BUREAUCRACY CULTURE AND LEADERSHIP IN INDONESIAN E-ADMINISTRATION IMPLEMENTATION: BASED ON PERSPECTIVE OF KNOWING AND LEARNING ORGANIZATION.

P r o c e e d i n g s

B a l i , N u s a D u a

I n d o n e s i a - J u l y 2 0 1 0

28

th

_{International Congress}

of Administrative Sciences

IIAS Theme

IIAS Theme

Public Administration facing New Dynamics:

Constraints, Innovation and Sustainability

Actes

B a l i , N u s a D u a

I n d o n é s i e - J u i l l e t

28

ème

_{Congrès international}

des Sciences administratives

Thème de l’IISA

Thème de l’IISA

L’Administration publique face à de nouvelles

dynamiques: contraintes, innovation et durabilité

Rue Defacqz 1, bte 11

B-1000 Bruxelles, Belgique

e-mail: info@iias-iisa.org

Remerciements

L’Institut international des Sciences administratives remercie vivement l’Institut national d’Administration publique de la Ré-publique d’Indonésie, la Société indonésienne des Sciences administratives, le Ministère de la Réforme administrative, le Ministère de la Culture et du Tourisme, le Ministère des Finances, le Ministère de l’Education nationale, le Conseil national de planifi cation du développement, le Secrétariat d’Etat, le Ministère des Affaires étrangères, le Sénat et la province de Bali de la République d’Indonésie.

Ackowledgements

The International Institute of Administrative Sciences should like to thank The National Institute of Public Administration, The Indonesian Society of Administration Science, The State Ministry of Administrative Reforms, The Ministry of Culture and Tourism, The Ministry of Finance, The Ministry of National Education, The National Development Planning Board, The State Secretariat, The Ministry of Foreign Affairs, The Senate and the Province of Bali of the Republic of Indonesia.

INSTITUT INTERNATIONAL DES SCIENCES ADMINISTRATIVES

L’IISA est une association internationale à but scientifi que dont le siège est à Bruxelles. Créé en 1930 par le Congrès international des sciences administratives tenu à Madrid, l’IISA est la première des institutions spécialisées à affi rmer, au niveau mondial, sa volonté scientifi que pour résoudre les problèmes et les défi s des administrations nationales et internationales. Il reste aujourd’hui la seule institution internationale spécialisée en sciences administratives et en administration publique, un lieu unique pour la recherche et la coopération, ouvert aux universitaires et aux praticiens de toutes les régions du monde. L’Institut est représenté dans une centaine de pays et compte parmi ses membres des Etats, des Sections nationales, des Organisations internationales et des membres collectifs. Il est par ailleurs doté d’un Statut consultatif auprès de l’UNESCO et du Conseil économique et social des Nations Unies, et est membre du Conseil international des sciences sociales. L’Institut développe ainsi ses programmes en synergie avec les principales organisations afi n de promouvoir la coopération internationale dans le domaine de l’administration publique.

L’IISA a pour mission de promouvoir le développement des sciences administratives, l’amélioration du fonctionnement des administrations publiques, le perfectionnement des méthodes et des techniques administratives et le progrès de l’administration internationale. Une grande part des activités de l’IISA est consacrée à l’analyse et la recherche (congrès, groupes de travail, séminaires), à la formation (ses publications, sa Revue internationale des sciences administratives, trimestrielle, publiée en espagnol, en anglais, en français et en chinois, sa Lettre d’information, son site internet), ainsi qu’à l’expertise et à la consultation (L’Institut répond à des demandes spécifi ques de gouvernements, d’organisations internationales ou de toute autre agence). L’association spécialisée et les groupes régionaux de l’Institut développent également et de façon permanente des travaux et un suivi des évolutions dans leur domaine spécifi que. L’Association internationale des écoles et instituts d’administration (AIEIA) vise à répondre aux besoins de développement institutionnel de la gestion publique et de l’administration. Le Groupe européen pour l’administration publique (GEAP) a pour objectif le développement de l’administration publique et de la théorie administrative dans le cadre européen. Le Groupe Latino-américain pour l’administration publique (GLAP) a pour objectif le développement de l’administration publique dans les pays d’Amérique Latine.

Les activités de recherche de l’IISA sont essentiellement menées dans le cadre de ses Groupes de projet et ses Manifestations majeures annuelles (Congrès, Conférences, séminaires).

INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ADMINISTRATIVE SCIENCES

The IIAS is an international association with scientifi c purpose whose seat is in Brussels. Established in 1930 by the International Congress of Administrative Sciences held in Madrid, the IIAS is the fi rst of the specialised institutions to affi rm, worldwide, its scientifi c willingness to resolve the problems and challenges of national and international administration. It is today the only international institution specialised in administrative sciences and public administration, the primary meeting place for research and co-operation, and open to academics and practitioners from all regions of the world.

The Institute is represented in approximately one hundred countries and counts among its members States, National Sections, International Organisations and Corporate Members. The Institute also has Consultative Status with Unesco and the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations and is a member of the International Social Science Council. It thus develops its programmes in synergy with the major organisations to promote international co-operation in the fi eld of Public Administration.

The purpose of the IIAS is to promote the development of administrative sciences, the better operation of public administrative agencies, the improvement of administrative methods and techniques and the progress of international administration. A large part of IIAS activities is devoted to analysis and research (Conferences, Working Groups, Seminars, etc.) information (its publications, quarterly International Review of Administrative Sciences - published in Spanish, English, French and Chinese, Newsletter, website) and expertise and consultancy (the Institute responds to specifi c requests of governments, international organisations, or any other agency).

The Institute’s Specialised Association and Regional Groups also develop and follow-up research in their specifi c fi eld of interest. The International Association of Schools and Institutes of Administration (IASIA) aims to respond to the institutional development needs of public management and public administration. The European Group for Public Administration (EGPA) is responsible for the development of public administration and administrative theory relative to the European environment. The Latin American Regional Group (LAGPA) is responsible for the development of public administration in the Latin American countries.

The IIAS research activities are mainly carry out by its Project Groups and its annual Major Events (Congresses, Conferences, Seminars).

Sommaire -

Contents

Avant-propos

...p.5

Introduction

...p.6

Rapport du Rapporteur général /

Report of the General Rapporteur

...p.7

L’Administration publique face à de nouvelles dynamiques: contraintes, innovation et durabilité

Public Administration facing New Dynamics: Constraints, Innovation and Sustainability

By Andy Fefta Wijaya

Rapports des ateliers /

Workshops Reports

...p.14

1.

Relégitimer l’action publique: Rôles et responsabilités

Re asserting public action: Roles and Responsibilities

By Taui q Muhammad

2.

L’Etat et la protection des citoyens et de la société : Valeurs et réponses

Renewing State Protection for Citizens and Society: Values and Responses

By Denise Amyot

3.

L’Etat face à son héritage : conditions, contraintes et opportunités

Handling the Legacy: Conditions, Constraints and opportunities

By Prabhas Kumar Jha

Discours liminaires /

Keynote speeches

...p.22

1.

Administrative Reforms of the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia

in Manifestation of Good Governance

By E. E. Mangindaan – State Minister

2.

The Human Face of Governance: Public Service in Times of Crisis

By Meredith A. Newman – President ASPA

3.

La Relégitimation de l’Action publique

Par Gérard Timsit – Professeur émérite

Listes des articles acceptés /

List of abstracts accepted

...p.38

(un CD Rom reprenant les papiers complets présentés lors du congrès est joint

a CD Rom including the complete papers presented is attached)

Avant-propos par le Professeur Gérard Timsit,

Directeur des publications de l’IISA

Les congrès organisés par l’IISA sont une des manifestations essentielles de son activité scientifi que. Réuni en 2010 à Bali, après celui d’Helsinki l’année précédente et avant le congrès de Lausanne de juillet prochain, le 28ème Congrès a rassemblé un nombre impressionnant – près de 500 - de spécialistes de l’administration publique –des universitaires, des chercheurs, des hauts fonctionnaires, des praticiens… - en provenance de 60 pays de toutes les parties du monde. Ces congrès sont donc, par les exposés et les discussions auxquels ils donnent lieu, tant en séance plénière que dans le cercle plus restreint des groupes et ateliers organisés autour de chacun des thèmes et sous-thèmes des congrès, l’occasion d’une immense confrontation d’informations et d’idées sur les problèmes les plus actuels, parfois les plus brûlants, auxquels ont aujourd’hui à faire face nos Etats et nos administrations.

L’Institut se réjouit de pouvoir présenter les Actes du Congrès de Bali qui a été consacré au sujet : L’Administration publique face à de nouvelles dynamiques: contraintes, innovation et durabilité. Renouant avec une tradition ancienne et, pour des raisons matérielles, malheureusement, quelque temps interrompue, ces Actes s’attachent à offrir l’image la plus fi dèle possible des travaux qui se sont déroulés dans ce cadre. Un congrès, c’est non seulement l’endroit et le moment de la présentation des résultats des recherches entreprises, mais c’est aussi, d’une certaine manière, une recherche en actes, une recherche vivante, le lieu d’une démarche scientifi que dans laquelle des vérités se cherchent, s’expriment et s’affrontent qui permettent de cerner les réalités dans tous leurs aspects - succès et échecs- et de préparer les réformes à entreprendre. Nul doute que chacun puisse trouver dans les textes ici présentés - textes auxquels l’Institut a voulu laisser leur diversité et toute leur spontanéité- les informations nécessaires à l’analyse comparative et le foisonnement et l’acuité de la réfl exion indispensables pour fonder cette action publique au service de l’intérêt commun pour laquelle les hommes ont inventé l’Etat et son administration.

Gérard TIMSIT,

Professeur émérite à l’Université de Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne,

Président du Comité des publications de l’IISA.

Foreword by Professor Gérard Timsit,

Director of IIAS Publications

Congresses organised by IIAS are one of the essential manifestations of its scientifi c activity. Taking place in Bali in 2010, after Helsinki last year and before the Congress of Lausanne in July, the 28th Congress was attended by an impressive number - nearly 500 – of specialists in public administration: academics, researchers, government offi cials, practitioners ... from 60 countries worldwide. By the presentations and discussions to which they give rise, both in plenary sessions and in the smaller circles of groups and workshops held around each theme and sub-themes of the congress, these meetings are an opportunity for a huge comparison of information and ideas on the most topical, sometimes the hottest, issues that our countries and administrations now have to face.

The Institute is pleased to present the Proceedings of the Bali Congress which has been devoted to the topic: Public Administration Facing New Dynamics: Constraints, Innovation and Sustainability. Reviving an old tradition that was unfortunately suspended for practical reasons, these acts are committed to offer the most accurate picture possible of the work taking place in this framework. A congress is not only the time and place to present the results of researches, but somehow, it also showcases research in action, a living research, a place of scientifi c approach in which truths are looked for, spoken about and confronted allowing to identify realities in all their aspects - successes and failures included- and to prepare the reforms. No doubt everyone can fi nd in the texts presented here - texts which the Institute decided to keep their diversity and spontaneity-all the information necessary for comparative analysis and the abundance and depth of thinking needed to build this public action at the service of the common interest for which men have invented the State and its administration.

Gérard Timsit,

Professor Emeritus at the University of Paris 1 Pantheon-Sorbonne

Introduction

Toutes les sociétés sont aujourd’hui confrontées à une situation mondiale qui a connu une profonde mutation ces dernières décennies, mise en lumière par la crise actuelle, et à laquelle la gouvernance publique doit impérativement s’adapter.

Dans leurs environnements nationaux respectifs, un nombre croissant de pays doivent faire face à des changements de tout ordre tels que les changements démographiques, la migration, les problèmes ethniques, l’équilibre urbain - rural, les inégalités sociales, les restructurations économiques majeures, la redistribution des revenus, la gestion des développements technologiques, la gestion des crises ou encore les situations post-confl ictuelles et sécuritaires. Les tâches traditionnelles qu’assumaient les gouvernements et leurs administrations se sont par conséquent multipliées et, par la force des choses, complexifi ées.

Cependant, les Etats ne peuvent espérer y parvenir sans tenir compte de leur propre contexte historique et national et des méthodes administratives qu’ils utilisent, en bref de leur culture.

Introduction

All societies today face a dramatically changed global situation compared with a few decades ago, further lightened by current crisis, and public governance must adjust in consequence.

Within their respective national environments, a steadily rising number of countries have to deal with massive change such as demographic shifts, migration, ethnic issues, the urban-rural balance, societal disruption, major economic restructuring, income redistribution, managing technological developments, crisis management, or, post confl ict and security situations. The traditional tasks that governments and their administrations must undertake have in consequence multiplied, and grown that much more complex in scope.

However, states cannot expect to do so effectively if they do not take fully into account, each in their own historical perspective their specifi c national context and administrative ways of doing things, in short their culture.

Rapport du Rapporteur général

Report of the General Rapporteur

Public Administration Facing New Dynamics:

Constraints, Innovation and Sustainability

Balancing and harmonizing value, policy,

governance, administration and management

By Andy Fefta Wijaya*

I would like to thank the IIAS in appointing me as the rapporteur general of the Bali Congress 2010. This role was an honorable task for me. I also thank all the participants who contributed with their paper and participated in this remarkable event.

The Bali congress 2010 was a joint congress between the International Institute of Administrative Sciences (IIAS) and the International Association of Schools and Institutes of Administration (IASIA). The congress was conducted from 12 until 17 July 2010 in the paradise Island of Bali, Indonesia. However the IIAS conference opened on Wednesday, 14 July 2010.

On 12 July 2010, the fi rst day of the congress, started with the DPDAM/UNDESA’s Workshop on ‘Standard of Excellence’ arranged by Hayian Qian Director of DPDAM/ UNDESA and John- Mary Kauzya, Chief of the governance and public admi-nistration branch DPADM/UNDESA. In the workshop, limited participants share their knowledge, experience and common practice on Standard of Excellency of Public Administration Sector.

IIAS sessions were started on Wednesday, 14 July 2010. The welcome remarks were delivered by Rolet Loretan, Director General of IIAS followed by the presentation of a keynote speech by Prof Meredith Newman (Florida International University), President of ASPA (American Society for Public Administration). She talked about the human face of governance: Public Service in times of crisis. She emphasized ‘the emotive skills that public administrators need to meet these challenges in service to the public’. As she said: ‘What is important is not what is right or left, but what works’. The session ended with the presentation of the IIAS Rapporteur General, Andy Fefta Wijaya (the Head of master degree program in Public Administration, Faculty of Administrative Science, University of Brawijaya, Indonesia – FIA UB) who delivered a speech in highlighting some important key points that would be addressed during the conference. Public governance has been challenged by uncertainty, dynamics and diversities, but citizens should be better served. Strengthening governance for delivering public goods and services is urgent (see such as a case of strengthening governance of water service delivery in Wijaya 2009).

On 13 July 2010, we attended the opening plenary session for the IASIA theme. The opening started a speech from Prof Allan Rosenbaum, President of IASIA followed by two speakers from the host country: Prof Ginanjar Kartasasmita (President Advisory Council of Indonesia and President of Persadi/ Indonesian Association of Administrative Science) and Prof Armida S. Alisjahbana (State Minister for chairperson of the National Development Planning Agency, Indonesia).

On 14 July, following the joint opening ceremony of the congress, we attended a joint host country panel with the theme: ‘Cultural Dimension of Administrative Reform: Challenges and Responses in the 21st Century Development Decades chaired by Dr Santa Nirwandar (Indonesian Ministerial of Tourism). Four speakers being respectively, namely Prof Dr Mustapadidjaya AR (Indonesia), Prof Mishra Ramkumar (India), Prof Zhiren Zhou (China) and Prof Jerry O. Kuye (South Africa), presented a paper during the session. From the panel, we learned that beliefs of each values and cultures are refl ected in the designs and scenarios of policy and standard that are going to be developed. However, people share their common values used as the umbrella principles among them. Deliberative policy analysis is needed to understand governance in the network society (Hajer and Wagenaar 2003). Balancing and harmonizing between common values and local values are urgent in the new dynamics era of culture diversity and complexity. It is a key point to govern confl icts and build trusts among them (see UN, 2007a).

One other keynote speaker for IIAS was his Excellency, Mr Event Erenst Mangindaan, State Minister of Administrative and Bureaucratic Reforms of the Republic of Indonesia and Chairman of Politics, Law and Human Rights of Fostering Leadership Assembly of Democrat Political Party, Indonesia. He shared the Indonesian experience in exercising its bureaucratic reforms. A grand design of the Indonesian Bureaucratic reforms has been established. However, the next important agenda is how to make this strategy works. It is a big homework for the Indonesian government in managing the public sector reform (see C Pollitt and G Bouckaert 2000).

On 15 July, we listen to the Braibant lecture, the scientifi c event for the 80th IIAS anniversary presented Professor Akira Nakamura, who served as Vice-President and Dean of the Graduate School of Meiji University for six years until March 2008. Professor Nakamura mentioned that future direction of research perspective in East Asia includes: need of empirical studies; micro issues (budgeting, personnel, decision making); reconsideration of government-business confi gurations; and re-evaluation of administrative centered approach.

Those fi elds are related to the public sector strategy in delivering goods and services (see Joyce, 2003). In the opening cere-mony, Prof Franz Strehl (President of IIAS) reminded us of the essential role of strategic management in implementing public sector strategies. Strategy is a tool for transforming your government to attain a high performance (Osborne and Plastrik, 2000). Strategic change is a tool for transforming an organization (Hoisington and Vaneswaran 2005). Strategic planning and management play an important part in this new dynamic era of uncertainty, complexity and diversity. Governments need to learn benefi cial concepts from private sector transferred into the public sector as the NPM movement (see Lynn 2006, Lane 2003, Osborne and Ferlie 2002, Andrisani et al. 2002, and Martin 2000).

Considering new constraints faced by many actors in the public sector, absolutely we need a new way in managing public sector (see Flynn 2007). One important part of managing public sector is managing change and innovation (see Osborne and Brown, 2005 and Brillantes, 2003) in dealing with the current public affairs. A new model of partnership and cooperation (see Savas 2000) are critical for improving the public sector performance. Managing and measuring performance (see Bouckaert and Halligan 2008) is essential, and the most important thing is maintaining our best fi t practices and performances. For that, we need to evaluate and measure our performance (see Hatry, 1999) whether it is related or not to the aim of service being delivered and the need of our citizen (see Shah 2005). Performance measurement models such as balanced socrecard (Kaplan and Norton since 1992 & 1993) can be used as a strategic tool to deliver the policy. We need a feed back from our constituent. ‘Tacit’ knowledge is essential. Learning from those people who we serve is crucial. Sustaining our performance for best results and impacts can be achieved through the installation of systemic thinking and praxis (see McIntyre, 2003) in public sector policy and implementation.

THE IIAS WORKSHOPS WERE DIVIDED INTO THREE SUBTHEMES:

Workshops A for Subtheme 1: ‘Reasserting Public Action: Roles and Responsibilities’.

21 papers were presented during those sessions and there were written by 29 scholars from 13 countries (Korea, Japan, Iran, Germany, Morocco, Netherlands, Indonesia, Cameroon, Japan, Finland, UK, South Africa, and Canada). 19 papers were written and presented in English, and two papers were written and presented in French respectively by Mohamed Harakat (Université Mohammed, Morocco) and Denis Proulx with Claude Beauregard and Rodrigo Naranjo Galvez (ENAP – Université du Quebec, Canada).

The presentations covered many issues. One related to governance and principles of governance. Mr Germandze with the case of Cameroon talked about a squandered opportunity for innovation in public sector and the need of governance reform in the public sector. Principles of governance like accountability are discussed in the papers of Mr Astuti and Mr Dwiputriani. Mr Astuti concentrated in aspects of the bureaucratic discretionary, while Mr Dwiputrianti did it the auditing performance. Mr Suryanto and M Ahadiyati talked about the other principle of governance which is strengthening Village autonomy for social protection of rural community. Citizen participation in modern municipality was addressed by Mr Proulx.

The other specifi c discussion in governance debates was related to the role and function of government. Mr Munseok analyzed the functional scope, structure, and size of government and governance capacity. Mr Horie discussed the changing roles and responsibilities of government in Japan. Principles of decentralization debates were discussed by Mr Matsunami in the case of decentralization reform of local governments in Japan and Mr Moon discussed it in the case of two fi nancial crises and crisis management in Korea: cousins or twin lessons from centralization theses.

The second discourse was related to management side of the public sector, especially to the NPM debate notably with Mr Grunow referring to the role of commercial counseling in the latest reform processes. In its argument, counseling is often as a part of the problem rather than a satisfactory solution to problems of administrative performance and call for reassessment of the respective roles of commercial counseling in the public sector.

More specifi cally in the case of public service in local govern levels, Mr Kumorotomo examined local public services after the ‘pemekaran’ policy or the creation of new local government and Piotrowska exercising determinants for public service performances at the local level of administration in Poland. Mr Pramusinto wrote about local leadership and innovation the new era of decentralization in Indonesia.

However, there were limited discussion in balancing and harmonizing positive and negative aspects of both Governance and NPM approaches in reassuring public action. It is explained in the table 1 below reasserting public action: balancing and har-monizing between roles of governance and responsibilities of NPM. Even though it is not clear cut (fi rewall) in the relationship among those items in the information below, but it can still give an illustration to analyze a priority tendency of each approach.

Table 1 Reasserting Public Action:

Balancing and Harmonizing Between Roles of Governance and the Responsibilities of NPM

Harmonizing and balancing between the roles of governance and responsibilities of NPM is a combination of the two ap-proaches. Governance is related to a system development. Creating new values, establishing new institutions and making new policies are parts of the governance roles to develop the best – fi t systems to the needs of people in the systemic network among government, community and private sectors. So, it is a high role of public sector in building ‘good’ or ‘sound’ or ‘accountable’ or ‘transparent’ or ‘participative’ or ‘right’ (etc.) governance systems.

The implementation of those governance systems is strongly dependent on the managements’ responses in reasserting their public action. Their action is highly responsible to be based on the new governance system. NPM innovation is essential to improve public sector performances, but their creativity needs to be steered under the new governance system. New roles of the governance system will take a responsibility to assure the public action brings benefi ts all three governance sectors.

Workshops B for subtheme 2: Renewing State Protection for Citizens and Society: Values and Responses.

18 papers were written by 21 authors from 13 countries (Argentina, Egypt, Kenya, China, Indonesia, Italy, South Africa, Finland, China, Thailand, Finland, UK, and Japan). All papers were written and presented in English.

Under this theme, some papers debated more conceptual issues and others were more practical. In the conceptual discus-sion, M Vuori et al construct a theoretical and conceptual model for the “mutual learning of responsiveness”. Mr Tippawan presented issues of partnerships among public, private, and civil society sectors in public administration and Mr Anwar wrote about good societal governance.

In the public sector practices, papers were more based on the issues of social welfare and public service. Some scholars orientated their papers in social welfare programs, for examples Mr Mmwangi writing about cash-transfers for the poor in Kenya and Mr Keaong talking about social security programs (pension and medical insurance) in urban China. Economic, social-demographic, political, technological and environmental changes are driving forces for renewing state protection to citizen and society. Mr Andrieu was suggesting a new integrated model of social policies and programs and Mr Monel A Abdel-Baki was proposing: an egalitarian model of reform agenda in addressing inequality by addressing the perceptions and demands of society in Egypt.

Some other scholars analyzed issues of state protection in public services. Ms Damayani wrote about people with different abilities (disable). According to her, the Indonesian government ignored public services for disable. Mr Kanyane criticized the misfi t between the minimal resources and the escalation demand of citizens’ needs for public service. So, a new approach need to be installed like Mr Lumijavri was suggesting in the model of Outcome-Based Public Management (OPM) as a response to the new demands and challenges in the environment of public organizations. However, the new way in protecting society needs to be adapted with the existing or condition in where the reform takes a place. Mr Awang concluded, in his paper, that there shall be no signifi cant progress even though the service reform has been executed.

The other way is making an incremental change like Ms Lumijarvi mentioned for the development of the current models of public services but ensuring it to fi t better within the public organization atmosphere. In Mr Zhou’s case in Chongqing, China, he suggested the need of improving the migrant-workers training level for education in order to improve their human capacity.

Some other papers focused on the issue of E – administration and IT. Ms Wanjang’I’ wrote the Role of Public Administration in Providing Information through Interne in the case of Kenya. Mr Saefullah also discussed the Indonesian e-administration implementation facing diffi culties because of the limitation of public human capacity in IT.

One scholar also wrote on Non profi t Organization in China. Mr Nala mentioned the increasing NPOs in China which shall lead to the change of China’s NPO governance rules and regulations, and at the end it shall strengthen China’s civil society.

There was no paper or limited discussion in this workshop which specifi cally criticized the concept and practice of state pro-tection in development. The way of thinking and behavior of many public sectors towards economic, social and environmental development aims as Elkington (1997) should have been addressed. Environmental and moral degradation are caused by the human acts and thoughts which are not compatible with the concept of sustainable and societal development. Renewing State Protection for Citizens and Society should also be discussed in the context of sustainable and societal developments.

Reasserting Public Action Roles

& Responsibilities Governance NPM

Locus (make a system) High Middle to low

Workshop C for subtheme 3: Handling the Legacy: Conditions, Constraints and Opportunities.

13 papers were written by 17 scholars from 11 Countries (Australia, Korea, China, Germany, Indonesia, Korea, South Africa, France, Canada, Thailand and The Netherlands). 11 papers were written and presented in English and two papers were written and presented in French respectively by Jean–Baptiste Pointel (University of Rouen, France) and Raoul Tamekou Tsowa (University of Montreal, Canada).

The papers in this subtheme were handling the legacy and discussed various forms of public governances, policies and mana-gements including changes and innovations in the public sector. Some changes and innovations are related to the reforms of inter governance networks take forms like hybrid organizations, partnership, managerialist style, balanced scorecard.

Mr Taco Brandson and Mr Phillip Karre in their paper on ‘The Dynamics of Hybrid Organizations: Innovations and Risks for Public Governance’ mentioned that ‘many hybrid organizations have operated without great problems and even with some benefi ts. Certain organizational and regulatory conditions appear to be crucial in this respect’. Mr Sanusi also highlighted the success stories of partnerships among public, private and community in improving public service performance in some Indonesian local governments, particularly in increasing effectiveness. However, the critical point was that there is a lack of learning efforts from the other local governments to copy or adopt and implement those success stories of some local governments in Indonesia. Mr Mehde also addressed the challenge of the managerialist type of government vis a vis the legalistic traditions. Mr Hu Bing developed a new model for the governance of local government in integrating management and services in China.

Some other papers were related to policy and strategic issues. Mr Jieun Seong wrote about ‘green growth policy in Korea’. Mr Tapscot in the case of Cape Town in South Africa argued that there is a mismatch between how the formulators of policy understand participation and how it is interpreted by offi cials at the local level. It maintained that it is considerable that more attention shall need to be focused on why offi cials fail to translate national policies into action if the notion of participatory de-mocracy is attain any purchase in the population at large. There is a knowledge gap between levels of governments. However, gap knowledge occurs between senior public servant and parliamentarian as explained in the study case of Mr Coghill and Ms Lewis on climate change and sustainability post Copenhagen and the need of training in the legislative body.

Furthermore, other papers highlighted some strategic reasons for transparency and diversities. Mr Moon talked about public information disclosure in Korea. Mr Budiarjo in his study found that the organizational culture change in Boyolali local govern-ment, are infl uenced by the change of the national political culture. The Boyolali Government has been changed because of the increasing demands of public accountability and transparency. However, some aspects of organizational culture in Boyolali local government remain the same (before the reforms) since they have deeply rooted relationship with Javanese culture being immune to the political system change. Mr Surasit wrote about balanced scorecard (BSC) as a tool for strategic implementation and evaluation in Thai public sector.

To conclude, some critical points can be pointed. In the ideological and policy issues, making good policy and sound gover-nance (see Farazmand 2004) is our policy agenda. Creating workable policy in practice and getting benefi cial outcomes and impacts of the policy to citizens is essential. Professor Allan Rosenbaum’s speech warned us that public policy could be the public sector problem. To be more precise about this point and what does it means for the citizens is that particularly the ‘mar-ginalized people or society’ including poor, disabled, indigenous, gender and border people. Sometimes, it may be considered that politicizing public policy for own benefi ts may be considered as a criminal act. It may be too strong, but considering its negative implication of the act to the whole society and our environment, we may agree on it. Policy networks become a matter in this situation. We may ask whether positive or negative policy networks which lead our policy making process, as well as its implementation. So, public participation and involvement in the transparent public policy process should be put in the front of our policy reform agendas.

In the public governance, administration and management discourses. Governance concerns are to share roles and responsi-bilities among government, private and community sectors (see further about governance in UN 2007a, UN 2007b, Kettl 2003, Kooiman 2003, Rhodes 2003 & 2000, Pierre and Peters 2000). Governance gap can be seen when the practice does not follow the policy as it was mentioned in Mr Kanyane’s presentation showing the public policy misfi ts. It does not work in prac-tice. We should look again to Mr Ginanjar Kartasasmita’s speech indicating that in the globalization’ era we should consider the presence of ‘uncheck and invisible’ powers. Until this point, I remember Mr Shamsul Haques’s presentation warning “us” on the impact of globalization through NPM’s movements on the social protection, and he also questioned on whose actors get benefi ts from all those game. I shall not challenge the concept of NPM, but some benefi ts from NPM approaches could be useful for our public sector practices without denying its negative implications.

We should look again: Does our public service serve them as ‘citizens’ or customers? (see Denhardt and Denhardt 2003); Do our citizens deserve a better treatment from our public sector? Do we create a sound governance and administration? What we can learn from this congress? The main question would be who govern us? It may seem that we are governed by our hie-rarchy but it is our market or network that is governing us. Some are uncheck and invisible powers. It would be alright if it was for the goodness of the whole society, however if it is for their own benefi t as the natural characteristics of the private sector and the possible situation of the negative networks. The key for our governance reforms would be in balancing and harmonizing the

role and responsibility of our hierarchy, market and networks. For that, we may need strong and transformational leadership. Combining accountable governance and good leadership would be a critical element. In the public management area, I would like to say that we do not only let our managers to manage, but also we should ask them to learn from our stakeholders. We should also suggest them to cooperate with market and society in the partnership frameworks.

I hope that we can learn a lot from this congress. The main theme “Public Administration facing new dynamics: constraints, innovation and sustainability” was not without reasons as mentioned above. We should go through this crucial phase and it can be overcome by balancing and harmonizing value, policy, governance, administration and management. I would like to say that the future of the future public administration was here in our hands during the congress.

REFERENCES

• Andrisani, P. J., hakim, S. and Savas, E.S. (2002). The New Public Management:

Lessons From Innovating Governors and Mayors, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston.

• Bouckaert, G. and Halligan, J. (2008). Managing Performance, Routledge, Oxon.

• Brillantes, A. B., (2003). Innovations and Excellence, University of the Philippines, Diliman

• Denhardt, J. V. and Denhardt, R.B. (2003). The New Public Service, M.E. Sharpe, Armonk.

• Elkington, J. (1997). Canibals with Forks: the Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business. Oxford: Capstone

• Farazmand, A. (2004). Sound Governance: Policy and Adminisration Innnovation. Praeger Publisher, London.

• Flynn, N. (2007). Public Sector Management, Sage, London.

• Hajer, M. and Wagenaar, H. (2003).Deliberative Policy Analysis: Understanding Governance in the Network Society, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

• Hatry, H. P. (1999). Performance Measurement: Getting Results. Washington: The Urban Institute Press.

• Hoisungton, S.H. and Vaneswaran, S.A. (2005). Implementing Strategic Change. McGraw Hill, New Delhi.

• Joyce, P. (2003). Strategic Management for the Public Service. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

• Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1992). The Balanced Scorecard: Measures that Drive Performance. In Harvard Business Review on Measuring Corporate Performance (1998 ed., pp. 123-146).

Boston: A Harvard Business Review Paperback.

• Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1993). Putting the Balanced Scorecard to Work. In Harvard Business Review on Measuring Corporate Performance (1998 ed., pp. 147-182). Boston:A Harvard Business Review Paperback.

• Lane, J.-E. (2000). New Public Management. London: Routledge.

• Lynn, L.E. (2006). Public Management: Old and New, Routledge, New York.

• Martin, DS. (2000). Building the New Managerialist State, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

• McIntyre-Mills, J. (2003). Critical Systemic Praxis for Social and Environmental Justice. New York: Kluwer Academic.

• McLaughlin, K., Osborne, S.P., and Ferlie, E. (2002). New Public Management: Current Trends and Future Prospects, Routledge, London.

• Osborne, S.P. and Brown, K. (2005). Managing Change and Innovation in Public Service Organizations, Routledge, Oxon.

• Osborne, D. and Plastrik, P. (2000). The Reinventor’s Fieldbook: Tools for Transforming Your Government, Jossey-Bass, San Fransisco.

• Kettl, D. F. (2002). The Trasformation of Governance. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

• Kooiman, J. (2003). Governing as Governance. London: Sage Publications.

• Pierre, J. and Peters, B.G. (2000). Governance, Politics and the State. MacMillan, Hampshire.

• Pollit, C. and Bouckaert, G. (2000). Public Management Reform: A comparative Analysis.

Oxford University Press, New York.

• Rhodes, R. A. W. (2000). Governance and Public Administration. In J. Pierre (Ed.), Debating Governance: Authorithy, Steering, and Democracy (pp. 54-90). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

• Rhodes, R. A. W. (2003). Understanding Governance: Policy Networks, Governance, Rel exivity and Accountability.

Maidenhead: Open University Press.

• Savas, E.S., (2000). Privatization and Public-Private Partnerships, Seven Bridges Press, New York.

• Shah, A. (2005). Public Service Delivery, The World Bank, Washington.

• United Nations, (2007a). The Challenges of Restoring Governance in Crisis and post Conl ict Countries, UN, New Yorks.

• United Nations, (2007b). Governance for the Millenium Development Goals, UN, New Yorks.

• United Nations, (2007c). Public Administration and Democratic Governance: Governments Serving Citizens, UN, New Yorks

• Wijaya, Andy Fefta. (2009). Strengthening Governance of Water Service Delivery, in Saber, SA,

Rapports des ateliers

Workshops Reports

Relégitimer l’action publique: Rôles et responsabilités

Re asserting public action: Roles and Responsibilities

Taufiq Muhammad*

Administering public action to promote public interest is the core business of public administration. In modern time, the State is supposed to play a central role in administering public action. Facing the new dynamics in national and global environment with the progress of democratization, technology advancement, globalization and social and cultural changes, the role of the State has become an object of reform. Current reforms tend to reduce the scope of state intervention. Dominated by managerialism paradigm, the State is requested to focus in policy formulation and to delegate its responsbility in providing public service to private sector, society or local government. This paradigm is questionned by the reality where most countries have to solve the problems notably poverty, inequality, corruption, terrorism, public health etc. Regarding current effort in the administrative reform, the subtheme 1 give the focus in responding to the question: What are the role and the responsibility of the State in reasserting public action?

There were 17 papers for the subtheme 1 which were selected from 52 abstracts.

The main ideas of presentattion

Current reform paradigm is dominated by managerialism approaches such as institutionalized through policy of decentraliza-tion, privatizadecentraliza-tion, adoption of NPM showing its limitation.

First, decentralization is considered as an instrument to enhance the state responsiveness and accountability. There are two perspectives of decentralization. The vertical decentralization: delegation of the state authority to local governments and the horizontal decentralization: dispersion and delegation of the state of authority in to non-governmental organization or quasi government organization. Decentralisation is also regarded as a mean to strengthening democracy by giving, creating, checking and balancing the system. These ideas come up with the creation of autonomous or semi autonomous government organization. The horizontal and vertical decentralizations could not achieve its expected objectives for some reasons. The vertical decentralization is hindered by the bureaucratic culture in central government as well as the local administration. Where in the other hand, the horizontal decentralization is considered as a mean to cope with public distrust showing its limits. Rather than improving the governance process, this creation is often aggravating the problem of policy coordination, creating ambiguity in public accountability, problems of corruption and favoritism toward government elite.

Second, privatization. To respond to economic crises, the privatization policy is adopted as an instrument to reduce public expenditure burden and the expansion of the private sector as an instrument for growth and development, and subsequently reduction of public government size. Through privatization, the private fi rms compete for public service delivery. It is considered as both political and economical ideologies. In terms of political ideology, the privatization is to be seen as a reaction to the growth of government and bureaucracy. The image of the State is changing, and the government has turned more to private sector for services. Yet, many studies show the evidence is mixed and concluded that no direct and systematic relationship can be established between costs saving and private production of public services. The problems related to privatization are accountability, problem of corruption and low quality of public service.

Third, Introduction of NPM. The adoption of NPM aims to improve the effi ciency in public sector by adopting the private sector management principles. Nevertheless, NPM has distracted the priority of public problems and the orientation of policy agen-das towards economics concerned. The discourse of public sector effi ciency, the performance management, the customer driven public service predomine the policy agenda setting and in some extent distract public debate from the problems of unemployment, poverty, social marginalization etc.

In order to strengthen public action effectiveness, the State has to redefi ne its reform policy orientation. The reform should not be any longer oriented as an instrument to reduce the size and the role of the state. Contrastly, the State is expected to play a central role in strengthening, sharing, understanding and responsibilitating between the different actors respectively the State, the civil society and the private sector. Current public problems notably poverty, unemployment and crime constitute a common responsibility between the State, the civil society and the private sector. The propositions to improve public action effectiveness namely are :

* Advisor for Ministry of State Administration and Territorial Management Republic Democratic of Timor Leste, Vice Dean for Academic Affairs at the Graduate School of Administration and Tutor of Open University on Subject Administrative Theory

1. Building public trust through transparency and integrity of the State action. In order to develop a sense of common res-ponsibility from civil society and private sector, the State has to improve the transparency and strengthen its capacity notably in corruption erradication, law enforcement, and effectiveness of control management conducted by the State institution. Aside from that, the State needs to show a sound policy in certain domains which aimed to improve social solidarity and cohesiveness such as poverty erradication, gender equality programs etc.

2. Strengthening public sector leadership. Public action needs an effective public sector leadership, both in local and national level. Effectiveness of the public sector leadership is judged by its capacity to build a clear vision, strengthening consensus and mobilizing engagement among stakeholders to solve public problems.

3. Public sector strategic focus. The reform policy needs to consider the balance between the scope of State intervention and the State capacity. As most studies suggested, the State reform needs to be focused on strategic areas which enable the private sector and the civil society to develop their potential and their capacity to promote public interests.

L’Etat et la protection des citoyens et de la société :

Valeurs et réponses

Renewing State Protection for Citizens and Society:

Values and Responses

Denise Amyot*

The sub-theme Renewing State Protection for Citizens and Society: Values and Responses is a key sub-theme for this conference because economical, political and social disparities have become common global phenomena. What is most worrisome is that various reports are showing that disparities are increasing. This situation creates pressure on government both at the political level and at the offi cial level, to ensure adequate protection of citizens and society.

HIGHLIGHTS - MISE EN PERSPECTIVES 1ER _POINT

Quels étaient les éléments communs aux différentes présentations?

Les attentes des citoyens augmentent – ils veulent plus de transparence, d’imputabilité, d’effi cacité et de participation aux prises de décision.

Les pressions sur les Gouvernements

1) les dépenses augmentent la pression car l’urbanisation augmente

2) de plus en plus de différence entre les services dans les régions rurales et les régions urbaines 3) la population vieillissante augmente

4) les besoins des citoyens augmentent

5) l’utilisation des nouvelles technologies provoque de plus en plus de pression, ceci implique des défi s que posent ces pressions: impact de la globalisation sur la qualité de vie des personnes vulnérables, sur l’Etat et sur les politiques publiques. Les questions qui se posent ?

Comment arriver à un équilibre entre les demandes qui augmentent et les ressources gouvernementales qui souvent diminuent ? Comment répondre aux besoins des citoyens qui veulent participer plus activement aux prises de décision qui les concernent ? Comment équilibrer ce qui est du rôle de l’Etat et du rôle des citoyens ?

Avant de répondre à ces questions, je souhaite rappeler, en toile de fond , les propos éloquents de notre conférencière principale, Professeur Meredith Newman quant à l’importance des valeurs émotionelles des fonctionnaires/des gestionnaires d’Etat . Vous vous rappellerez également que le président de l’Institut international des Sciences administratives, Franz Strehl, a lui aussi évoqué l’importance de ces qualités émotionnelles des fonctionnaires publics en tout temps et pas seulement en temps de crises. Finalement rappelons-nous les excellents propos du Prof. Gérard Timsit sur la relégitimisation de la démocratie participative dans le rôle de l’Etat.

2IÈME _POINT

De qui avez-vous parlé lors des présentations ?

Populations à risque / défavorisées, personnes sous le seuil de la pauvreté, orphelins, personnes handicapées, personnes âgées, etc.

3IÈME _POINT

De quoi avons-nous parlé ?

On pourrait dire que la majorité des présentations ont parlé des besoins de base dont nous parle Maslow dans sa pyramide des besoins – c. à d. – besoins de subsistance (un toit, de la nourriture, des soins médicaux)

Des mesures prises ou que pourraient prendre certains pays :

a) Etat en Afrique – le Kenya fournissait des montants d’argent minimum pour les populations à risque.

b) Etat en l’occurrence l’Egypte où un modèle économique d’évaluation de bien capital amélioré maximiserait l’utilité du capital. Modèle testé avec des chiffres réels qui démontre que si le système était appliqué pour des petites et des moyennes en-treprises, on pourrait développer des projets de subsistance et de confort et on pourrait révolutionner le rôle des systèmes bancaires.

c) les iniquités entre les régions rurales et urbaines; entre les fonctionnaires et les employés du secteur privé au niveau de la pension et de l’assurance médicale.

d) le manque d’infrastructure et d’accès de certains membres de la population aux nouvelles technologies; le manque d’offre des services gouvernementaux utilisant ces nouvelles techniques.

e) iniquités pour les personnes handicapées au niveau du logement et de l’éducation. f) nouvelles mesures pour mesurer la pauvreté.

Nous avons donc examiné, sous différents angles, les problèmes posés aux gouvernements qui appellent à des solutions similaires ou différentes.

4IÈME _POINT

Comment assurer une administration publique effi cace et effi ciente? 1. Développement des capacités des fonctionnaires publics

ex: gestion fi nancière, engagement public, gestion du changement, leadership, éthique, responsabilité. 2. Adaptation ou organisation

1) planifi cation;

2) contrôle des résultats – plus de responsabilité, plus de transparence; 3) faire rapport aux citoyens;

4) reduction de la corruption (et non pas élimination de la corruption) 5) mesures de la performance

3. Rôle des citoyens – nouveaux phénomènes, nouvelles pressions, plus de demandes que d’offres 4. Rôle du secteur privé en partenariat avec les ONG et avec le gouvernement

5IÈME _POINT

What we did not hear much or not at all: Ethos of the Public Service (professionalization)

• zero tolerance for corruption

• organizational culture to mobilize staff • role of citizen in the planning stage

• role of leadership for public servants at all levels

Question – do we need an accreditation for public servants or an accreditation for the public services of the world?

Role of other institutes that can support public administrators • roles of public administration schools

• roles of retirees • roles of NGOS

Training for politicians to support the reform.

L’Etat face à son héritage :

Conditions, contraintes et opportunités

Handling the Legacy:

Conditions, Constraints and opportunities

Prabhas Kumar Jha*

Fourteen Papers were presented under this sub-theme, all of which in one way or the other dealt with legacies of the past, whether cultural, colonial or socioeconomic in nature. These papers also outlined the unique and specifi c ways adopted to transform, adapt or integrate these factors, while evolving or designing new mechanisms, systems and policies within the overall framework of governance.

The fi rst group of papers concerned Local Governance and public service delivery models and practices. The second group of papers dealt with the complex and diffi cult issues of “Climate Change and green growth policies”. The third group of papers was more general in nature and dealt with miscellaneous issues like transparency, openness of system, legal issues and citizen’s rights.

The Geographical compass of these papers was fairly wide spread. It involved countries like China, Korea, Indonesia, Ger-many, South Africa, France, Thailand, Australia, Netherlands, Japan etc., presenting a global view and outlook, delineating local differences yet displaying striking similarities. The regional diversity of papers also afforded an opportunity to deepen and enrich our understanding of processes at work.

1. In the area of Local Governance and public service delivery model, following papers were presented.

a) Re-nationalization of Shanghai on Shanghai’s Public Transport System by Yang Rong, China.

Shanghai’s Public Transport System witnessed a see-saw shift from national to private and again to re-nationalization. The paper raises the dilemma of fi nding the right balance between market and government, within the context of socialist market economy. The paper argues that effect of Central Government Policy on local level is more than a law. Thus, there is a lack of real autonomy at the local level. The Cyclic nature of extreme measures is a refl ection of not fi nding the balance between market and the government.

Discussions following presentation were focused on two key areas, namely, pervasive role of Central Government and lack of real autonomy at local level. It was felt that lack of democratic set up was the most important factor which needs to be addressed.

b) Regional Heritage on Local Government - Lessons and Experiences from China by G.Zhiyong Lan, China.

The paper discusses three different models of growth in China. The Wen Zhou Model is based on private enterprise. The reason was its unique geographical location, being close to Taiwan across the sea, so the people had fi rst hand experience of trade with outsiders. The local network of people was strong and they took advantage of China’s open door policy, which resulted in their success in international trade and high levels of per capita income. The South Jiangsu model, located in Huaxi Village is based on collective model and led by a Charismatic leader. The land was privatized. The enterprises remained collective and in turn it became the wealthiest village in China. The third model is Shenzhen Model which is a special administrative Zone, created by the Government next to Hong Kong. It also was developed by the government as China’s export port and Government led the development with strong capitalist oriented policy fl avour. The author concludes that as a prismatic society, China has different local cultures, which has led to different development models. At the same time, the three development models discussed above have run into one serious problem or the other. One of the biggest challenges before China is to sustain these models of success. Major reforms and innovations are required to integrate market mechanisms in the governance system.

A lively discussion took place on various issues raised by the presentation. The Author of the paper strongly argued that tradi-tional hierarchical structure of Chinese society, governed by Confucious doctrine of practical and empirical work ethics remains a major factor in motivating Chinese people to conquer adversity, hunger, deprivation and poverty. A unique and exceptional belief in Chinese self-esteem, led them to compete successfully in manufacturing, trading and commerce, thereby achieving a measure of dignity and prosperity. However, it was also acknowledged that Chinese society is again standing on a threshold, looking and groping for new ideas, which demands major structural reforms in various areas of governance.

c) Organizational Culture Change in the Decentralization Practice in Indonesia by Budiarjo, Indonesia.

Shri Budiarjo has emphasized the strength of Javanese character underneath decentralization practices followed in Boyolali. The traditional values like Gotong Rayong (Mutual Assistance) and Tengggang Rasa (Tolerant Behavior) is highly prominent. The use of Javanese symbols, language and uniform also reinforces this. The paper also suggests that strong local element has improved public service delivery at the local level, however, culture of transparency and accountability is still low, which needs to be improved.

The Paper reiterated the fact that some small reform measures have started taking place in various local units with mixed results. However, as a whole decentralization process is still, in its infancy and a great deal of structural changes and reforms are required to usher in real transformation.

d) Private, Public and Communities Partnership in delivering Public Services in Indonesia local level by Anwar Sansui, Indonesia.

The paper argues for building up public, private participation in delivering public services at local level. Best Practices of Jembrana (Bali) Bantul Yogyakarta & Solo (Central Java) show some highly promising results in this area. The case in example is Jembrana Health Insurance (KKJ) which has improved access of poor to health services, which happened, primarily by inclusion of private sector in this scheme. However, still this model is not fi nancially sustainable, which needs to be addressed. Bantul Model basically takes care of education and health. In Solo model, the displacement and re-habilitation of street vendors was done through communication and interaction. The paper further says that these successes are leadership oriented and has not percolated to other districts and areas. Also the question of community participation is at a low level.

During discussions, it was stressed that at local levels, direct elections have created a vibrant dynamics and elected offi cials are undertaking a string of initiatives and reforms. Secondly, there is a renewed focus on improving education, health and civic amenities, which are positive signs. During the discussions, it came out that such initiatives are still leadership/individual based and systemic changes are required to institutionalize performance in terms of peoples’ participation, client satisfaction and fi nancial sustainability at social level.

e) What are happening in Japanese local governments by decentralization reform! by Jun Matsunani, Japan.

On decentralization reforms in Japanese local level governance, the author makes the point that within a Unitarian system, local fi nancial reforms and municipality amalgamation reforms have helped to a certain extent. The Central Government also rationalized transfer of funds from centre to the local level. But these reforms have now lost the sense of direction, specially, on fi nancial autonomy and decentralization of local body. More importantly, rural local governments have suffered in comparison to urban local government.

Japan is an advanced and leading economy, where local governments are much better organized and are fi nancially very strong. The author argued that despite these advantages, further decentralization of local bodies is required. There is also a strong need for more fi nancial autonomy. There is a strong sense of lack of direction among political parties as to what is to be done.

f) Tensions between the demand and supply of Participatory Democracy – The South Africa Experience by Chris Tapscott and Lisa Thompson, South Africa.

The author has provided a keen insight into participatory process tensions between demand and supply side. He offers an objective critique of participatory process taking place in South Africa and cited the case study of Housing at local level. He has shown that there is need for alignment of development with democracy as vested interests, elites, bureaucratic control and inertia has derailed and compromised delivery of housing. Although, a robust legal and policy framework exists for social housing, however, implementation side is pretty grim. Given the long history of colonialism, a very high demand for housing, inequality and poverty, it is most important to put an end to the abuses surfacing in participative process.

The paper brings out the fact that in situations where there is a huge gap between demand and supply due to high levels of poverty and inequality, mere introduction of participatory processes would not suffi ce. It must be clearly recognized that such a situation is ripe for exploitation and graft. It is simply not enough to have legal and policy framework for delivery of social housing, if it is not backed up with strong administration, enforcement of ethics/rules and speedy punishment meted out to abusers and exploiters. The author argues that lack of proper implementation has resulted in deep public frustration and anger. During discussions, the author stressed the point that better objective criterion need to be established to prevent misuse. The conclusion was that while participatory process is the right step, but it is equally necessary to offset its ills.

g) Sustainable Municipal Financial Management: Rising Demand for Senior Managers Role in South Africa by L B MZini, South Africa.

L B MZini has argued in her paper that there is a great lack of expertise in Municipal System of Governance in South Africa, wherein senior managers lack adequate skills, expertise and capacities. She gave a number of examples that suggested that inexperienced, contractual people are mismanaging the governance in municipalities, thereby fuelling peoples anger and protest. She specially laid stress on creating a professional management system for municipalities which ought to be manned by skilled, trained and strictly accountable senior managers. She felt that present day adhoc and inexperienced managers are unable to do justice to their jobs. She added that fi nancial management is much more crucial, as resources are scarce and its optimization is absolutely necessary in South African context.

It was clear during discussions that South African experience of municipal administration is passing through a great deal of crisis and the system is still not mature. Lack of professionalization in these organizations pointed towards the urgent need of creating a sound management system.

h) L’infl uence due Modele Scandinave Sur la reforms franceise del’Etat by Jean- Baptiste Pointel.

Pointel’s paper on Scandi navian models of local governance traced out their history and growth in detail. Firstly, these countries have mature democracies and have a long and strong tradition of local level democracy, decentralization, people’s participation and autonomy. Now, there is a renewed focus on transparency, professionalism and accountability. Various models of participation in public service delivery have also contributed to better results. The local level Ombudsman is also an important feature in redress of grievances and complaints. During discussions, it was stressed by many that many features of Scandinavian system are proving their relevance as those can be easily adapted elsewhere.

i) The Dynamics of Hybrid Organizations: Innovations and Risks for Public Governance by Taco Brandsen, Netherlands.

The Author has focused on emergence of hybrid organizations and a consequent shift from government delivery to other modes. These bodies here evolved through a combination in varying degrees of government, private and community parti-cipation. Some major risks faced in this process are of fi nance, cultural value system and loss of political control. Empirical studies suggest that fi nancial abuse has not increased, although benefi ts are also not clear. Clear Regulatory Framework seems to prevent abuses like corruption. It has also led to innovation and legitimacy. A major factor for success in these organizations is the degree of professionalism, existing in it.

The Paper generated a good deal of discussions starting from the very defi nition of “Hybrid” to its comparative advantages vis- a -vis existing systems. The author made it clear that hybrid concept is simply any model where government, private or community organizations in varying ways and degrees join hands in the arena of public service. He emphasized that such a growth has come about due primarily to the fact that many trained and motivated professionale are investing their time and energy in non government social sectors. The availability of such resources has created a demand for them to get involved with various areas of public administration and governance. Secondly, it is primarily their professionalism and dedication that has created the space for such joint ventures. Thirdly, these new hybrid entities are mostly doing a better job and have gained public confi dence and acceptance. The author also clarifi ed that role of supervising/regulatory bodies must be in place providing a clear framework of regulation, to prevent misuse.

2. The second group of papers dealt with issues concerning climate change and related issues.

a) Climate change and sustainability post Copenhagen: addressing a knowledge gap: Ken Coghill and Colleen Lewis, Australia.

The Author argued that there is a strong need for education and training of Parliamentarians, as they play key legislative role. This has become more and more important, as many parliamentarians and elected politicians are ignorant of scientifi c

facts in this regard. Copenhagen Climate meet did not produce desired results and the outcome was highly fractured and unsatisfactory. The Author has tried to highlight the role of parliamentary bodies and committees, which can act as effective knowledge disseminators. The Author also gave a few examples where such bodies are doing an admirable job. It was followed by a lively discussion. The issues centred around hard political prejudices which prevent politicians to take principled and objective steps. However, there was consensus that efforts must be made at the level of parliamentary bodies to publicize and disseminate objective knowledge and guide legislators in the process. Some suggestions came that parliamentary bodies of various countries can cooperate to facilitate knowledge dissemination.

b) Potential and Limitations of Green Growth Policy of President Lee Myong – bak’s Government from the perspective of Environmental Policy Integration by Jieun Seong, South Korea.

The Paper brought out the steps taken by Korean Government through laying out national agenda on less carbon green growth in 2008 by adopting green technologies and clean energy through overall transition, policy integration and synergy between environment and development. However, evaluation of implementation shows lack of both government leadership and a socially consent procedure, thus greenism may be projected as the main goal, however, its still undermined by economic development. Thus, it is necessary to set a common vision widely shared by different stakeholders and to build participatory governance for it to become permanent phenomenon.

The discussions raised a number of critical issues. While initiatives taken by South Korean Government were impressive, however, it was agreed that grass roots approach to this complex issue is still lacking. Mere top down approach would remain limited and marginal.

3. There were a number of papers on various miscellaneous issues as well.

a) Balanced ScoreCard: A tool to improve Strategic implementation and evaluation in Thai Public Sector by S.Vajirakachorn, Thailand.

The paper argues about the impact of Balanced Scorecard (BSC) on Public Sector. BSC takes into account fi nancial, custo-mer, business indicators etc. It has evolved now as a Strategy Map or Tool. It has proved its effectiveness by transforming Thai Public Sector into more business like, outcome oriented, with increased accountability, effi ciency and transparency. During discussions, some speakers displayed keen interest in this system and felt a need to study it on the spot. It was generally agreed that this Score Card has emerged as a holistic tool and has indeed produced positive results.

b) Cross National Analysis and Korea’s Case Study on Public Information disclosure by Myoung Jin Lee and Jac Moon, South Korea.

The Paper deliberates upon Public Disclosure Act enacted in Korea and assesses its quantitative and qualitative impact. 36 public agencies data for the last 10 years were analysed. The study shows positive changes over a period of time. However, it was also found that some abuses were also visible, which needs crucial adjustments.

In discussions, it was highlighted that “Right to Information” is a very powerful tool in the hands of public and it acts as a catalytic to keep public organizations honest and transparent.

c) A legalistic tradition facing the managerial challenge - The German Case by Veith Mehda, Germany.

The paper analyses the dynamics of legislative tradition versus new public management. One obvious conclusion from German experience is that elaborate and deeply rooted legalistic traditions are stronger than management ideas. However, in few areas, some synergy is developing. A good example is that of adopting private sector style budget accounting for all local governments through legislations.

It led to a very interesting discussion on various issues surrounding the pros and cons of legalistic framework. While it was agreed that a robust legal framework is needed at the level of broad policy formulation yet a great amount of space still remains available for new models of governance and practices. It is also a question of mindset and too much emphasis on laws/rules would not allow new experiments or adapt new methodologies.

4. The papers and attendant discussions pointed towards a few important issues:

I The need for greater democratization and decentralization. II Need for greater professionalism at various levels.

III Need for a strong regulatory framework to prevent abuse and misuse of resources. IV Grass root advocacy and knowledge dissemination for effective climate change. V Direct accountability to people and stakeholders.

Discours liminaires

Keynote speeches

Administrative Reforms of the Unitary State

of the Republic of Indonesia in Manifestation

of Good Governance

E. E. Mangindaan*

Distinguished Presidents of IIAS and IASIA, Distinguished Participants,

Ladies and Gentlemen,

First of all I wish to welcome you all in Bali, the island of Gods, one of the most beautiful and unique (culture and hospitality) tourist attractions. Hopefully you will, all particularly those from other countries, have suffi cient time to enjoy Bali between the tight agenda of the congress.

I would also like to greatly thank and highly appreciate IIAS and IASIA that have entrusted Indonesia as the venue for the IIAS-IASIA joint congress that is very important, strategic and prestigious in Nusa Dua, Bali on 12 – 17 July 2010.

Distinguished Participants, Ladies and Gentlemen,

The comfort that you enjoy now, perhaps you would never had it if it happened twelve years ago, back in 1997/98. Yes, be-cause at that time, the majority of Indonesian people all over the country experiencing long multidimensional crisis particularly in economy. The crisis had made the people to have less trust at its lowest level towards the state institutions and government administration. For a few years during the crisis, millions of Indonesian people found it hard to get a job. Thus the poverty rate raised drastically as a result of poor national economy with the GDP of minus 13 percent, some fi nancial and banking services experienced bancrupcy.

Protests and demonstrations from university students and various walks of life from the society towards the government happened almost every where in all parts of the country that were marked both by variously brutal anarchies and repressive measures from the security offi cers. The inability of the government to stabilize economy, social, politics and national security further encouraged the protests from students and various elements of the society to push the government. At last it reached its peak in May 1998 when President Suharto resigned and then he was replaced by President B.J. Habibie, who was formerly the Vice President.

President Habibie, with reference to the demands of the society’s aspirations, and in accordance with the commitment of the national reform movement, had opened a new chapter of the National Reforms History, amongst others, by enacting Law Number 28 Year 1999 regarding Management of Clean, and Free from Corruption, Collusion and Nepotism State. The Law stipulated general principles of the management of government that were in line with the universal concept to manifest Good Governance as propagated by UNDP and other various international donor institutions. This national policy was then followed by other various operational policies directed towards the arrangement to formulate the management of transparent, accountable, professional, democratic, partisipatory, and lawful government.

The momentum of national reforms in the era of Presiden Habibie administration had also enabled the manifestation of the transformation of the management of the government in the regions from centralistic to decentralized system through devol-ving wide autonomy to the regency/city as well as provincial governments with the enactment of Law Number 22 Year 1999 regarding Regional Government and Law Number 25 year 1999 regarding Financial Balance between Central and Regional Governments. Various stipulations in the law of regional autonomy in many aspects had changed the structure of relationship between central and regional governments, including changing the power of central authority in the región from executive to legislative, so that it enabled the head of a región to be impeached by the regional legislative council when their performance was not accountable. Since the enactment of regional autonomy, there was a sharp increase in the formation of new autono-mous regions as a división of the regency and city. It reached until 500 governmental units of autonoautono-mous regions currently. The progress of decentralized and autonomous regions was appreciated by the World Bank as the “Big Bang” phenomenon.

Distinguished participants, ladies and gentlemen,

The phenomenon of transformation of institutional structure known as the “Big Bang” was not only an achievement of the national history of the state government of the Republic of Indonesia, but it also received an international and global recognition for the determinant commitment of Indonesian nation to conduct changes to realize a governance that was good, clean and free from corruption, collusion and nepotism; a governance that was democratic, decentralized, transparent, accountable, and upheld law supremacy, protected and respected human rights.

In the last decade as a manifestation of democratic reforms there were four national leaders that reigned the country through the most democratic mechanism in the history. The fi rst most democratic general election in the reform era with multiparty

There are still obstacles when head of agencies are not willing to implement e-government. They do not like a changing process and there is a fear of disappearance of revenue from other sources for their public servants. There is still resistance to change from local bureaucrats because multilevel corruption becomes less (Gatra.com, 2003). Unwillingness to change by the leaders and fear of losing additional revenue are still obstacle of e-administration implementation.

Clear vision, mission, strategy, and committed national leaders to e-administration improvement are important, because leaders have a crucial role in deciding e-government implementation. Garnham (2000) cited in Setiyadi (2003) states, non-technical factors, such as vision, mission, goals and strategies conducted with full support of national leaders is more dominant than technical factors (such as computer and telephone) in improving the success of e-administration. In Indonesia’s case, leadership commitment to e-government should be followed by other factors, namely supported ICT infrastructure, cyberspace law enforcement, capable human resources in ICT, and a supportive bureaucratic work culture. Those factors should be in an integrated way improved to gain maximum benefits of e-administration implementation. As in learning and knowing organization, leadership has significant role to improve e-administration. The power of leadership in superior affects systemic mindset of public servants in understanding and serving public. As a systemic point of view, internal and external factors should be considered in improving e-administration implementation. All aspects interconnect to each other.

To reduce digital divide, public organization need more aggressive in training their bureaucrat, as in learning organization. There are aspects need to be fulfill to improve bureaucratic culture and leadership based on knowing and learning organisations, namely:

1. Visioner leader

2. Implementing formal and informal reward 3. Publishing the success staffs

4.Starting with adapting style and culture of organization

As Indonesia e-administration is in dynamic situation with free trade agreement situation, political and economy fluctuation and local values that embedded in every people’ development actions, hence in knowing and learning organization point of view, there is a need of information seeking behavioral pattern that needs to be involve in Indonesian e-administration. Ellis (1989) in Chun Wei Choo (2006:60) states that there are eight behaviors characteristic that need to be fulfill in the information seeking phase, namely:

1. Starting: bureaucrats and society search for information (that their need). 2. Chaining: they have culture to citation or reference among materials they use 3. Browsing: they have culture in searching in an area of potential interest

4. Differentiating: they have culture in using materials when they use information differences for positive reason

5. Monitoring: there is an action of monitoring information for development issue 6. Extracting: they have culture in working systematically to identify any materials

that they need.

7. Verifying: they have culture in eager to check the accuracy of information

8. Ending: they are still have feeling to seek information even at the end of their action, for checking purposes.

As above eight generic characteristics of information seeking behavior is not generally already in Indonesian public organization and society have, however in this digital and e-administration era, those characteristic need to be placed. So as to, Indonesian can improve their welfare, because other countries (developed and developing countries already adopt ICT) already in this or close to this information seeking pattern.

Therefore, Indonesian national leaders and bureaucratic culture need to improve those eight generic characteristics in order Indonesian e-administration in this information era improve. Those items indicate the three major information activities in knowing and learning organization (in order the optimum e-government imperatives can be felt by Indonesian people), namely: sense making, knowledge creation and decision making.

Strategy to improve leadership and bureaucratic culture in the learning and knowing organization is by using The Knowing Cube (Chun Wei Choo, 2006:314). The knowing cube is the model that provides a structure and language that can be used to analyze information use in organization (Chun Wei Choo, 2006:314). According to Chun Wei Choo this model does not suggest universal solutions, but it offers a framework that can help an organization to think through its own strategy to gain better actions to achieve organization’s goals. Overall the knowing cube is not a panacea of all obstacles in ICT adoption (e-administration) in organization.

Factors influence information in organization –sense making, knowledge creation and decision making- are: cognitive, affective and situational (Chun Wei Choo,2006:314). Those factors play out at the individual, group and organizational level (Chun Wei Choo, 2006:314).By using cognitive, affective and situational factors in the sense making, knowledge creation and decision making in e-administration implementation, a leader can has a framework to help organization analyze its management and use of information, including in creating bureaucratic culture in adopting ICT in government’s every day duties.. As cultural knowledge consists of the shared assumptions and beliefs about organization goals, identities, capabilities, customers and competitors (Chun Wei Choo, 2006:196), then cognitive, affective and situational factors are needed to improve bureaucratic culture including in e-administration implementation.

Conclusions

There is still no culture of sharing of information in Indonesian bureaucracy. This remains an obstacle of e-government implementation. Furthermore, Indonesia’s bureaucracy is another drawback of the use of ICT to improve their capacity to serve their citizens. Not all bureaucrats are willing to change their work culture.

Leadership has an important role in creating good vision, mission, and strategy of e-administration implementation in Indonesia. A committed leader to the improvement of e-administration implementation will affect the effectiveness of e-administration implementation. Indonesia still needs a national leader to improve its e-administration implementation.

To enhance the role of leadership and bureaucratic culture in e-administration from the learning and knowing organization, there is a need to fulfill: visioner leader, implementing formal and informal reward, publishing the success staffs and starting with adapting style and culture of organization.

The Knowing Cube is a model of creating a framework of leaders and bureaucratic culture to improve and analyze the use of ICT in government’s duties or e -administration.

References

Chun Wei Choo, 2006, The Knowing organization: How Organizations Use Information to Construct meaning, Creating Knowledge, and Make Decisions, Oxford University Press, New York.

Gronlund, A. (2002), Electronic Government: Design, Applications and Management, Idea Group Publishing, Hershey.

Hughes, O. E. (2003), Public Management & Administration: An Introduction, Palgrave Macmillan, New York.

KDI School of Public Policy & Management, OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation & Development), Korean Ministry of Planning & Budget. (2003),

International Seminar on Open Government, KDI School, OECD, Korean Ministry of Planning & Budget, Korea.

Layne, K. & Lee, J. (2001), “Developing Fully Functional E-government: A Four Stage Model”, Government Information Quarterly, No. 18, pp.122-136.

Laudon, K.C & Laudon, J.P. (1998), Information Systems and the Internet, A Problem-Solving Approach, The Dryden Press, Harcourt Brace College Publishers, Fort Worth, Philadelphia.

Marche, S & McNiven, J.D. (2003), “E-government and E-governance: The Future Isn’t What It Used To Be”, Canadian Journal of Administrative Science, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. 74-86.

OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development). (2003), The E-government Imperative, OECD Publications Services, Paris.

Prins, J.E.J. (Eds). (2001), Designing E-government, On the Crossroads of Technological Innovation and Institutional Change, Kluwer Law International, Netherlands.

Setiadi, Kompas, 16 Mei 2005, Pelayanan Publik di Indonesia, Jakarta.

Sinar Harapan, October 2005, Indonesia Negara Terkorup Ke Enam, Jakarta. Smith, R.F.I, Can E-government Help?, 2005, Monash University, Melbourne.

The Asian Development Bank, E-government to Combat Corruption in the Asia Pacific Region, http://www.adb.org/Governance/egovernmentcorruption.pdf, May 2003, [date accessed: 10 October 2003].

The United Nations, Benchmarking E-government: A Global Perspective,

http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/un/unpan003984.pdf, 2001, [date accessed: 21 January 2003].

The United Nations. (2003), World Public Sector Report 2003: E-government at the Crossroads, The United Nations, New York.

The World Bank, The E-government Handbook for Developing Countries, A Project of InfoDev and The Center for Democracy and Technology,

http://www1.worldbank.org/publicsetor/egov/E-gov%20Handbook.pdf, 2003, [date accessed: 10 November 2003].

Victorian Government, Multi Media Victoria, Putting People at the Centre, Government Innovation Working for Victorians, http://www.mmv.vic.gov.au, 2002, [date accessed: 24 February 2004].

Wahyudi, I.A., Indonesian E-government,

http://www.eov.thai.gov.net/knowledge/eGovernmentInter/INA.ppt, November 2001, [date accessed: 29 January 2003].

Weill, P & Vitale, M.R. (2001), Place to Space, Migrating to eBusiness Models, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, Massachusetts.

Weill dan Ross, (2004), IT Governance, How Top Peformers Manage IT Decision Rights for Superior Results, Harvard Business School Press, Massachusetts.

Wibisono, Y & Sulistyaningsih, W, The Development of E-government in Indonesia,

http://www.uncrd.or.jp/ict/eworkspace/papers/dp_woro.htm, 2002, [date accessed: 31 January 2003].

Yong, J.SL. (Eds.) (2003), Enabling Public Service Innovation in the 21st Century: E-government in Asia, Times Media Private Limited, Singapore.