This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
Jurnal Administrasi Publik (Public Administration Journal
)Available online http://ojs.uma.ac.id/index.php/jap
Disaster Policy, Participation, and Horizontal Conflict: Case Study Reconstruction Aid Funds of The Bantul Earthquake
Yuli Isnadi1* & Asmarawati Handoyo2
1Departement of Public Policy and Management (DPPM) FISIPOL UGM, Indonesia
2Graduate Institute of Political Economy (GIPE), College of Social Sciences NCKU, Taiwan
Received:13 February 2023; Reviewed: 03 May 2023; Accepted: 22 May 2023
*Correspondence Email: yuliisnadi@ugm.ac.id
Abstract
This investigation aims to show that the government’s policy without participation approach causes horizontal conflict in society. The case study is financial aid in the reconstruction process for the earthquake victims in Bantul Regency, 2006-2007. This research collects secondary data, such as government documents, journals, books, news, and other relevant sources. Based on data analysis, we find that the absence of participation in policymaking causes policy cannot to accommodate the social context of the target group. As the impact, community leaders and community members face a problematic situation that creates many problems during implementation. These problems, finally, lead society into horizontal conflict.
This finding might contribute to public policy and disaster management discourse, theoretical and practical, and build a path for future research.
Keywords: Disaster policy; participation; horizontal conflict
How to Cite: Isnadi, Y. & Handoyo, A. (2023), Disaster Policy, Participation, and Horizontal Conflict: Case Study Reconstruction Aid Funds of The Bantul Earthquake. Jurnal Administrasi Publik (Public Administration Journal). 13 (1): 41-48
INTRODUCTION
On May 27th 2006, a great earthquake shook Bantul Regency, Yogyakarta Special
Region. This earthquake had a magnitude of 5.9 on the Richter scale and caused a horrible impact on local people.
Table 1 The Impact of Bantul’s Earthquake on 2006
Victims House Damage
Death Serious Injuries Minor Injuries Completely Destroyed
Heavily Damage
Slightly Damage
3,968 13,989 8,612 71,763 71,372 66,359
Source: compiled by various sources (detiknews, 2006; Putri, 2021)
Some sources recorded the earthquake’s impact in detail. There were 26,569 people receiving the impact of this disaster, in which merely about 32% of the victims had minor injuries. As seen in Table 1, there were 3,968 or about 15%
Bantul victims died and about 13,989 or 53% other victims got serious injuries.
Meanwhile, the poor impact was also on infrastructure. Table 1 shows the condition of inhabitants’ houses. There were 209,494 houses damaged, of which solely 31% or 66,359 of them in slight damage. The other 71,763 or 34% houses were completely destroyed, while 71,372 or 34% houses were heavily damaged.
The Bantul situation after the earthquake was highly serious where 17,957 of Bantul’s people either die or in serious injuries and 143,135 houses were either completely destroyed or heavily damaged. This encouraged local and central governments to establish recovery policies, one of which was the reconstruction policy (Keputusan Presiden Republik Indonesia Tentang Tim Koordinasi Rehabilitasi Dan Rekonstruksi Wilayah Pasca Bencana Gempa Bumi Di Provinsi Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta Dan Provinsi Jawa Tengah, 2006). Meanwhile, the Government of Yogyakarta implement this policy by releasing (Peraturan Gubernur Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta, 2006) to help local people to rebuild and repair damaged houses. The government gave financial aid that the number of money was based on the destruction categories: completely destroyed, heavily damaged, and slightly damaged.
The policy’s result was contradictory.
On one side, the reconstruction process
was very fast. The world recognized that this reconstruction process is one of the fastest in the world (Nuswantoro, 2021) attracting many foreign countries to learn.
On the other side, there was a social issue, when the implementation of financial support distribution causes horizontal conflict in society. Several people were jealous of their neighbours due to the amount of aid that they had received, whereas other people felt the policy was not fair. Post distribution of reconstruction aid, the harmony in society was damaged.
The number of community activities decreased, and some people did not talk to each other(Isnadi, 2011).
This research aims to explain the relationship between disaster policy and horizontal conflict by using a participation perspective. Simply, this research has the zeal to answer “How is the public policy of financial support for earthquake victims in Bantul Regency causing horizontal conflict?” This question is highly important to be answered. First, this issue should be solved to ensure the victim of a natural disaster will not receive another disaster:
horizontal conflict. Second, horizontal conflict gives a poor impact on society, especially during the period when they should manage their life from the beginning. Last, but not least, the government must ensure its policy solving the problem, not either be part or the cause of the problem itself.
We use the ‘participation’ perspective in finding the answer. We discuss and elaborate on the theory of participation in public policy for disaster. Participation is an important concept in current decades (Saguin & Cashore, 2022). Hossain
described participation as a situation where people are involved to solve their problems (Hossain, 2013). In this process, people identify the problems, find the solution and implement strategies (Hossain, 2013; Paton & Johnston, 2001).
Participation has a pivotal function in disaster. It encourages people to analyze their vulnerable, discover problems, develop solutions, and establish organizations dealing with disaster (Chen
et al., 2006; Pearce, 2003). Pandey and Okazaki then, stated that the involvement of local people in the disaster policy process is crucial since the people are
‘disaster front’, those who first receive the impact of disaster (Pandey & Okazaki, n.d.).
Given the important roles of participation, disaster policy was encouraged to transform, and the logic of participation changed.
From To
Hazards Vulnerability
Reactive Proactive
Single Agency Partnership
Science-Driven Multidisciplinary Approach
Response Management Risk Management
Planning for Community Planning with Community
Communicating to Communities Communicating with Communities Picture 1 Transformation of Disaster Policy Approach Source: (Pearce, 2003)
Picture 1 above illustrates the transformation of policy disaster logic. It can be seen that the top-down approach has been changed to the harmony of the top-down and bottom-up approaches.
There are participation principles in the new logic. There is no ‘single agency’ in dealing with disaster, it should be a partnership between government and society. ‘Planning for the community’ has been transformed into planning with the community, in which government and community have a similar chance to design disaster policies. The last, the logic of
‘communicating to communities’ has been moved to ‘communicating with communities. In the new approach, government and community use their resource to design the disaster policy through egalitarian principles. Disaster policy is not the government’s exclusive domain, society has the right to be involved. Then, Chen accentuated that these actors are not only creating the policy but also developing training and disaster scenario exercises.
Furthermore, some scholars explained the correlation between participation, policy satisfaction, and
horizontal conflict. When people have not been involved in the policy process, there will be two main impacts, First, social values will be harmed (Dorcey &
McDaniels, 2001). Participation means developing norms of trust, reciprocity, tolerance, inclusion, and activating networks. The absence of participation means people do not have a chance to develop these social values. Second, people will be frustrated (Rubin, 1991). People are going frustrated because their idea and notion are not accommodated by the policy. Ideas and interests of frustrated people might grow uncontrollably. In case there is no trust, reciprocity, tolerance, inclusion and networks, this
‘uncontrollably’ situation might lead to horizontal conflict.
Based on the discussion above, we develop an assumption. We assume that the policy of financial aid created without participation approach causes horizontal conflict. Without participation, the community does not develop social values for policies. In the implementation process, there might be various problems that make people frustrated. In this situation, the feeling of unsatisfied ends with
horizontal conflict among community members.
METHOD
This investigation uses the case study method. We investigate horizontal conflict post the distribution of financial support for the victim of the earthquake 2006 in Bantul, by paying careful attention to its context. Theory, in this research, does not aim to be proved, yet it guides the researchers in finding the answer to the research question.
We used secondary data analysis.
Government documents, journals, research reports, and news digital media have been used. We also collected the data from other relevant sources, such as books, manuscripts, and others. To make sure the validity of the data, we did triangulation (Denzin & Lincoln, 2018). Information from a source has been confirmed by other sources.
In the data collecting process, we mainly used the Universitas Gadjah Mada library’s service, especially to access high- reputation international journals.
However, in some cases, we also use other open-access journals that have not been subscribed to by Universitas Gadjah Mada.
News reports from credible mass media and NGOs were also used. The mass media were Kompas, Tempo, detik, dan KR (Kedaulatan Rakyat). Meanwhile, the NGOs were Indonesia Corruption Watch (ICW), Mongabay, and others. In certain cases, the NGO did independent research, yet in other cases, they re-publish the media’s report.
Moreover, the analysis process has been conducted through coding, grouping, interpreting, and elaborating on the meaning and conclusion. Every single datum was given a code based on the issue.
A similar issue was grouped. We, thus, gave interpretation to each group to gain meaning. The last, we elaborate on the meaning of every group to obtain a conclusion that directly answers the research question.
We, thus, communicate and elaborate the conclusion with the previous research to gain clearer and stronger insight. We found journal articles that investigated disaster policy, participation, and horizontal conflict in various cases in the world. Making comparison lead to some valuable insights that help us to gain a deeper understanding of disaster public policy, participation and horizontal conflict.
To help future researchers in enriching the disaster policy, participation, and horizontal conflict topics, we offer some interesting issues for future research. This might help those who have excited to reveal the new crucial aspects between the disaster policy, participation, and conflict among the society members.
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
Based on the analysis process, we conclude that the absence of participation in policy formulation causes horizontal conflict in society. Financial support policy has been developed through a top-down approach, without community participation. Accordingly, many problems in the implementation process make the receivers unsatisfied. This situation keeps running until the distribution of financial support finishes. The horizontal conflict emerged in most societies in Bantul Regency.
First and foremost, when the earthquake hit, as mentioned above, Bantul was in a horrible situation. The local government, Bantul Regency’s government, was paralyzed because most of the government agencies were also receiving the disaster’s effects. Yogyakarta Special Region’s government asked for the central government’s intervention.
Considering the situation, the central government established recovery policies, one of which was financial aid for the reconstruction process. This policy was made by the central government and used the national budget, while its implementation asked the local people to involve.
In the implementation process, this policy has some guidance (Detiknews, 2006; Nuswantoro, 2021). First, local people must identify and divide the house damage into three categories, namely destroyed, heavily damaged, and slight damage. Second, each category receives a different amount of financial aid. Those whose houses were destroyed gained Rp.
15,000,000 or about $1,000. Meanwhile, for heavy damage and slight damage received Rp. 4,000,000 or $267 and Rp.
1,000,000 or $67. Third, the receiver in every hamlet must be organized into groups based on three categories:
destroyed, heavily damaged and slightly damaged. Fourth, the community leaders submit the data of the receiver (number of people, name, address and their categories to the government). Fifth, the government did verification to make sure the data validity. The last, government delivered the financial aid to each group.
When this mechanism run, some issues emerged (Isnadi, 2011). First, fairness in measuring the damage level.
There were many misperceptions and abuse of power that influences the measuring process. Social power, family relationship and illegal dealing were some of the many strategies to increase the destruction level of houses. In some cases, there was a case where the receiver of heavy damage destroyed his house to gain higher aid, from Rp. 4,000,000 (heavily damaged) to be Rp. 15,000,000. In another case, two neighbourhood families were conflicted because the poor family with bad houses receive the same amount of aid as the rich family with a stately home, namely Rp. 15,000,000 respectively. The rich family felt the policy was not fair. By using financial support, the poor can build a better house yet the rich build worst house than the previous.
Second, several community leaders decided the level of destruction independently. The local government had guided in measuring the house destruction, yet in some cases, the community leaders did not use the
guidance due to some issues. Some of them use social issues as their consideration, while others tried to gain extra money from this ‘project’ (Kompas, 2010; Radio Star Jogja, 2013). Accordingly, in some cases, the close relationship with the community leaders fully determined the number of financial aid received. Protests from community members emerged.
Third, transparency in managing the reconstruction aid. There was disagreement between community members and community leaders in managing the aid, due to dilemma conditions. To illustrates, on one hand, the community leaders must manage this issue by spending their time and money, whereas they were also the earthquake victim with many limitations. On the other hand, the government has not provided a special budget for the community leader to manage the financial aid distribution process. As an impact, in some cases, community leaders took a certain of money from the financial aid that causes the amount of money received by the community members not proper (Syaifullah, 2010). These problems rose protests from the community members.
Fourth, double counting. The earthquake tragedy in Bantul Regency has invited international NGO aid. Some NGOs have not coordinated with the local government in distributing their financial aid. They directly came and communicated with the community leaders. The decision of “who gets what” was the exclusive domain of community leaders. Therefore, in some cases, the close relation to community leaders determined whether a family can gain aid from double sources (government and NGO) or not. This problem triggered social jealousy and protest.
Post-reconstruction fund distribution, there were many social issues. Many people in Bantul Regency lived in inharmony, indicated by the lower mutual work. Some people and community leaders were arrested due to corruption during the distribution of the financial
support process. In other situations, some people recognized that they limited communication with some people in their neighbourhood. Simply, it can be stated that some societies in Bantul were hit by the social disaster. They were victims of two disasters, natural and social disasters (Isnadi, 2011).
What we have found from the findings above is that the financial aid policy was made without participation. To make a quick response, the central government used a top-down approach in shaping the policy, there is no chance for people to participate. It created special conditions for community leaders and community members. For community leaders, there is a contradictory situation.
On one hand, their position became strategics, they can decide ‘who gets what’.
On the other hand, they did not have a special budget to implement the policy, whereas they were the earthquake’s victims too. As the impact, in many cases, some community leaders abuse power, either intentionally or unintentionally.
Some of their decisions were not objective.
Meanwhile, for community members, without participation, there are no consensus and social values for the implementation of policy. The implementation process became complicated which makes people frustrated. Two families with different economic statuses receive the same amount of money, however, this triggered social tension. And, in some cases, the level of closeness to the community leaders determines whether a family can gain a higher and even double source of aid or not.
This investigation finds that participation influences the quality of public policy results, especially in distributing financial aid for earthquake victims in Bantul Regency. Without participation, community leaders and community members find a dilemma situation. Community leaders have pivotal roles, yet there is no special budget supporting them in implementing the
policy. Community members previously live in different social and economic statuses and have different closeness to the community leaders, and some of them have a chance to gain more aid. Simply, without participation, the policy cannot accommodate the special context of society.
CONCLUSION
To sum up, it can be stated that the absence of ideal participation in financial aid policy causes horizontal conflict in society. Government create the policies (Peraturan Gubernur Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta, 2006; Keputusan Presiden Republik Indonesia Tentang Tim Koordinasi Rehabilitasi Dan Rekonstruksi Wilayah Pasca Bencana Gempa Bumi Di Provinsi Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta Dan Provinsi Jawa Tengah, 2006) without inviting the community to participate, therefore the policy cannot accommodate the society’s context. As a result, there are many problems in policy implementation.
Most society members feel unsatisfied with the policy. Post-implementation process, the problems during the distribution of financial aid create horizontal conflict. So we conclude, participation in policy can help stakeholders avoid conflict, while without participation, the policy may lead society to conflict.
Theoretically, this finding supports the previous research stating participation is important in the policy process. This conclusion replicates the previous investigations. For instance, Xu et.al finds that participation can minimize conflict (Xu et al., 2019). Ma and Yali have a similar conclusion where participation will provide a chance for stakeholders to design the priority, therefore conflict can be avoided (Ma & Wen, 2019).
Practically, participatory disaster policy is the main issue for the government. When government refuse to invite other stakeholders to shape the policy, there will many problems in the implementation process that lead to
horizontal conflicts. Contrary, participation will give many benefits to the government, because the policy will accommodate the local context. This conclusion supports the previous research, such as Baptiste et.al, which states that participation will encourage the stakeholders to exchange their knowledge, influence the choice, and create an inclusive decision-making process (Bedessem et al., 2022). A similar conclusion was also proposed by Tresina et.al (Tresiana et al., 2022) and Ayala et.al (Cruz Ayala et al., 2022).
This conclusion develops a path for future research. There is a dilemma on the government’s side. On the one hand, the government is insisted to make a proper policy fastly. On the other hand, participation is time-consuming. Making policy fastly with a participatory approach becomes two important matters.
Investigating the case where the government can make policy fastly with a participatory approach becomes urgent in the future.
Moving to another point, the utilization of the internet, communication, and technology (ICT) in designing disaster policy might be useful in the future, especially social media. When the internet has grown gradually in the current decades, most areas in the world have favoured social media is also going up. In current years, some researchers have shown its benefit to increasing participation, Lin and Kant concluded that the penetration of social media impacted the inclusiveness of participation, the number of participants, interaction among different levels of citizens’ power, and participation effectiveness (Lin & Kant, 2021). Lin confirmed this conclusion by stating that social media can improve the inclusiveness of participation (Lin, 2022).
How the utilisation of social media in creating ideal participation in disaster policy is an attractive topic in future research.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We are very grateful to Yungnane Yang, professor of the Graduate Institute of Political Economy (GIPE) at National Cheng Kung University (NCKU), Taiwan.
He helped us in developing the research framework and serve some critical comments on the research proposal.
REFERENCES
Bedessem, B., Morère, L., Roblin, L., Dozières, A., &
Prévot, A.-C. (2022). Participatory Biodiversity Governance: A Comparison of Two French Initiatives. Sustainability,
14(13), 7715.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su14137715 Chen, L.-C., Liu, Y.-C., & Chan, K.-C. (2006).
Integrated Community-Based Disaster Management Program in Taiwan: A Case Study of Shang-An Village. Natural Hazards,
37(1–2), 209–223.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-005-4669- Cruz Ayala, M.-B., Soto, J. R., & Wilder, M. O. (2022). 5
On Lessons from Water Recharge Projects in Mexico: Science-Policy Collaboration and Stakeholder Participation. Water, 15(1), 106.
https://doi.org/10.3390/w15010106 Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (2018). The
SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research (Fifth). SAGE.
detiknews. (2006, June 1). Depsos: Korban
Meninggal 6.234.
https://news.detik.com/berita/d- 606837/depsos-korban-meninggal-6234 Detiknews. (2006, October 2). Dana Rekonstruksi
Korban Gempa Yogya Cair 5 Oktober.
https://news.detik.com/berita/d-
687406/dana-rekonstruksi-korban-gempa- yogya-cair-5-oktober
Dorcey, A. H. J., & McDaniels, T. (2001). 7. Great Expectations, Mixed Results: Trends in Citizen Involvement in Canadian Environmental Governance. In Governing the Environment (pp. 247–302). University of
Toronto Press.
https://doi.org/10.3138/9781442675469- 010
Hossain, Md. A. (2013). Community Participation in Disaster Management: Role of Social Work to Enhance Participation. Sociology, 9(1), 159–171.
https://pdf4pro.com/amp/view/community -participation-in-disaster-management-role- of-4a7af9.html
Isnadi, Y. (2011). Bencana Kedua: Ketika Kebijakan Penanggulangan Bencana Berbuah Bencana.
Capiya.
Keputusan Presiden Republik Indonesia tentang Tim Koordinasi Rehabilitasi dan Rekonstruksi Wilayah Pasca Bencana Gempa Bumi di Provinsi Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta dan Provinsi Jawa Tengah, Pub.
L. No. 9 (2006).
Kompas. (2010, May 26). Lurah Disidang Terkait
Dana Gempa.
https://www.antikorupsi.org/id/article/lur ah-disidang-terkait-dana-gempa
Lin, Y. (2022). Social media for collaborative planning: A typology of support functions and challenges. Cities, 125, 103641.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2022.10364 Lin, Y., & Kant, S. (2021). Using Social Media for 1
Citizen Participation: Contexts, Empowerment, and Inclusion. Sustainability,
13(12), 6635.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su13126635 Ma, B., & Wen, Y. (2019). Community Participation
and Preferences Regarding Conservation and Development Policies in China’s Giant Panda Nature Reserves. Sustainability, 11(18), 4852. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11184852 Nuswantoro. (2021). Pemulihan Pasca Gempa, Bisa
Belajar dari Bantul.
https://www.mongabay.co.id/2021/08/18/
pemulihan-pasca-gempa-bisa-belajar-dari- bantul/
Pandey, B., & Okazaki, K. (n.d.). Community Based Disaster Management: Empowering Communities to Cope with Disaster Risks.
Paton, D., & Johnston, D. (2001). Disasters and communities: vulnerability, resilience and preparedness. Disaster Prevention and Management: An International Journal,
10(4), 270–277.
https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM00000000059 30
Pearce, L. (2003). Disaster Management and Community Planning, and Public Participation: How to Achieve Sustainable Hazard Mitigation. Natural Hazards, 28(2/3), 211–228.
https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022917721797
Peraturan Gubernur Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta, Pub. L. No. 47 (2006).
Putri, G. S. (2021, May 27). Mengenang Gempa Jogja 2006, Ini Mekanisme dan Potensi Bahayanya.
https://www.kompas.com/sains/read/2021 /05/27/120200623/mengenang-gempa- jogja-2006-ini-mekanisme-dan-potensi- bahayanya?page=all
Radio Star Jogja. (2013, April 18). Warga Bantul Laporkan Korupsi Dana Rekonstruksi Gempa. https://kbr.id/nusantara/04- 2013/warga-bantul-laporkan-korupsi-dana- rekonstruksi-gempa/53948.html
Rubin, C. B. (1991). Disaster recovery after Hurricane Hugo in South Carolina. Natural Hazards Research and Applications Information Center, Institute of Behavioral Science.
https://librarysearch.library.utoronto.ca/dis covery/fulldisplay?context=L&vid=01UTOR ONTO_INST:UTORONTO&search_scope=UTL _AND_CI&tab=Everything&docid=alma9911 06752811306196
Saguin, K., & Cashore, B. (2022). Two logics of participation in policy design. Policy Design and Practice, 5(1), 1–11.
https://doi.org/10.1080/25741292.2022.20 38978
Syaifullah, M. (2010, June 14). Bupati Bantul Akui Pemotongan Dana Gempa di Puluhan Desa.
https://nasional.tempo.co/read/255156/bu pati-bantul-akui-pemotongan-dana-gempa- di-puluhan-desa
Tresiana, N., Duadji, N., Febryano, I. G., & Zenitha, S.
A. (2022). Saving Mangrove Forest Extinction in Urban Areas: Will Government Interventions Help? International Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning,
17(2), 375–384.
https://doi.org/10.18280/ijsdp.170203 Xu, Plieninger, Zhao, & Primdahl. (2019). What
Difference Does Public Participation Make?
An Alternative Futures Assessment Based on the Development Preferences for Cultural Landscape Corridor Planning in the Silk Roads Area, China. Sustainability, 11(22), 6525. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11226525
