Inter-local-government partnership for urban management in decentralizing Indonesia: from below or above? Kartamantul (Greater Yogyakarta) and Jabodetabek (Greater Jakarta) compared

Under the new decentralization policy, local governments in Indonesia tend to be inward-looking in orientation. Many local governments have exploited the local resources even more intensively, and they are not concerned with the socio-economic conditions of the larger region of which they are part. Within the context of metropolitan areas, there has been almost no effective cooperation among the bordering districts and municipalities to promote the metropolitan development. Against this backdrop, the study examines and compares the institutional partnership and governance in two Indonesia's metropolitan areas, namely Kartamantul (Greater Yogyakarta) and Jabodetabek (Greater Jakarta).     

Regional fiscal cooperation in metropolitan areas: An exploration

This article explores the potential benefits and costs of regional cooperation on metropolitan area fiscal policies. After discussing the relationships between cities and suburbs, as well as the role of local fiscal policies in regional well‐being, the article presents and tests a model for measuring benefit spillovers resulting from fiscal policies. The results show that state and local infrastructures have important effects on metropolitan property markets, and that current spending is less influential than the level of public capital in place in determining property values. State highway investments are found to reduce the attractiveness of metropolitan area locations. Enhancements to central city infrastructure are estimated to significantly increase suburban property values, and the results of some simple policy experiments are examined.© 1999 by the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management.     

Politics-as-usual on trial: regional anti-corruption campaigns in Indonesia

Abstract

This article explores to what extent to local pro-reform actors matter in Indonesia through the prism of anti-corruption campaigns in the country's regions. I argue that the rash of anti-corruption campaigns and related trials involving legislative members, especially from mid-2004 onward, can be attributed neither to the resources lavished on anti-corruption organizations based in Jakarta, nor to the popularity of President Yudhoyono's anti-corruption rhetoric. Instead, it can be traced to a particular anti-corruption campaign that began in earnest in 2002 in Padang, West Sumatra. Using a multi-dimensional approach, a small group of activists relentlessly pursued their newly elected provincial legislators to be accountable to their democratic mandates and as important, to respect the rule of law pursuant to new national anti-corruption legislation. The guilty verdicts of May 2004 galvanized similar groups across the country to investigate their respective legislative bodies. This exemplary case of societal accountability also demonstrated the leverage activists can gain over local politicians when they forge coalitions with other elite actors, especially those in Jakarta. I further explore two anti-corruption cases in the province of West Kalimantan to place post-Padang developments in their proper perspective. If hopes were raised that regional anti-corruption movements–based on the Padang model–might accomplish more than sensational trials but help consolidate democracy at the regional level by holding elected officials accountable, these two examples show how fleeting these expectations might be. The trials that took place but which produced no convictions resulted from the fallout of local political tussles, and not from local civil society organizations galvanized by the ideals of transparency and good governance.     

‘Spending Wisely: Principles for a Good Spending Review': The First Report of the Fabian Commission on Future Spending Choices

This article examines the work of the Fabian Society Commission on Future Spending Choices published in June 2013. The Commission is undoubtedly the most detailed and ambitious attempt by a centre‐left think‐tank to analyse the structure of UK public spending since Labour's 2010 defeat. The Commission makes an eloquent case for a strategic approach to UK public spending, filling the substantial void in thinking on the centre‐left since Labour's 2010 defeat. Inevitably, the proposals raise fundamental questions about the capacity of the British state and the constitutional framework of the UK political system to accommodate a long‐term, future‐orientated approach to public expenditure, which deserve to be properly aired and debated.