State asset management reform in Indonesia : a wicked problem

Efficient state asset management is crucial for government departments that rely on the operations of their state assets in order to fulfil their public functions, which include public service provision and others. These assets may be expensive, extensive and or, complex, and can have a major impact on the ability of governments to perform its function over extended periods. Various governments around the world have increasingly recognised the importance of an efficient state asset management laws, policies, and practices; exemplified by the surge in state asset management reform. This phenomenon is evident in Indonesia, in particular through the establishment of the Directorate General of State Assets in 2006, who was appointed as the ultimate state asset manager (of Republic of Indonesia) and the proprietor of state asset management reform. The Directorate General of State Assets too has pledged its adherence to good governance principles within its state asset management laws and policies reform. However the degree that good governance principles are conceptualised is unknown, resulting in questions of how and to what extent is good governance principles evident within Indonesia's reformed state asset management laws and policies. This study seeks to understand the level of which good governance principles are conceptualised and understood within reformed state asset management policies in Indonesia (as a case study), and identify the variables that play a role in the implementation of said reform. Although good governance improvements has been a central tenet in Indonesian government agenda, and state asset management reform has propelled in priority due to found neglect and unfavourable audit results; there is ambiguity in regards to the extent that good governance is conceptualised within the reform, how and whether this relationship is understood by state asset managers (i.e government officials), and what (and how) other variables play a supporting and/or impeding role in the reform. Using empirical data involving a sample of four Indonesian regional governments and 70 interviews; discrepancy in which good governance principles are conceptualised, the level it is conceptualised, at which stage of state asset management practice it is conceptualised, and the level it is understood by state asset managers (i.e government officials) was found. Human resource capacity and capability, the notion of 'needing more time', low legality, infancy of reform, and dysfunctional sense of stewardship are identified as specific impeding variables to state asset management reform; whilst decentralisation and regional autonomy regime, political history, and culture play a consistent undercurrent key role in good governance related reforms within Indonesia. This study offers insights to Indonesian policy makers interested in ensuring the conceptualisation and full implementation of good governance in all areas of governing, particularly within state asset management practices. Most importantly, this study identifies an asymmetry in good governance understanding, perspective, and assumptions between policy maker (i.e high level government officials) and policy implementers (i.e low level government officials); to be taken into account for future policy evolvements and/or writing. As such, this study suggests the need for a modified perspective and approach to good governance conceptualisation and implementation strategies, one that acknowledges and incorporates a nation's unique characteristics and no longer denies the double-edged sword of simplified assumptions of governance.

The exemplification of governance principles within state asset management laws and policies : the case of Indonesia

Efficient state asset management is crucial for governments as they facilitate the fulfillment of their public functions, which include the provision of essential services and other public administration support. In recent times economies internationally and particularly in South east Asia, have displayed increased recognition of the importance of efficiencies across state asset management law, policies and practice. This has been exemplified by a surge in notable instances of reform in state asset management. A prominent theme in this phenomenon is the consideration of governance principles within the re-conceptualization of state asset management law and related policy, with many countries recognizing variability in the quality of asset governance and opportunities for profit as being critical factors. This issue is very current in Indonesia where a major reform process in this area has been confirmed by the establishment of a new Directorate of State Asset Management. The incumbent Director-General of State Asset Management has confirmed a re-emphasis on adherence to governance principles within applicable state asset management law and policy reform. This paper reviews aspects of the challenge of reviewing and reforming Indonesian practice within state asset management law and policy specifically related to public housing, public buildings, parklands, and vacant land. A critical issue in beginning this review is how Indonesia currently conceptualizes the notion of asset governance and how this meaning is embodied in recent changes in law and policy and importantly in options for future change. This paper discusses the potential complexities uniquely Indonesian characteristics such as decentralisation and regional autonomy regime, political history, and bureaucratic culture

The exemplification of governance principles within state asset management laws and policies : the case of Indonesia

This chapter reviews aspects of the challenge of reviewing and reforming Indonesian practice within state asset management law and policy specifically related to public housing, public buildings, parklands, and vacant land. A critical issue in beginning this review is how Indonesia currently conceptualizes the notion of asset governance and how this meaning is embodied in recent changes in law and policy and importantly in options for future change. This chapter discusses the potential complexities uniquely Indonesian characteristics such as decentralisation and regional autonomy regime, political history, and bureaucratic culture.

Why stagnant? behind the scenes in Indonesia’s reformed state asset management policies

This study seeks to answer the question of “why is policy innovation in Indonesia, in particular reformed state asset management laws and regulations, stagnant?” through an empirical and qualitative approach, identifying and exploring potential impeding influences to the full and equal implementation of said laws and regulations. The policies and regulations governing the practice of state asset management has emerged as an urgent question among many countries worldwide (Conway, 2006; Dow, Gillies, Nichols, & Polen, 2006; Kaganova, McKellar, & Peterson, 2006; McKellar, 2006b) for there is heightened awareness of the complex and crucial role that state assets play in public service provision. Indonesia is an example of such country, introducing a ‘big-bang’ reform in state asset management laws, policies, regulations, and technical guidelines. Two main reasons propelled said policy innovation: a) world-wide common challenges in state asset management practices - such as incomplete information system, accountability, and governance adherence/conceptualisation (Kaganova, McKellar and Peterson 2006); and b) unfavourable state assets audit results in all regional governments across Indonesia. The latter reasoning is emphasised, as the Indonesian government admits to past neglect in ensuring efficiency and best practice in its state asset management practices. Prior to reform there was euphoria of building and developing state assets and public infrastructure to support government programs of the day. Although this euphoria resulted in high growth within Indonesia, there seems to be little attention paid to how state assets bought/built is managed. Up until 2003-2004 state asset management is considered to be minimal; inventory of assets is done manually, there is incomplete public sector accounting standards, and incomplete financial reporting standards (Hadiyanto 2009). During that time transparency, accountability, and maintenance state assets was not the main focus, be it by the government or the society itself (Hadiyanto 2009). Indonesia exemplified its enthusiasm in reforming state asset management policies and practices through the establishment of the Directorate General of State Assets in 2006. The Directorate General of State Assets have stressed the new direction that it is taking state asset management laws and policies through the introduction of Republic of Indonesia Law Number 38 Year 2008, which is an amended regulation overruling Republic of Indonesia Law Number 6 Year 2006 on Central/Regional Government State Asset Management (Hadiyanto, 2009c). Law number 38/2008 aims to further exemplify good governance principles and puts forward a ‘the highest and best use of assets’ principle in state asset management (Hadiyanto, 2009a). The methodology of this study is that of qualitative case study approach, with a triangulated data collection method of document analysis (all relevant state asset management laws, regulations, policies, technical guidelines, and external audit reports), semi-structured interviews, and on-site observation. Empirical data of this study involved a sample of four Indonesian regional governments and 70 interviews, performed during January-July 2010. The analytical approach of this study is that of thematic analysis, in an effort to identify common influences and/or challenges to policy innovation within Indonesia. Based on the empirical data of this study specific impeding influences to state asset management reform is explored, answering the question why innovative policy implementation is stagnant. An in-depth analysis of each influencing factors to state asset management reform, and the attached interviewee’s opinions for each factor, suggests the potential of an ‘excuse rhetoric’; whereby the influencing factors identified are a smoke-screen, or are myths that public policy makers and implementers believe in; as a means to explain innovative policy stagnancy. This study offers insights to Indonesian policy makers interested in ensuring the conceptualisation and full implementation of innovative policies, particularly, although not limited to, within the context of state asset management practices.

Stagnancy in Indonesia’s reformed state asset management policies and practices : a wicked problem?

The policies and regulations governing the practice of state asset management have emerged as an urgent question among many countries worldwide for there is heightened awareness of the complex and crucial role that state assets play in public service provision. Indonesia is an example of such country, introducing a ‘big-bang’ reform in state asset management laws, policies, regulations, and technical guidelines. Indonesia exemplified its enthusiasm in reforming state asset management policies and practices through the establishment of the Directorate General of State Assets in 2006. The Directorate General of State Assets have stressed the new direction that it is taking state asset management laws and policies through the introduction of Republic of Indonesia Law Number 38 Year 2008, which is an amended regulation overruling Republic of Indonesia Law Number 6 Year 2006 on Central/Regional Government State Asset Management. Law number 38/2008 aims to further exemplify good governance principles and puts forward a ‘the highest and best use of assets’ principle in state asset management. The purpose of this study is to explore and analyze specific contributing influences to state asset management practices, answering the question why innovative state asset management policy implementation is stagnant. The methodology of this study is that of qualitative case study approach, utilizing empirical data sample of four Indonesian regional governments. Through a thematic analytical approach this study provides an in-depth analysis of each influencing factors to state asset management reform. Such analysis suggests the potential of an ‘excuse rhetoric’; whereby the influencing factors identified are a smoke-screen, or are myths that public policy makers and implementers believe in, as a means to ex-plain stagnant implementation of innovative state asset management practice. Thus this study offers deeper insights of the intricate web that influences state as-set management innovative policies to state asset management policy makers; to be taken into consideration in future policy writing.

The exemplification of governance principles within state asset management laws and policies : the case of Indonesia

Efficient state asset management is crucial for governments as they facilitate the fulfillment of their public functions, which include the provision of essential services and other public administration support. In recent times economies internationally and particularly in South east Asia, have displayed increased recognition of the importance of efficiencies across state asset management law, policies and practice. This has been exemplified by a surge in notable instances of reform in state asset management. A prominent theme in this phenomenon is the consideration of governance principles within the re-conceptualization of state asset management law and related policy, with many countries recognizing variability in the quality of asset governance and opportunities for profit as being critical factors. This issue is very current in Indonesia where a major reform process in this area has been confirmed by the establishment of a new Directorate of State Asset Management. The incumbent Director-General of State Asset Management has confirmed a re-emphasis on adherence to governance principles within applicable state asset management law and policy reform. This paper reviews aspects of the challenge of reviewing and reforming Indonesian practice within state asset management law and policy specifically related to public housing, public buildings, parklands, and vacant land. A critical issue in beginning this review is how Indonesia currently conceptualizes the notion of asset governance and how this meaning is embodied in recent changes in law and policy and importantly in options for future change. This paper discusses the potential complexities uniquely Indonesian characteristics such as decentralisation and regional autonomy regime, political history, and bureaucratic culture.

A public asset management framework for Indonesian local governments

The decentralisation reform in Indonesia has mandated the Central Government to transfer some functions and responsibilities to local governments including the transfer of human resources, assets and budgets. Local governments became giant asset holders almost overnight and most were ill prepared to handle these transformations. Assets were transferred without analysing local government need, ability or capability to manage the assets and no local government was provided with an asset management framework. Therefore, the aim of this research is to develop a Public Asset Management Framework for provincial governments in Indonesia, especially for infrastructure and real property assets. This framework will enable provincial governments to develop integrated asset management procedures throughout asset‘s lifecycle. Achieving the research aim means answering the following three research questions; 1) How do provincial governments in Indonesia currently manage their public assets? 2) What factors influence the provincial governments in managing these public assets? 3) How is a Public Asset Management Framework developed that is specific for the Indonesian provincial governments‘ situation? This research applied case studies approach after a literature review; document retrieval, interviews and observations were collated. Data was collected in June 2009 (preliminary data collection) and January to July 2010 in the major eastern Indonesian provinces. Once the public asset management framework was developed, a focus group was used to verify the framework. Results are threefold and indicate that Indonesian provincial governments need to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of current practice of public asset management in order to improve public service quality. The second result shows that the 5 major concerns that influence the local government public asset management processes are asset identification and inventory systems, public asset holding, asset guidance and legal arrangements, asset management efficiency and effectiveness, and, human resources and their organisational arrangements. The framework was then applied to assets already transferred to local governments and so included a system of asset identification and a needs analysis to classify the importance of these assets to local governments, their functions and responsibilities in delivering public services. Assets that support local government functions and responsibilities will then be managed using suitable asset lifecycle processes. Those categorised as surplus assets should be disposed. Additionally functions and responsibilities that do not need an asset solution should be performed directly by local governments. These processes must be measured using performance measurement indicators. All these stages should be guided and regulated with sufficient laws and regulations. Constant improvements to the quality and quantity of human resources hold an important role in successful public asset management processes. This research focuses on developing countries, and contributes toward the knowledge of a Public Asset Management Framework at local government level, particularly Indonesia. The framework provides local governments a foundation to improve their effectiveness and efficiency in managing public assets, which could lead to improved public service quality. This framework will ensure that the best decisions are made throughout asset decision ownership and provide a better asset life cycle process, leading to selection of the most appropriate asset, improve its acquisition and delivery process, optimise asset performance, and provide an appropriate disposal program.