Search results

Considerable challenges remain in functional assignment in Indonesia - some introduced by the recent revisions, during the second round of reform in the period 2004-2007. The Government of Indonesia (GoI) has accepted the offer from donors to undertake a study to delve more deeply into the progress made to date, the challenges that remain, and the opportunities to fashion a more robust, effective and stable assignment of functions. The study aims to help the GoI and donors in exploring new avenues for reform in this field. The term functional assignment in the study denotes a broad concept that captures the overall architecture of roles between levels of government and the specific construction of functions. The robustness of functional assignment is seen to derive from the judicious choice of elements suited to the local context, particularly how these elements come together to form a sound and consistent architecture. In assessing functional assignment, the study made use of academic and other stakeholder views on both substantive issues and the capacity development approach needed to develop a policy network in this field in the future. The possible supporting role of donors is also indicated, within the discussion of each issue in the main part of the report, and in condensed form at the end of this summary.

The government of Indonesia is once again attempting to create a more decentralised regional development planning system. This decentralisation framework has some flaws, but it is a significant departure from past centralised arrangements. However, the planning component is still conceptually weak and in disarray, caught in the same interagency wrangles that marked the New Order period. Ultimately, the persistently patrimonial bureaucracy may see the planning system as a tool that may be used to regain some of the control given away in the overall decentralisation framework. (DSE/DÜI)

Abstract This article presents an overview of the origins, development, rapid diffusion, and current usage of the concept of social capital in both the academic (research‐oriented) and more applied (social policy) literature. Following a short quantitative survey of the appearance of the term in both theses and journals, various meanings of social capital are examined in the light of classical and contemporary sociological theory. Three main research approaches, which are based on the operationalization of social capital or its application as a heuristic device, are critically examined. These approaches are associated with the work ofJames Coleman, Pierre Bourdieu, and Robert Putnam, but there are also some references to the work of economists. The authors contend that, while social capital has value and appeal as a new term, basic theory needs greater development. In particular, attention should be paid to acknowledging the specific perspective on social capital that underlies its usage, the scale or level of analysis employed, and the value of a qualitative use of social capital.