Home

    About

    Open Access Repository

    SearchBrowse by ThemeBrowse by AuthorBrowse by TypeMost Popular Titles

    Other Resources

    Curators

    Events

    Contributing Think Tanks

    Networks

    Using Content

    FAQs

    Terms of Use

    13,800+ curated items from top Think Tanks.
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Home

    About

    Open Access Repository

    SearchBrowse by ThemeBrowse by AuthorBrowse by TypeMost Popular Titles

    Other Resources

    Curators

    Events

    Contributing Think Tanks

    Networks

    Using Content

    FAQs

    Terms of Use

    Government Decentralization Program in Indonesia

    Nasution, Anwar | October 2016
    Abstract
    Without much preparation, Indonesia, in 2000, at a stroke replaced the previous system of centralized government and development planning with a wide range of decentralization programs. The reforms gave greater authority, political power, and financial resources directly to regencies and municipalities, bypassing the provinces. The powers transferred include those of executing a wide range of responsibilities in the areas of health, primary and middle-level education, public works, environment, communication, transport, agriculture, manufacturing, and other economic sectors. At the same time, the government replaced the antiquated cash-based, single-entry system of public finance with a modern double-entry accounting system that uses a single treasury account; is performance based; and has transparent management of the public treasury, tight expenditure and financial controls with performance indicators, computerized reporting, and a tightly scheduled auditing system. On the positive side, unlike in many developing and transition countries, the decentralization program in Indonesia has not caused major political or economic problems. However, the decentralization program was ill prepared and not carried out in a logical order for two reasons. First, the capacity of subnational governments to produce public and private goods, increase productivity and employment, and promote economic growth in their jurisdictions, was not increased. Because of the long tradition of centralization, local government never built the capacity to carry out economic planning and undertake initiatives to promote local economic growth. Before the reform, the local governments had mainly functioned as implementing agencies of national policies and programs. Second, the number of good financial managers, as required by the new laws of public treasury and auditing, was also limited and needed to be trained. The rising revenues of local governments do not follow their increasing government functions to promote economic development that could potentially cause fiscal imbalances.
    Citation
    Nasution, Anwar. 2016. Government Decentralization Program in Indonesia. © Asian Development Bank Institute. http://hdl.handle.net/11540/6659.
    Keywords
    Business Management
    Institutional
    Framework
    Business Ethics
    Regional Plans
    Project finance
    Development Bank
    Governance
    Good Governance
    Governance Approach
    Governance Capacity
    Governance Models
    Governance Quality
    Regional Policy
    Regional Perspectives
    Regional Government
    Regional Development
    Bureaucracy
    Cabinet system
    Common good
    Executive power
    Government
    Separation of powers
    Transparency in government
    Show allCollapse
    Citable URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/11540/6659
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Thumbnail
    adbi-wp601.pdf (444.8Kb)
    Author
    Nasution, Anwar
    Theme
    Governance
    Regional
     
    Copyright 2016-2021 Asian Development Bank Institute, except as explicitly marked otherwise
    Copyright 2016-2021 Asian Development Bank Institute, except as explicitly marked otherwise