Collaborative Governance Actor in the Revitalization Program of Old Banten Religious Tourism Area

This study discusses the interactions of collaborative governance actors in the revitalization program of the Banten Religious Tourism Area. The purpose of this study is to show the factors that influence the cooperation of local governments as well as analysis of the interaction between local government in the Revitalization Program of the Banten Religious Area. The research method is qualitative descriptive with interview and observation data collection techniques. Data in this study were obtained through primary data and secondary data. The results showed that various factors such as commitment, identification of priority needs, the process of integration and harmonization, participatory and institutional models supported the success of regional cooperation in the revitalization program. The interaction between regional cooperation policy actors in the Revitalization Program of the Old Banten Tourism Area in Serang City at the implementation level has run well, although there are still problems, which include interactions that are indirectly influenced by systems such as politics, economic and social systems. Problems also include the behavior of elites and officials who lean on certain groups.


Introduction
The policy of decentralization in the form of local autonomy in Indonesia, which guarantees  be inappropriate to create equitable growth and independence among low-income groups or communities in developing countries (Rondinelli, Nellis, & Cheema, 1983).
The implementation of development which focuses on efforts to reduce central government initiatives needs to be reduced by giving autonomy to local governments in decisionmaking and prioritizing the interests of planning development programs in the region. One of the efforts in achieving the success of development programs in the regions is to encourage collaborative governance. This is inseparable from the dynamics and public demands for quality regional development that can have an impact on society's welfare. Through local government cooperation based on considerations of synergy and mutual benefit, it is expected to create efficiency and effectiveness of public services (besides, collaborative governance becomes important). In addition, it is as a preference of the limitations possessed by each region in an effort to accelerate regional development goals. Collaborative governance policy is needed because of the lack of coordination between regional governments in the implementation of regional development, geographical and administrative similarities and authority over areas directly adjacent to the Banten religious tourism area in the use of natural resources and border areas.
Therefore, based on these factors, collaborative governance is carried out. According to Scott & Thomas (2016) public managers employ collaborative governance-as a process box and cooperation tool to achieve policy objectives. As a result, the decision to utilize resources through the process box and cooperation tools can be understood for strategic purposes.
Collaborative governance has become a general term in the public administration literature, which is described as a reaction to traditional planning and top-down oriented policy formulation approaches with a focus on technocratic oriented and unorganized governance. This notion fits perfectly with criticism of traditional Public Administration and the shift from government to government (Buuren, 2009b). In the past, government was the main driver in public policy (problemsolving, policymaking and service delivery), but now more actors are involved, from small nonprofit organizations at the local level to large multinational organizations where many groups have become an important part in the Goldsmith & Eggers policy process (2004) in Sisto (2018). This requires a shift from traditional top-down ways of solving problems to more cooperative ways of solving problems, which are often referred to as a shift from government to governance (Klijn & Koppenjan, 2016) as quoted in Sisto (2018).
Nevertheless, objectively, regional cooperation in the revitalization program of the Old Banten religious tourism area still faces various problems, such as the pattern and relationship between policy actors that are still not optimal.
There is still overlapping authority between policy stakeholders, especially at the level of technical bureaucracy. There is also lack of visitor access to space public areas, such as unrepresentative parking areas, the slow process of relocation of street vendors (PKL) from sterile areas of religious tourism to the already provided areas, namely the Tourism Support Areas (KWP). It also involves the absence of zoning systems of cultural heritage areas as sterile place and historic sites that must be protected and preserved. of roads that support the assistance of cultural heritage tourism areas, structuring and controlling space for relocation of street vendors and the construction of souvenirs and souvenir centers around the tourist area road. The formulation of the problem is to analyze the factors that influence the success of regional cooperation and how the interaction patterns of regional cooperation policy actors in the Revitalization Program of the Old Banten Religious Tourism Area in Serang City is.

Collaborative Governance
For more than two decades, the collaborative governance system has attracted the attention of academics and practitioners in various disciplines.
Collaborative governance has become a popular topic in the field of Public Administration and much of the literature has been dedicated to research (Ansell & Gash, 2007;Ali-khan & Mulvihill, 2008;Buuren, 2009;Emerson & Nabatchi, 2015;Morse et al., 2011;Matei & Irimia, 2014;Doberstein, 2016;Rigg & Mahony, 2013;Amsler, 2016;Emerson & Gerlak, 2018). In line with this, collaborative governance has also become a popular topic in public policy and public management literature (Scott & Thomas, 2016). Collaborative approaches (such as public-private partnerships, multi-sectoral publicpolicy networks, networks, and multi-stakeholder networks) are increasingly recommended for structuring greater government and addressing complex social and political problems, such as the environment and natural resources (Cash et al., 2006;Sandstr & Bj, 2017).
Collaborative Governance is a regulation in which one or several public institutions directly involve formal stakeholders in a collective, consensus-oriented, and deliberative decisionmaking process and aims to create or implement public policy programs or public assets (Emerson, Nabatchi, & Balogh, 2011). This means the role of the government is no longer provider, but facilitator and policymaker. The role of government will be effective if the output of public policies can adapt and innovate on various changes to encourage cooporation between various interests (Sururi, 2018). However, collaboration generally starts with instrumental goals, some of which have very broad goals. For example, in some locations, agents conduct social cooperation and joint economic development strategies with the aim of providing direction for individuals to collaborate (Huxham, Vangen, & Eden, 2007) According to Howlett, Ramesh, Weimer and Vining, in principle, policy actors are those who are always and must be involved in every process of public policy analysis, both functioning as formulators and pressure groups that are always active and proactive in carrying out interaction and interrelation in the context of public policy analysis (Rijal, Madani, & Fatmawati, 2013). In other studies, Rutland & Aylett (2008) suggest conducting analysis through the Actor-Network-Theory (ANT) theory approach and governance.
The first approach offers an understanding of how actors act collectively and the second approach is how the state tries to achieve its goals by directing people's behavior. in achieving goals and at least two factors influence the success of cooperation, namely the dimensions of complexity and structural diversity (Huxham et al., 2007). In addition, Siddiki, Kim, & Leach (2017) said that there are at least ten partnership cooperation policies that provide recommendations on fisheries policies. The results showed that the diversity of beliefs among the participants was positively related to relational learning and the high trust supported a positive impact on rational learning. Based on two things in support of programs that are instructional, the capacity and learning cooperation can explain that the program runs in an integrated manner with diverse rules (Emerson & Gerlak, 2018).
According to Ansell & Gash (2007) collaborative governance is a type of governance in which public and private actors work collectively in different ways and use certain processes to establish laws and rules for the provision of public goods. Meanwhile, there are many forms of collaboration involving non-governmental actors.
The researchers define specific roles for public institutions, using the term "public body." The concern is to include public institutions such as bureaucracy, courts, legislative bodies, and other government bodies in local and state level. Next, Ansell and Gash outlined six criteria, namely: 1) forums are initiated by public institutions, 2) participants in the forum include actors outside government, 3) participants are directly involved in decision-making and are not merely "consulted" by public bodies, 4) the forum is officially held and meets collectively, 5) the forum aims to make decisions based on consensus, and 6) the focus of collaboration is on public policy or public management (Ansell & Gash, 2007).  (Zaman, 2007).
Citizen participation is a complex process that is contested and limited to the space of citizenship that cannot be accessed equally.
Citizenship is influenced by a number of local political and socio-cultural factors such as history, religion, ethnicity, language, culture and economy.
However, a collaborative governance model with a public-private partnership structure, has provided opportunities for minority citizens to get a voice in reshaping urban space on a local scale (Ghose, 2005), and encouraging changes in organizational culture to better understand collaborative governance must continue. In addition to changing the culture of the organization, other suggestions include broadening the analysis that leads to the decision to collaborate or not, to include factors such as the context, goals or mission of the collaboration, member selection and capacity development, motivation and commitment of collaborators, collaboration structure and governance, strengths in collaboration, accountability, communication, perceived legitimacy, trust, and information technology (Leary, 2014). In addition, the revitalization program was not meant as the end of the policy but was an ongoing program.

Interaction of Policy Actor in
As stated by Zaman (2007)  in completing the revitalization program. The reason behind the regional cooperation is the limitation of government resources; the government does not have all the information, power and budget needed for environmental management, so it depends on other stakeholders (Huxham et al., 2007).
Second, Anticipated Reaction, interaction that is direct but formed due to the structure of power and control over resources in certain situations.
The magnitude of the potential and local resources of Old Banten, which are geographically located in    (Gonzalez, Fakhari, & Busemeyer, 2017). It can be argued that dynamic decisions are not focused on only one activity but on several objectives (Brehmer, 1992). Based on the explanation of the results and discussion described above, the expected implication of this research is the sustainability of regional cooperation by developing policy innovations and encouraging regional cooperation bodies that can solve problems together. In addition, the context of decision-making needs a dynamic mechanism through decision-making to solve technical problems.

Conclusion
The success of regional cooperation is influenced by four important factors, namely the commitment of regional leaders, identification of priority needs, the process of integration and harmonization, and participatory and institutional ypes of dynamic policy interactions are needed as an alternative to decision-making four previous types of interactions experience deadlock in decision-making. Dynamic involve choices made in an environment that can change exogenously or as a function us choices where decisions are connected sequentially to each other so that the impact tion at a particular time directly or indirectly influences future actions (Gonzalez, & Busemeyer, 2017). It can be argued that dynamic decisions are not focused on only ity but on several objectives (Brehmer, 1992). herefore, dynamic decisions require flexibility in each process and stage, especially for es that involve policy actors and public participation so that they are expected to be vercome the complexity of the problem of revitalizing the Old Banten Religious Region. Identification of public participants requires three conditions that are key to g a shared agenda, namely: (a) focus on the problem being targeted; (b) champions to process, provide support and ensure inclusiveness; and (c) members' willingness to the table." Narrowing the focus of the initiative is seen as an important fact (Salignac, arjolin, & Adams, 2018). Furthermore, participants have a strong view of what they o be a key success factor, and this forms three broad categories. In the end, it can be d that the type of interaction of dynamic decisions can be the preference of policy d public participation in collaborative governance for strategic decision-making. he results of research conducted by Fliervoet & Born (2016) states that the ent of collaborative governance undertaken by policy actors from the government acy needs to develop the ongoing cooperative relationships and require time and effort gnition of actors outside the government as partners cooperation. The results of the ducted by Ran & Qi (2018) state that exploring sources of strength and mutual trust in tion can contribute to the formation of collective goals, group consensus and shared ncreased participant compliance with other partners, and increased collaboration y. ased on the explanation of the results and discussion described above, the expected on of this research is the sustainability of regional cooperation by developing policy