'Introduction: epistemic communities and international policy coordination', International Organization, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 1-35.

Halapern, NP 1989, 'Policy communities in Leninist State: the case of the Chinese economic policy community', Governance, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 23-41.

Hersman, RKC 2000, Friends and foes: how Congress and the President really make foreign policy, The Bookings Institution, Washington DC.

Kingdon, JW 1984, Agendas, alternatives and public policies, Little, Brown & Company, Boston.

Komesar, NK 1994, Imperfect alternatives: choosing institutions in law, economics, and

Levaux, HP 1999, Commercial power centers in Indonesia: A new paradigm to analyse the role of business groups in policy making, RAND Graduate School, Washington DC.

Parsons, W 1995, Public policy, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.

Policy Network n.d., 'About Policy Network', Policy Network.net, viewed 11 April 2010,
< id="56">

Pross, AP 1985, 'Parliamentary influence and the diffusion of power', Canadian Journal of Political Science, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 235-266.

Richardson, J 2000, ‘Government, interest groups and policy change’, Political Studies, vol. 48, pp. 1006-1025.

Smith, B 1976, Policy making in British Government: an analysis of power & rationality, Rowman and Littlefield, New Jersey.

Social Policy Case Study: Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) in Indonesia

Description and Purpose of CSR Policy

CSR concept was generated in Europe and United States in response to the excess power of corporations (Kemp 2001, p.1). Although the CSR has been practiced since 1990s in Indonesia, the first legal basis was only issued in 2007 through Limited Liability Company Law (Law Number 40 Year 2007) and Investment Law (Law Number 25 Year 2007).

The above laws assert the purpose of CSR policy as follows: (1) to optimize the role of private sector in building a welfare society, and (2) to reduce the potential for social gap between “company community” and “local community” who live in area surrounding the company’s operation area (Law Number 40 Year 2007, s. 5; Law Number 25 Year 2007, s. 4).

CSR policy reflects the limitation of the State to secure the welfare of society. The State urges corporations to become the source of welfare, not only for their workers (companies must register their workers for insurance according to Law Number 40 Year 2004 Concerning National Social Security System), but also for local communities and society in general. Considering this case study and the typology of social welfare system by Esping-Anderson, Indonesia is near to, but does not exactly follow the conservative model. In conservative model, government will still intervene to help vulnerable families when corporations fail (Esping-Anderson 1990, p. 20; Hill 2006, p. 27). In the case of Indonesia, this is questionable. In many cases, every individual or family who is not working in reliable formal sectors must struggle by themselves for their own social welfare.

The social welfare system of East Asian countries cannot readily be fitted into Esping-Anderson’s typology (Holiday 2000, p. 706). The East Asian model, also called ‘productivist’, considers social policy subordinate to ‘economic growth’ (Holiday 2000, p. 709).

Indonesia has similar characteristics with East Asian model. Economic growth has been the basis of legitimacy since New Order Regime in late 1960s (Crouch 1998, p.168). After the national reform of the late 1990s, and even in the current national development plan 2010-2014, growth and economic stability are still regarded as the key for the improvement of social welfare (Bappenas 2010, p. II.3-1). The proportion of public social expenditure to Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is low (see Table 1). The country focuses on economic growth with low public social expenditure. This makes CSR policy relevant for Indonesian context.

Factors Determine the Nature of CSR Policy

Combination of low tax revenues compared to GDP, and high corruption (see Table 1) make the State have less power and public budget to secure social welfare.














Privatisation and promotion of foreign direct investment (FDI) makes Indonesian economy rely on big corporations. The strong role of Trans National Companies (TNC) has existed since Dutch colonial era (Kemp 2001, p. 2). In the mid-1980s, the privatisation policy began to make the private sector ‘the engine’ of Indonesian economic growth (Schwarz 2004, p. 60). This privatisation policy continues in the (current) Yudhoyono administration (Xinhua News 2006).

The power of local people and local governments determines their relationship with private sectors operating in their area. The national reform and decentralisation policy which began in 2001 has improved political participation and self-determination rights (Haug 2007, p. 38).

Indonesian culture is very much influenced by religion, particularly Islam, which urges generosity of the wealthy to the poor. Islam sharia specifies that the fruits of productivity should benefit the community (Kemp 2001, p. 9).

The Key Actors of CSR Policy

National and local government regulate and monitor the CSR policy and its implementation. For natural resources extraction sector, such as mining, the company must report their CSR progress to the mining ministry in Jakarta. Local governments are supposed to coordinate the CSR program in order to harmonize with local government’s agenda. However, the effectiveness of this coordination role ‘requires the machinery of an effective democratic government and civil society’ (Kemp 2001, p. vii).

TNC and domestic corporations are the implementers of CSR policy. The dynamics of power relation between corporations, local people and government (especially local government) will reach a point where they can agree on how to distribute the CSR resources.

Local people are very often in coalition with local government to face corporations that are considered outsiders. They are basically the beneficiaries of CSR. Their main challenge is to maintain their power so they can influence the decision of how the CSR should be implemented.

The Drivers of Changes of CSR Policy

Change in economic output and the productivity of private sectors will determine the number of resources that are available for CSR.

Ability of government to control politics and public policy will influence who controls the CSR implementation and its resources distribution. It is possible that the implementation of CSR policy will be reduced when:
• the government gets more trust from the people
• the national economy improves
• productive age people dominate the demographic structure
• government collects more revenue in proportion to its GDP
• people want the government to be more responsible on social welfare.

Change of power of local people and local governments will change how the CSR resources are distributed, and how CSR policy is implemented.

Change of composition of the size of corporation dominating national economy will determine the demand and supply of CSR services. The demand to CSR will be less when:
• more people become entrepreneurs managing small scale companies
• small scale companies dominate the national output rather than the big corporation
• number of big corporations diminishes; for example the government policy prioritise domestic and small scale companies to play role in economy.
At the same time, the supply also decreases because small scale companies will not be able to devote enough of their resources for CSR.

References
Bappenas, see Ministry of National Development Planning.
Crouch, H 1998, ‘The rise or fall of Soeharto’s general’, Third World Quarterly, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 160-175.
Departemen Keuangan 2007, Data APBD Tahun 2007 (Local government budget plan year 2007), Ministry of Finance of Republic of Indonesia, Jakarta, viewed 15 March 2010,

<http://www.djpk.depkeu.go.id/linkdata/data/belanja_2007_per_fungsi.htm>.

—— n.d., Data pokok APBN 2005-2010 (Data base of national government budget plan of 2005-2010), Ministry of Finance of Republic of Indonesia, Jakarta.
Economic Intelligent Unit 2007, ‘Country Profile’, eiu.com, viewed 14 March 2010,
.
Esping-Anderson, G 1990, The three worlds of welfare capitalism, Princeton University Press, Princeton NJ.
Eurostat n.d., Total General Government Revenue, Eurostat, viewed 14 March 2010, .
Haug, M (2007), Poverty and decentralization in Kutai Barat: the impacts of regional autonomy on Danyak Benuaq wellbeing, Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), Bogor.
Hill, M 2006, Social policy in in the modern world: a comparative text, Blackwell, Malden, MA.
Holliday, I 2000, ‘Productivist welfare capitalism: social policy in East Asia’, Political Studies, vol. 48, pp. 706-723.
Kemp, L 2001, ‘Corporate social responsibility in Indonesia: quixotic dream or confident expectation?’, Technology, Business and Society Programme Paper Number 6, United Nations Research Institute for Social Development (UNSRID), Geneva.
Lambsdorff, JG, ‘Corruption perception index 2008’, in Transparency International, Global corruption report 2009, Transparency International, Berlin, pp.395-402, viewed 15 March 2010,
.
Law Number 40 Year 2007 Concerning Limited Liability Company (Republic of Indonesia).
Law Number 25 Year 2007 Concerning Investments (Republic of Indonesia).
Law Number 40 Year 2004 Concerning National Social Security System (Republic of Indonesia).
Ministry of National Development Planning 2010, Lampiran peraturan Presdien Republik Indonesia nomor 5 tahun 2010 tentang rencana pembangunan jangka menenangah nasional (RPJMN) tahun 2010-1014 (National medium development plan 2010-2014 appendix), Ministry of National Development Planning (Bappenas), Jakarta.
OECD 2010, Aggregated data of social expenditure database (SOCX), Organisation for Economic Co-operation for Development, viewed 13 March 2010,
Schwarz, A 2004, A nation in waiting, Talisman Publishing, Singapore.
Xinhua News 2006, ‘Indonesia issues new policy package on financial sector’, Xinhua News Agency, 6 Jul

More Aid Wouldn't Necessarily Make Less Poverty

Jeffrey Sachs and His advocacy on More Development Aid

The world has agreed to bring prosperity to all people on earth as can be seen on Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Sachs (2005a) examines the amount of ODA provided by the United States (U.S.) from 2002 to 2004 by analysing data from Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) to understand the relevance of U.S. contribution providing global fund for MDGs achievement, particularly in comparison to other Development Assistance Committee (DAC) countries. He argues that U.S. ODA in proportion to Gross National Income (GNI) was insufficient and far from its commitment. He suggests U.S. to increase their ODA more than three times by 2006 and more than four times by 2015 compared to the level in 2003. He also suggests a rough structure of how the U.S. ODA must be allocated which mainly aims to increase its effectiveness. This paper will argue that, while more aid and better allocation is truly important for development in impoverished countries, but there are some more issues that have to be considered to make the aid effective in achieving the goals. Sachs maintains his line of thinking that more aid will create growth, and growth will result in less poverty. By maintaining that linier thinking, he will not convince his audiences, particularly the U.S. Government, to devote more development aid.

This paper will start by reviewing Sachs’s linier thinking which can be divided into two parts i.e. more aid creates growth, and growth makes less poverty. Followed by examination of those two parts of linier thinking by confronting with arguments from other experts. Before come to conclusion, this paper will discuss the broader perspective on understanding poverty, to contrast it to Sachs’s linier thinking.

Sachs’s Linier Thinking

The U.S. is one among other 191 MDGs signatory countries and one among 24 DAC countries who assist partners to alleviate poverty and achieve MDGs. The U.S. provided between 21 to 26 percent of total DAC ODA from 2002 to 2008 which made them the highest contributor (OECD 2008). However, the United Nations (U.N.) does not measure the donor countries contribution from its proportion to total ODA, it is measured by the proportion of ODA to the GNI of the respective donor country. The U.N. targets for developed countries to devote 0.7 percent of their GNI to ODA (OECD 2009). In this point Sachs argue that U.S. and DAC countries provide inadequate ODA from its commitment as well as from the actual need to achieve MDGs. According to his calculation, the world needs double amount of ODA by 2006 and almost triple by 2015 compared to the level in 2003.

Sachs believes more aid is needed to close the “financing gap” in impoverished countries, the aid would create growth which in the end will alleviate poverty (Sachs 2005a, pp.85-89). This typical way of thinking can be observed from other Sachs publications (e.g. 2009, 2007, 2005b). Sachs argues that poverty trap happened because impoverished countries are poor on human capital and infrastructure. However, their household and the government do not have sufficient funds to close the gap. They can barely ensure their survival and do not have addional funds to invest for the future. They face the problem of a “financing gap”, the development aid can fill that gap. The development aid can be used to close the financing gap for investment on infrastructure and human capital, that investment will empower people and create more economic opportunities which then will take poor households out of the poverty trap.

More Aid Doesn’t Necessarily Create Economic Growth

Sachs may make his point that investment in physical infrastructure will create growth. Studies conducted by Ghosh and De (1998) and their other publication (Ghosh and De 2004) tell us that physical infrastructure attract more factors of production to work to create higher level of outputs, income, and/or employment and it become highly significant factors in contributing to development. In economic theory, the higher level of output is identical to economic growth. Similar finding also come from Alicia H. Munnell who examined the impact of infrastructure on economic growth. She concludes that ‘public infrastructure investment has a significant, positive effect on output and growth’ (Munnell 1992, p.197).

However, an earlier study by Cassen (1986) which assessed the impact of development aid for World Bank and International Monetary Fund, concludes that different studies come to quite different conclusions. ‘They range from positive to strongly negative affects’ (Cassen 1986, p.25).

The sharpest critic to Sachs linier thinking on “aid creates growth” is probably William Easterly. Easterly (2001, pp.34-44) argued that the approach of “closing the financing gap” simply create perverse incentives for recipient country. They will not devote the aid inflow for investment, the recipient countries will just use aid to buy more consumption goods, and they will maintain the gap as it later on will be closed by donors any way. If the recipient countries would not make investment from their own resources then they will treat the aid inflow in the same way. Therefore the aid would not create growth because it would not be used for investment. The real challenge here is how to create right incentives to ensure that the aid inflow is used for investment.

In his book, Easterly calls this phenomenon “the financing gap forever”. Easterly’s argument on financing gap forever makes the case in Indonesia. Indonesia maintains its position in top five on DAC ODA recipient countries since 1986 to 2007 as can be seen from OECD statistical data (OECD 2009). Anis Chowdhury and Iman Sugema examined the impact of aid effectiveness in Indonesia. They found positive correlation between the aid inflows with the economic growth though it was low. However, Indonesia becomes an aid-dependence country that always wants to follow the balanced budget principle by seeking foreign aid to close the financing gap. The “closing financing gap” approach has made government lazy to be creative on domestic resources mobilization (Chowdury and Sugema 2005, p.186)

More evidence come from Kraay and Raddatz (2007) who examined the cause of poverty trap by testing the two canonical mechanisms: low saving and low levels of productivity at low levels of development in Africa. They found little evidence of the existence of poverty traps based on the two mechanisms. It tells us that the argument that more aid will create sustained increases in growth is doubtable.

It can be concluded here that it is true that growth need more investment on infrastructure and human capital. However, the development aid is not necessarily used for those productive investments if there is no right incentive for recipient countries to use it in a proper way.

Economic Growth Doesn’t Necessarily Make Less Poverty

In this second part of Sachs’s linier thinking of “economic growth makes less poverty”, Sachs has more supporters from development economist even including William Easterly. Although Easterly criticises “aid create economic growth” but he agrees very much with Sachs on “economic growth make less poverty”. Easterly influenced by data collection by his World Bank’s colleagues Martin Ravallion and Shaohua Chen on spells of economic growth and changes in poverty covering the years 1981 to 1999. After summarizing the data, Easterly concluded that ‘fast growth went with fast poverty reduction, and overall economic contraction went with increased poverty’ (2001, p.13).

Before having further discussion on “economic growth makes less poverty”, this paper will clarify the definition of “economic growth”. Encyclopaedia Britannica Online (2010) defines economic growth as the growth of total output of goods and services. Thus, if there are more goods and services produced and exchanged in the market, does that necessarily result in the less poor? Economic growth is something happening in the market while poverty is in the household. It is true that households are player in the market, but which households are in the market and which are still remining outside the market which means remaining poor?. It is very clear here that economic growth can not detect poverty.

Thus, how about the data examined by Easterly that convinces him that economic growth has correlation to less poverty, Paolo Verme has better explanation for this. Verme (2010) examined macro and micro regional data related to high rate economic growth and household income in Kazakhstan of 2001 and 2002. Verme distinguish between output growth which identical with economic growth and household income growth. He concluded that household income growth is the one that contribute to poverty alleviation, not the output growth. He found no positive and significant correlation between output growth and poverty reduction. Verme can come to this plausible conclusion because he didn’t rely to macro data of GDP only. He prepared GDP data disaggregation by sector and by regions as addition to micro data of household income. He argues that household income growth is the pro poor growth with contributing sectors that are different from contributing sectors to output growth. Pro poor growth means that the growth happened in household and it has been higher for poorer households, which explains why poverty has declined and why it has declined more for the poorest among the poor.

The concern of growth should no longer to “if” but rather to how the growth trickles down the poor, while output growth does not always trickle down the poor (Verme 2010, p. 19). The growth can happen without the poor involved in production and market, while the output can grow with or without the poor. Therefore, the future economic policy should not focus only to output growth. It should commit to the pro-poor growth policy.

Poverty Covers Multidimensional Spheres

Sachs (2005, p.88) emphasizes two major investments to achieve the MDGs, they are: infrastructure and human capital. It is nice that he mentions human capital and not too narrow to infrastructure. Sachs defines human capital as ‘healthy population with adequate levels of literacy, education, and job skills’ (2005, p.85). The explanation is very clear that infrastructure without human capital will not optimally work as production factors in economy, and after all, human capital is a basic human right.

However, poverty is not only about lack of human capital and lack of infrastructure. It is broader than that. The Nobel Prize-winning Amartya Sen has strong argument on this with his “capability” theory. Sen defines capability as ‘a person has, that is, the substantive freedoms he or she enjoys to lead the kind of life he or she has reason to value’ (Sen 1999, p.87). Therefore he defines poverty as capability deprivation rather than merely as lowness of incomes, let alone economic growth.

Goenner et al. (2007, pp.2-5) elaborate Sen’s capability theory combined with other model such as the sustainable livelihood approach (SLA) on multidimensional poverty assessment model called nested spheres of poverty (NESP). They argue that poverty is a lack of many things, starting from insufficient income, vulnerability in basic needs, up to the lack of freedom and options for a better future. In other sense, poverty can be very subjective such as the feeling of deprivation. The NESP’s spheres reflects causal link from the most out layer into the very core within its disc model. The bottom line is again that poverty cannot be handled only by economic growth and/or income improvement.

Conclusion

More aid funding is important, but aid funds alone will not help to alleviate world poverty. Aid inflow can be simply used by recipient countries for consumption expenditures rather than investment without any clear incentive policy, which means that aid inflow would no create growth. However, even if it is used for investment and it creates growth, it does not necessarily means less poverty if we do not pay attention to the multidimensional spheres affecting poverty. Poverty alleviation and MDGs achievement in general need comprehensive intervention. An effective pro poor policy must be applied. Donors and recipient countries must understand the characteristic of the poor so they can design an effective policy which will provide turmendous opportunities for the poor to get out from the trap by them self. A searcher attitude is more useful than the planner.

Sachs will have more opportunity to convince his audiences, not only the U.S. government as his main target, but also his critics and peoples who work as grass roots development activists to support him to advocate for more development aid if he broadens his arguments on aid effectiveness and strategy to achieve MDGs and alleviate world poverty.

References

Cassen, R 1986, Does aid work?, Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Chowdhury, A & Sugema, I 2005, ‘How significat and effective has foreign aid to Indonesia been?’, ASEAN Economic Bulletin, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 186-216.

Easterly, W 2001, The elusive quest for growth: economists' adventures and misadventures in the tropics, MIT Press, Massachusetts .

Encyclopaedia Britannica Online 2010, ‘Economic growth’, Encyclopaedia Britannica eb.com, viewed 14 February 2010,

<http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/178400/economic-growth>.

Ghosh, B & De, P 1998, ‘Role of infrastructure in regional development: a study over the plan period’, Economic and Political Weekly, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 3039-3043.

Ghosh, B & De, P 2004, ’ How do different categories of infrastructure affect development? evidence from Indian States’, Economic and Political Weekly, vol. 39, no.3, pp. 4645-4657.

Gönner, C, Haug, M, Cahyat, A, Wollenberg, L, De Jong, W, Limberg, G, Cronkleton, P, Moeliono, M & Becker, M 2007, ‘Capturing nested spheres of poverty: a model for multidimensional poverty analysis and monitoring’, Occasional Paper No. 46, Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor.

Kraay, A & Raddatz, C 2007, ‘ Poverty traps, aid, and growth’, Journal of Development Economics, vol. 82, no. 2, pp. 315-347 .

Munnel, AH 1992, ‘Infrastructure investment and economic growth’, Journal of Economic Perspectives, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 189-198.

OECD 2008, Net official development assistance in 2008: preliminary data for 2008, Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development, viewed 13 February 2010,

<http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/48/34/42459170.pdf>.

OECD 2009, OECD factbook 2009: economic, environmental and social statistics, Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development, viewed 13 February 2010,

<http://lysander.sourceoecd.org/vl=4785723/cl=18/nw=1/rpsv/factbook2009/10/03/03/index.htm >.

Sachs, JD 2005a, ‘The development challenge’, Foreign Affairs, vol. 84, no. 2, pp.78-90.

Sachs, J 2005b, The end of poverty, Penguin Press, New York.

Sachs, JD 2007, ‘Take the guesswork out of aid to African countries’, Financial Times, 2 March, p.17.

Sachs, JD 2009, ‘Homegrown aid’, International Herald Tribune, 10 April, p.6.

Sen, A 1999, Development as freedom, Alfred A. Knopf, New York.

Verme, P 2010, ‘ A structural analysis of growth and poverty in the short-term’, The Journal of Developing Areas, vol. 43, no. 2, pp.19-39.

The Connectivity Policy and Its Relevance to East Kalimantan Context

When I was in GTZ national staff exchange to Himachal Pradesh (HP), India, I heard about “connectivity policy” applied by Indian government. It is the policy that aims to ensure all villages are connected to the capital of the state by road. I visited a small settlement located in the couple of hills behind the capital of HP, Shimla, which was connected by road. I should explain here that the level of difficulty of road construction is high as it is in the high side of hill, and interestingly, it is a small settlement where only few households are there, which we might think that it is not economically efficient for the road construction. However, the road is still constructed though it is just a gravel road.
At that time I thought that it is an interesting policy, particularly for East Kalimantan where some villages are even not connected to the capital of district. In terms of outcome based management, instead of keep talking about road construction only, let’s measured that effectiveness by counting the percentage of villages that connected by road to the capital of district.
Now I started to learn about economic in introductory program in ANU. The lesson is actually just the basic of economic way of thinking. But I just realized that I wasn’t aware about that before.
The main lessons is that when society create larger market which indicated by more quanityty demanded and supplied in ‘relatively’ free market, the benefit to society (or in economic jargon called as “total surplus”) will be increase although that the new equilibrium price may higher than the previous one. Why is it like that? The answer is simple: because more consumers who able purchase the products and services they need, and more producers who produce and able to sell their products and services. Both producers and consumers (society) are in better off.
Thus, how to make more demand and supply? The very basic theory of demand and supply said it is “price” that whill change the quantity demanded and supplied, and what they call as “non price determinant” that will change the demand and the supply. In demand, there are six non price determinant i.e. income, consumer taste, price of substitute, price expectation, price of complement, and number of customers. Meanwhile, there are five non price determinant factors in supply i.e. technology, price of factors, price of alternative goods, price expectation, and number of producers.
Now I come to the main point which is connectivity. I believe that connectivity is the most influencing factors to those non price determinants both for supply and demand. Connectivity as part of the public infrastructure outcome can create more investment, employment and private sector output (Munnell, 1990), and more public infrastructure can help to alleviate poverty (Buddhadeb & De, 1998). President Yudoyono also believe that if he make double spending in infrastructure, to $140 billion during his second presidency, it will help him boost economic growth to 7% by 2014 from an estimated 4.3% last year (Kate & Sukarsono, 2010). It means connectivity can create more income and more number of consumers, which at the end increase consumer demand. Connectivity can decrease the transport cost of producers (price of factors) and it can also increase the number of producers coming to the market, which at the end increase the supply.
If we look at the geographic of East Kalimantan connectivity can be achieved either by road, water or air. However, the most reliable and efficient way is road because it cost peoples less and relatively independent from the weather. Although road construction is more expensive in the investment but it will cost society less than air and water.
Public infrastructures such as roads and bridge demand a lot of money. However, East Kalimantan region has more than US$ 200 million per annum beside deconsentration and assistance fund from central government. Therefore, it is very difficult to accept the fact that from time to time local governments in East Kalimantan, included the province government, spent the budget much less than the plan. In 2007, governement spending was just 78% from its planned, while in 2009 most likely not reach 70% because the report per mid of December 09 shows the spending was just 65%. Whereas there are many villages are still not well-connected to the centre and the poverty is still more than 15% (I even beleive the figure is more than 30% particularly in districts). I would suggest to the governor and all mayors in East Kalimantan to prove to public that they are capable to spend the public budget wisely which means spend the planned amount for the strategic activities and programs which will bring the welfare to the society. Only by that way, East Kalimantan can push central government to review the fiscal decentralization policy in order to have more public budget in the region.

Bibliography
Buddhadeb, G., & De, P. (1998). Role of Infrastructure in Regional Development: A Study over the Plan Period. Economic and Political Weekly , Vol. 33, No. 47/48 , 3039-3043+3045-3048.
Kate, D. T., & Sukarsono, A. (2010). INDONESIA: UNFINISHED HIGHWAY TO GROWTH. New York: Business Week.
Munnell, A. H. (1990). How Does Public Infrastructure Affect Regional Economic Performance? New England Economic Review , 11-22.
Badan Pemeriksa Keuangan Republik Indonesia/Indonesia's Supreme Audit Institution (2008). Audit Report to Financial Statement of The Province Government of East Kalimatan Fiscal Year 2007.

The Development Challenge: A Summary

Sachs argued the role of United States wasn’t sufficient to help poor countries to meet their Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). It was not only because inadequate amount of Official Development Aid (ODA) fund provided, but also because the allocation didn’t support the MDGs directly. Sachs found that $11.8 billion out of $14.6 billion of total U.S. bilateral aid in 2003 were allocated for things that are not directly build long term economic change in impoverished countries. Of the remaining $2.8 billion very little used for transformational development that he believes would support poor countries to escape dependence on outside aid. Ironically, the perception of U.S. peoples about their development aid was much more than what actually they give. Moreover, the U.S. government often couldn’t meet their own promise to provide adequate amount of ODA fund.

Sachs argued that the poor countries will meet the MDGs if they invest more in infrastructure and human capital. However, the ability of their households and government budget is far from sufficient.

Sachs suggested four steps to make U.S. become the world leader on international development to achieve MDGs: make U.S. peoples realize the actual amount of money they spent for ODA, increase the U.S. fund to contribute to achieve MDGs according to international agreement, restructure the ODA allocation so the proportion is directly support MDGs, transformational development, and the Millennium Challenge Account scheme, and finally to adjust the U.S. development assistance program so they can synergize their development aid and national security concern.

Detail of paper:
Title: The Development Challenge
Author: Jeffrey D. Sachs
Journal: Foreign Affairs (March/April 2005)

Australia: Ekologi dan Migrasi

Australia merupakan salah satu negara ekonomi maju yang menempati peringkat ke 11 untuk Produk Domestik Bruto (PDB) per kapita, terutama jika dibandingkan dengan Indonesia yang berada di peringkat 127. Seperti negara-negara ekonomi maju lainnya, sektor jasa mendominasi ekonomi Australia (sekitar 70% dari total GDP) selain pertanian, pertambangan dan industry.

Negara dengan jumlah penduduk kurang dari sepersepuluh penduduk Indonesia ini memiliki luas daratan lebih dari enam kali lipat luas daratan Indonesia. Walaupun demikian, tidak seperti Indonesia yang subur, hanya sedikit saja tanah di Australia yang subur dan mendukung pertanian untuk produksi pangan mereka. Australia merupakan benua dengan tanah paling tidak produktif dimana tingkat pertumbuhan tanaman alami paling lambat. Ini terjadi karena tanah di sini sudah sangat tua dan terus menerus dicuci oleh hujan selama milyaran tahun. Oleh karena itu masih lebih ekonomis menanam jeruk di Brazil dan membawanya ke Australi dalam bentuk jus dibandingkan menanam jeruk di Australi sendiri.

Australia merupakan benua kering. Curah hujan di bagian tengah kurang dari 600 mm per tahun. Curah hujan agak tinggi hanya ada di sebagian kecil daerah di wilayah pesisir yang bisa mencapai 2000 mm per tahun terutama pesisir timur dan pulau Tasmania. Dari sebagian kecil wilayah pesisir itu, hanya sebagian kecil lagi yang bisa mencapi lebih dari 3000 mm per tahun. Bandingkan dengan Indonesia yang rata-rata curah hujan tahunannya lebih dari 3100 mm per tahun. Oleh karena itu kota-kota di sini dilengkapi dengan danau-danau buatan yang menampung air hujan untuk jangka panjang. Dan kota-kota hanya mungkin dibangun di pesisir dg curah hujan cukup, oleh karena itu kota-kota besar Australia berada di pesisir timur ditambah Adelaide di selatan dan Perth di barat dan Darwin di utara.

Penduduk asli Australia adalah bangsa Aborigin. Orang kulit putih pertama kali mendiami benua ini pada tahun 1788 setelah James Cook tiba di sini pada tahun 1770. Orang kulit putih pertama di sini adalah orang Inggris yang teridiri dari para tahanan dan penjaganya. Pengiriman tahanan ini terjadi karena membludaknya jumlah tahanan pada abad 18 yang didominasi oleh para pencuri dari kalangan orang miskin di Inggris. Kerajaan Inggris khawatir akan terjadi pemberontakan kalau para tahanan ini tidak dipindahkan. Sampai dengan tahun 1783, masalah kelebihan tahanan ini dapat diselesaikan dengan mengirim mereka ke Amerika Utara. Tetapi revolusi Amerika membuat pengiriman tahanan terhenti. Pengiriman tahanan ke Australia terus berlangsung sampai dengan tahun 1868.

Migrasi dan kependudukan di Australia selalu menjadi isu penting. Krisis di Asia dan peluang ekonomi di Australia membuat banyak migran dari Asia yang ingin tinggal di Australia. Per tahun 2009 lalu, pertumbuhan penduduk Australia mencapai 2,1 persen, tetapi 64 persennya merupakan pertumbuhan akibat migrasi. Saat ini sekitar seperempat warga negara Australia lahir di luar Australia, artinya mereka adalah migran yang berhasil menjadi warga negara. Pernah ada pendapat kuat di para politis untuk meningkatkan jumlah penduduk sampai dengan 50 juta (dari 20 juta saat ini) agar Australia dapat menjadi negara super power mengimbangi Amerika. Tetapi mereka juga sadar bahwa daya dukung lingkungan di sini tidak memungkinkan, krisis air dan lahan produktif untuk pertanian merupakan masalah besar Australia. Oleh karena itu Indonesia merupakan negara penting karena kita merupakan ‘pagar’ dari para imigran Asia lainnya. Tentu akan sangat menjadi masalah bagi Australia kalau ‘pagar’ ini tidak stabil karena bukan hanya tidak dapat mencegah migran dari luar tetapi orang Indonesia sendiri malah akan menjadi migran di sini.

Catatan:

- Referensi penting tulisan ini adalah: Diamond, J. (2005). Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Success. New York: Viking.

- Gambar peta didapat dari http://www.bom.gov.au/jsp/ncc/climate_averages/rainfall/index.jsp