Bureaucracy is a part of government which have functions to formulating, executing and evaluating for public policy. To carry out its functions, bureaucracy have a big authority to managing public resources and use it for public interest. Public policy as the real form of bureaucracy’s work is no longer only related to what will be done or will not be done by government, but has more structured, in official and written.
It should be recognized that in the past, bureaucracy’s role tend too big and monopolize almost all aspects of society’s life. Over the time, this paradigm has changed. Bureaucracy can not only a single player to maintaining all of public interests. This is caused by the limitations of bureaucracy itself. These limitations are :
a. Limitation of human resource in bureaucracy.
This point seemed to find its meaning in Indonesian context. Capability of bureaucracy personnel often questioned if we saw the policy products.
We certainly agree that public policy should be able to anticipate potential of problems so that’s why it is very important to giving attention for the quality of policy product.
b. Limitation of institutional
Division of works in the bureaucracy often make overlapping authority between agencies, especially if in the fat bureaucratic structure, it could made unefficient in work because the step that must done became another agency working area. Coordination effort, should be recognized, easy to say but difficult to do.
c. Limitation of budget
With many public interest that must handled by bureaucracy, there is a demand to giving same attention to all working sector. We know it is an utopian. Like or dislike, bureaucracy must make a priority for their working program in a fiscal year. Consequently, the budget may indeed be less than optimal to fullfill public needs. This can be compounded by the leakage rate of budget, if it high enough.
d. Limitation of time
Bureaucracy often forced to finish all of their working program in one fiscal year. Well, it have to admit that one fiscal year doesn’t enough to finish all of public policy matter and not every issue is allowed to convert in multi years program.
To overcome this limitations, so it is need to push the role of other sector outside bureaucracy for working together handling public needs. Private parties or business is the answer. We know about this form of cooperation with PPP terminology or Public-Private Partnership. This term has already known since 1980’s decade. British government under PM Margaret Thatcher has published the policy which allowed private sector to invest and operate road infrastructute because of economic recession that burden the government budget. British government realize in the middle of recession, infrastructure and transportation development must keep running in order to restore the economic situation. Same policy that has runned by US government in 1930’s decade when economic depression hit the country.
Later in its development, Hall formulating PPP classification in to :
1. Outsourcing : private sector as an operator only. They don’t give a mandate to build or invest.
2. Private Finance Initiatives (PFI) : private sector doing an investation for public facilities and the they provide public service work for certain period of time but public facility owned by government.
3. Concession : almost similar with PFI, but the burden for return on investment is borne by the public.
4. Lease : private sector do not doing an investment but they collaborate with government to operate and maintain the facility. Public bear the cost of investment through rates.
5. BOT (build, operate, transfer) : private sector build and own facility for certain period of time and then, the ownership transfered to government.
Indonesia itself has known this PPP pattern since the 1970s through highway construction projects Jakarta-Bogor-Ciawi (Jagorawi) and then it was operated by PT. Jasa
Marga. However, this pattern of partnership did not became an option because the funding
came from foreign debt beside PPP cooperation pattern itself that is not yet widely known.
PPP models that we are talking here not just only to the procurement of goods and services for government because the period is very short. The coverage of PPP working area is more bigger, including : investation and managing public service facility, transfer of technology, design and build.
Until recent days, as has been known since long time ago, infrastructure issue still become a favourite object about PPP. Irrigation, drinking water, oil and gas, telecommunication and transportation are the parts of infrastructure but minus land transportation based on road. Why minus land transportation based on road. Because PPP regulation, that is Presidential of the Republic of Indonesia Regulations number 67/2005 until the third change of regulations on 2011 about Government Cooperation with Enterprises for Providing of Infrastructure has rules in article 4, paragraph 1a that transportation infrastructure in PPP including seaport, airport, railway and train station. Nevertheless, this shouldn’t hinder PPP initiative like bus terminal, providing bus fleet and also PPP in social sector like education which is very important for public interest too.
But we should know that PPP practice can not run smoothly. We can take several example in Yogyakarta. First example, the development of Giwangan bus terminal in Yogyakarta city. Private sector that should managing and developing the area like has mandated by the city government did not completed their obligation because aspects of the financial benefits that are considered not feasible.
Second example is development of 34 Trans Jogja bus shelter which has became of Yogyakarta city government responsibility. City government has giving their mandate to one of big advertising company in Yogyakarta. After they finished to build the shelters, city government will give exclusive rights to manage advertisement but until this day, the company never did their work about advertisement management.
Or cooperation plan for iron sand mining and new airport development, both in Kulon Progo Regency, Yogyakarta Special Region. From the early stage, these plans has been rejected by local communities. The locals afraid if these cooperation be implemented, they will be suffered from pollution, loss of rice fields as their ocupation and and evicted from their homes. Plan for build new airport development also still holds the potential problems about safety issues for area flight operations. This look alike that policy plan wasn’t preceded by an adequate studies.
Another example outside Yogyakarta Special Region, we can see the failure of Semarang City government to develop Mangkang terminal bus on 2010. This program was planned to cooperated with private sector but for this case, Semarang City government didn’t have a clear policy about cooperation mechanism and not supported by an adequate study about the direction for terminal development for next period.
For anticipating the potential failure of PPP, then this is where should need the role of the university or any form of college. University or college are an academic entity whose existence is in addition to educating students to have the academic and professional ability, also improve people’s lives through science and technology development works. While associated with the power system, university still considered to have an independent position and the relative lack of practical political intervention.
Related with PPP, university have three as an assessor, justificator and monitoring assistance. Assessor is role of university to conduct a feasibility study about PPP plan.
According to public policy view, feasibility in here not just mean a financial benefits, but
furthermore, how big the impact of PPP on the progress of the region. This point can be further elaborated as: how the PPP will be used to increase the public welfare, how the PPP impact on environment or transportation analysis or potential economic growth if PPP will happen. This point is very urgent because in facts, government often make a deal with business or private sector without an adequate studies.
With the role of university as an assessor, PPP plan will have a mature concept and a clearer policy direction. From our experience in land transportation sector for example, private sectors are reluctant to engange in transportation projects because because of the commitment and governance policies of the transport from government is not yet clear. Obscurity governance and policy direction in land transportation has been occured for a long time and being not condusive for big investor. For sea and air transport sector at present has been able to attract the banking sector in financing infrastructure. This positive signal from banking sector caused by governance policies considered more better or highly regulated rather than land transportation, especially based on road. However, land transportation based on road can not be ignored because this mode of transportation is more closely related to our daily life as a human. This calls for reforming land transportation sector has been touted at least since the last few years but has not been effective.
For university role as a justification, this is closely related with the role of assessor. If PPP plan have a mature and sustainable concept, then of course, there are many positive reasons that able to published. Besides that, role as justifikator also useful for raising public opinion for supporting PPP plan so it will have sociology legitimation. Must be recognized that there is still a gap between the public and bureaucracy resulting public resistance to bureaucratic policies plans. This situation caused by confidence levels and the public's ignorance of public policy scheme. Keywords here is public policy communication. Bureaucracy have tended that the communication policy only as a side job so poor in working method. Policy communication not only inviting people or representation from public, perfunctory exposure, perfunctory dialogue, lunch and finished; no it is not! In Indonesian society context who do not have equitable and capabilities access of information technology, it is important to diversify the working methods of public policy communications. So university can bridging tha gap with public surveys and collecting public opinion. Like have mentionde earlier, public still consider that university image is relatively good so if university can take the role, perhaps public acceptibility for PPP plan will be more higher. This method has been applicated by US bureaucracy for a long time.
And for the third role, university also able for assistance about policy monitoring and oversight in order of public policy scheme, including PPP. The fundamental weakness from public policy in Indonesia is still weak in policy’s oversight even has good in policy planning. This suggests that the existing policy only for as long as there used to be. This poor oversight will affecting policy performance and then, also affecting thrust level of public to bureaucracy institutions.
The public will assume that the bureaucracy is a group of people who are less intelligent and have concerns if they are the parties whose affected by the policy, it will not give them for advantage. If university can assisting monitoring works for PPP policy, we believe that
they will follow objective standards that in line with their expertise. This monitoring result will be a good feedback that useful for doing an improvement for current or future policy plan.
In this PPP issue, bureaucracy as part of executive should establish working system which accomodating involevement of private parties and university for giving their contribution as active. So it isn’t only government with business, business with university or
government with university but this is three parties effort. If there are only two parties like government with business, the worst risk is failure of cooperation. And also if only business with university for another example, positive work generated will not necessarily get the support policy.
At the end of last year, Bappenas RI (Indonesian National Development Planning Agency) has claimed that nearly all of PPP plan were failed. Bappenas thought that caused of this problem was the less commitment from local bureaucracy. PPP commitment that has planned in central government level often canceled for executed becauce local governments feel burdened or feel not in line with PPP concept in their working area. It is true that there may be certain circumstances in a region that may hinder the implementation of the PPP, but the unfortunate thing is if it was due to the unpreparedness of the local bureaucracy itself. This failure to follow the commitment will be decreasing value of the investment feasibility in a region and that is of course shrink opportunities of local government for making cooperation. This situation could be avoid if local government bulit partnership with university or other higher academic institutions to gain second opinion about feasibility and expected effect of PPP plan scheme. And also, local government shouldn’t always depend on central government to opening PPP opportunity. Local government must build their own initiative to attract PPP so they will have a big probability to suit with their local condition. This is very useful for certain sector which is not acommodated in formal regulation like land transportation based on road and other social sector outside of infrastructure issue. Coordinating and communication with central government can be done in parallel and should not be a barrier execution of cooperation, so there is the practice of bureaucratic discretion that is commonly known in the terminology of public administration.
International Experience
In United States, Europe and Japan has has awakened mutualism symbiotic relationship between bureaucracy, business and university actor, named Triple Helix. Through a concept coined by Henry Etkowitz and Loet Leydesdorff since the late 1990s. This concept application is the creation of a synergistic working relationship between the three actors for the development of science and technology to be applied in the process of national development.
With application of Triple Helix concept, the benefits are:
a. Capacity building for bureaucracy. Triple helix will make intensive interaction dynamics between the actors so as to prevent the creation of exclusivity from each party.
b. Efficiency in policy process. Bureaucracy can share their role with business sector for example, to investment and managing infrastructure facility and with university to study and policy monitoring. Through this pattern, bureaucracy will be able to run
their function as an efficient with assistance from both partners. Perhaps it will be adding more chain in policy planning but it will increasing the effectiveness of the work itself.
c. Efficiency in public resources. It can not be denied that in the assessment process of any public policy, already require public resources both in terms of budget,
equipment, human resources and administrative support. Then if there is a failure of cooperation plan, up to almost 100%, as reported by Bappenas, we could imagine, how many time, money and other resource that wasted and gave no result to public. So it is very important to sthrengthening policy plan through an adequate studies and back-up policy.
d. Minimize an assimetric development process. Optimization of the process of national development is an ideal result from collaboration of three parties. Implementation of PPP which evenly distributed throughout the national territory will be able to remove the dichotomy of Java – outside Java, Western Indonesia – Eastern Indonesia.
e. Creating a better government accountability. Collaboration between three parties making policy process that will be more democratic because partisipation space opened with more wider. This situation made corruption perception index in USA & Europe are more better than third world countries.
Important lesson we must note here, whether according to the concept of triple helix or other similar concepts, bureaucracy should be dominant role. Of course, dominant in here does not mean as state etatism but bureaucracy as mediator or facilitator between the parties. How about the concrete form of it?
Bureaucracy should make policies that are conducive to the smooth implementation of the PPP :
1. Regulations to set the PPP governance in a mature. Clear pattern of coordination between central and government must strengthened. Coordinating work from central to province and province government to city or regency government must be done by intensively so all of government level realize their responsibility and eager to execute PPP in their working area. So it should be built an effective concensus between central and local government.
2. Guarantee and sustainability public budgets to support assesment, research and monitoring work in order to optimizing realization of PPP.
3. Guarantee and sustainability fund from public budget for PPP implementation, adjusted for the portion of the government's responsibility.
4. Guarantee and sustainability transfer of technology process obligation to develop competitiveness of our national products.
5. Local government should develop their discretion to attracting & conducting PPP initiative. Thus, local government also build their own collaboration with business sector and universities for planning together about PPP project that they want to conduct and adapt it to their local situation. Indonesia has already applicating local autonomy since 2000 so local government have take an authority to manage development process in their working area, and then, they must create and allocating four items which have mentioned above.
So bureaucracy position is dominant but in line with it, in order to manage public resources, only bureaucracy that have an authority to do that.
(This article has presented at Faculty of Social & Political Science, Gadjah Mada University on 5 June 2014).