Suchergebnisse

This article aims to examine what Indonesia has achieved in the last decades of decentralisation. In other words, has decentralisation brought about what its prominent advocators yearned for? How do "decentralisers"-- supporters and prominent advocators of local autonomy - play their roles in re-actualising or reinventing their local identities? How has local identity emerged within the state's territory? Empirically, most new splitting regions (pemekaran) (both province and district) are formed through mobilisation of etnhnic and religious sentiments. Specifically, ethnic politics continue to contribute to the development of the West Sulawesi. Decentralisation, at the changing political landscape, has been seen as a new opportunity and arena for local elites to compete against others to control the local governments.

This article examines the role of transmigration in the formation of a frontier in the Indonesian province of Sulawesi. The "KTM" (Kawasan Terpadu Mandiri – Integrated and Self-Sustained Settlement) initiative, which is funded by the government, provides the primary context. Using ethnographic methods, we identify the first Bugis migration in Indonesia that was funded by the government. The Bugis who settled in Baras were the only ones for whom the state had any involvement in the planning, sponsorship, or endorsement of their relocation from other locations like Sumatra or Kalimantan. We argue that the KTM of Baras has evolved from an agricultural frontier to an economic frontier and, most recently, a frontier focussed on the core issues of political ecology. This focus has arisen because the settlement has taken on the characteristics of an intersection of various types of frontiers. Empirically, this intersection of frontier and the oil palm industry have contributed to transforming the north-western region of Sulawesi.

In Indonesia, decentralisation has emerged in the name of democratisation over the last decades. Decentralisation, politically, has significantly shaped the relationship between the central and local governments. Therefore, many have believed that the decentralisation is equivalent to the democratisation process. In this article, we attempt to answer these questions: (1) is the decentralisation compatible with consolidated democratisation in Indonesia? (2) How is "the rule by people†implemented for the sake of democracy; in other words, how local people fill these spaces? In this article, we argue that there has been a connection between democratisation process and decentralisation. However, the relationship seems to be superficial. ; Desentralisasi di Indonesia telah muncul atas nama demokratisasi dalam dua dekade terakhir. Desentralisasi, secara politis, telah membentuk hubungan antara pemerintah pusat dan daerah lebih kompleks secara signifikan. Oleh karena itu, banyak yang percaya bahwa desentralisasi setara dengan proses demokratisasi. Pada artikel ini, kami mencoba menjawab masalah berikut: (1) apakah desentralisasi selaras dengan konsolidasi demokratisasi di Indonesia? (2) Bagaimana "pemerintahan oleh rakyat" diterapkan demi demokrasi; dengan kata lain, bagaimana orang lokal mengisi ruangan ini? Dalam artikel ini, kami berpendapat bahwa telah terjadi hubungan antara proses demokratisasi dan desentralisasi. Namun, koneksi antara dua entitas tersebut nampaknya masih dangkal.