Analysis of Revenue Per Person
In 42 Kabupatens and Cities and 5 Provinces in Indonesia
11
8
Graph 2.2 Nominal and Real Revenue Growth in 5 Provincial Governments, 2007-10
This graph is available only in the Indonesian text of this publication
Source: APBD-Rs for 2007-09 and APBD-Ms for 2010, processed by the LBS team.
Three cities Surakarta, Padang and Surabaya as well as West Sumbawa and North Gorontalo
4
had the highest average revenue growth rates during 2007-10.
North Gorontalo’s revenue rose dramatically in light of its status as a new kabupaten formed only in 2007. In real terms its revenue jumped 336
2007-08 and 66 2008-09, but declined in 2010 even in nominal terms. In the case of West Sumbawa, real revenue rose by 19 2009-2010 because of an agreement between the kabupaten government and a
mining company that promised grant funding of around Rp 63 billion
5
in 2010. In addition, there was an increase under other lawful own-source revenue LPDS of Rp 11 billion bringing total revenue to Rp 22
billion.
Graph 2.3 Revenue in 10 Kabupatens with the Highest and Lowest Growth Rates, 2007-10, Based on Constant 2007 Prices
This graph is available only in the Indonesian text of this publication
Source: APBD-Rs for 2007-09 and RAPBDs for 2010, processed by Seknas FITRA
The three kabupatens in Aceh and the cities of Banjar and Palu had the lowest average rate of revenue growth among the 42 kabupatens and cities under study. Revenue in the 3 kabupatens in Aceh declined
sharply in 2009 as a result of a decline in Revenue Sharing Fund DBH allocations. Based on constant 2007 prices, North
Aceh’s DBH receipts declined from Rp 467 billion 2008 to Rp 294 billion 2009, those of Aceh Besar from Rp 48 billion to Rp 26 billion and those of West Aceh from Rp 40 billion to Rp
25 billion. Meanwhile, the city of Banjar sustained drastic drops in revenue of 25 in 2008 and 17 in 2010, principally as a result of a decline in receipts from the General Allocation Fund DAU from Rp
274 billion 2008 to Rp 177 billion in 2009. As for the city of Palu ’s declining revenue, the main
contributing factor was declining levels of provincial and other government fiscal aid from Rp 25 billion in 2009 to just Rp 2 billion in its APBD-M in 2010.