Ensuring Social Security for All: Key Considerations for Policy Options in Indonesia 240 Ensuring Social Security for All: Key Considerations for Policy Options in Indonesia

Social security is an essential instrument for protecting people from falling into poverty due to economic shocks in the event of sickness, work-accident, old age, and death of income producers. Indonesia introduced Law no. 40 Year 2004 on National Social Security System to implement mandatory social security programs for all. Despite the compulsory participation for all, the national social security system's coverage continues to be low and mostly relies on government aids. This study explores and analyzes key factors that need to be considered during the policy options formulation process to ensure the intended policy can support the national social security system's implementation. The findings show the need to build an integrated ecosystem model that is critical for social security implementation by considering the combined use of decision-making approaches and five consideration factors during the policy options formulation. An integrated ecosystem model contributes better policy options formulation that can support the effective implementation of the national social security programs while minimizing implementation risks.

Introduction system affects people's lives considerably; thus, it has a significant role in promoting equality (Aaron, 1982). Other countries define social security differently (Pieters, 2006); no international law clearly defines social security. For example, the European Union member countries use social protection, including voluntary schemes not set up under legislation. United Kingdom's social security refers only to statutory benefits in cash; while the term social services refer to social security; health, education, and housing services, as well as provisions for social work and social welfare. In the United States, social security refers to the federal social insurance system (OASDI). In Denmark and the United Kingdom, social security aims to reduce poverty and promote income maintenance. In other countries, such as France, social security aims for income maintenance, separate from measures to deal with poverty.
In Indonesia, social security refers to the national contributory social insurance programs that aim to guarantee the basic needs of a decent life for each participant and family member (Article 3 of SJSN Law) and reduce economic insecurity (Rejda, 2012) due to financial risks (i.e., loss of income due to sickness, old age, or unemployment). The government enforces the participation of employers and affected individuals. The Indonesia social security system is separate from social safety net programs that are mostly social assistance or cash transfer, or in-kind programs. However, the government also contributes to the national social security system for the poor and vulnerable for the national social health insurance program (Article 1 point 5 and Article 14 of SJSN Law). This article focuses on social security and will not delve into social assistance in detail. Wood and Gough (2006) argue that social policies are the outcome of a country or region-specific political settlement. Despite rejecting the idea of one size fits all, Wood and Gough (2006) argue a "moral hierarchy of welfare regime forms ranging from insecurity to informal insecurity to formal security," but this can vary depending on the circumstances of a country or region's welfare regime; and different welfare mixes may help achieve a universal goal while remaining realistic. Holliday (2000) proposes adding productivist welfare regimes for East Asian countries after studying welfare regime approaches exercised by Japan, Singapore, Hong Kong, South Korea, and Taiwan; he argues that welfare regimes in those countries do not belong to a conservativeliberal-social democratic typology of welfare regimes as described by Esping-Andersen (1990) in The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism.
The productivist welfare regimes combine informal and formal welfare (Wood & Gough, 2006). In a productivist welfare regime, social policy is subordinate to economic policy (Holliday, 2000). It is concentrated on social investment, notably in education and basic health rather in Decision Science from Tokyo Institute of Technology in 1995 and his B.Eng. from the Department of Industrial Engineering, Bandung Institute of Technology in 1992. Professor Sarjono Putro has published in several international journals, has presented several papers at various international conferences in Japan, Singapore, China, and Vietnam, and has written chapters in Springer Books. He has conducted consultations and training for state and private companies and governments on, but not limited to, negotiation, systems modelling for policy development, agent-based modeling, strategic decision making, systems modeling, and decision science. His research interests include systems modelling in policy development, systems thinking, systems approach in decision making, negotiation, service sciences, and agent-based modeling.
Anggoro, Yudo is the Director of Jakarta Campus as well as the Director of Center for Policy and Public Management at School of Business and Management, Bandung Institute of Technology. He obtained his PhD in Public Policy with minors in Industrial Policy and Economic Competitiveness from the University of North Carolina, Charlotte, U.S. in 2015 under Fulbright Scholarship. Dr. Anggoro completed his bachelor's degree in industrial engineering at Bandung Institute of Technology in 2004 and master's degree in management science from School of Business and Management, Bandung Institute of Technology, and graduated as best graduate with cum laude honor in 2009. Dr. Anggoro's research interests are economic competitiveness, industrial policy, transportation and infrastructure policy, public management, regional economic development, government performance, leadership, public economics, and strategic management. He previously served as Audit and GCG Committee at PT. Transportasi Jakarta (TransJakarta). than social protection (Wood & Gough, 2006).
In a productivist welfare regime, the social right, that is to ensure the fulfillment of basic needs, is minimal and its extensions linked to productivity activity (Holliday, 2000).
The category of welfare regimes in Indonesia has been evolving since the insecurity welfare regime during the Soekarno era from the date of independence in 1966 to the informal security welfare regime after the Soekarno era in 1966 until now (Sumarto, 2017). The types of welfare regimes have also changed three times. The precarious welfare regime type was adopted during the Soekarno era. It was followed by productivist welfare regime that was targeted to specific groups during the Soeharto era from 1966 to 1998 (Sumarto, 2017), which showed the application of occupational pension programs for selected groups including state apparatus and private sector workers. After the economic crisis and during Reformation era from 1998 to 2014, the welfare regime changed to the informal-liberal regime that combined informal support and the introduction of social safety nets (Sumarto, 2017) that was mostly social assistance in the form of cash transfers or in-kind transfers for targeted recipients and existing occupational pension programs for selected groups. And now the transition to informal-quasi-inclusive regimes beginning in 2014 (Sumarto, 2017) (Pisani et al., 2016). Pisani et al. (2016) argue that to achieve sustainable health coverage for all Indonesians, the government should also weigh in on technical considerations. A study conducted by Fossati (2016) also shows that collaboration within central and local governments is essential as analysis of the implementation of Jamkesmas in Indonesian districts shows that local politicians are responsive to their low-income constituents and increased political competition improves the delivery of social services (Fossati, 2016).   The Indonesian government has moved toward evidence-based policymaking, including national social security policies. Although policies may not be fully decided based on a cost-benefit review, the policy decision-makers are aware of each policy option's economic impact. In the end, a policy might be a product of compromise, but the best solution is decided at a certain point in time.

The incrementalism model assumes that
decision-making is not entirely rational but still maintains the assumption to develop policy solutions to identify problems. The trade-off is common to achieve a politically feasible outcome, resulting in incremental change (Lindblom, 1959). Varied interests and multiple actors/ stakeholders involved in the national social security system agenda have made consensusbuilding an essential factor for coming up with a final policy decision that most stakeholders can accept. As such, incremental policy changes are more likely to be accepted to maintain a balance of interests among stakeholders. Howlett et al. (2009) and Zahariadis (2014) said that different stakeholders, with various competing interests and agendas, may raise issues and offer possible solutions for their gains, resulting in the policy's chaotic development. Kingdon (2003) later conceptualized the extended garbage can model to explain how problems were identified and brought to policymakers' attention at the agendasetting stage. As a mandatory program, the national social security policy applies to all Indonesians and foreigners staying in Indonesia for more than six months; which means the policy will impact central and local governments, the private sector, the public sector, and the public. These stakeholders might have different interests and try to influence the policy process by providing input and analysis from their perspectives.
The advocacy coalition framework (ACF) model assumes that policy actors seek to make rational decisions, though often, the rationality with which decisions are made is hindered by various complex factors. Sabatier et al. (1993Sabatier et al. ( , 2014 explain that the ACF model argues that the policy process is a long-term negotiation between coalitions of interests, policy brokers, and political institutions that share a set of fundamental beliefs. These coalitions compete and interact to influence policy change. Saunders et al. (2015) argue that the research philosophy option ultimately influences data collection mechanisms and represents the According to pragmatism research philosophy, the research question is the most critical determinant of the research philosophy (Saunders et al., 2015).

Methods
Pragmatists use a method or combination of methods that advance specific research in the best possible manner. The characteristics of the pragmatism paradigm follow research problems and questions, also known as a research model of State of the Art, and the researcher focuses on practical solutions and outcomes (Saunders et al., 2015). The abductive approach is the most relevant for day-to-day policymaking, including policy option formulation, which functions best with information at hand, which is often incomplete.

Selection of Respondents
The authors use purposive sampling for this study as it involves a small sample (Neuman, 2007), considering the nature of the policymaking process for the national social security programs in Indonesia. The authors use their professional judgment to select respondents that can best answer the research question (Saunders et al., 2015) and apply the following criteria for selecting respondents: length of time working on social security agenda, their role and involvement (direct and indirect) in the national social security policy and implementation, their roles in the national social security policymaking process, current job position, and organization. In this study, six respondents were interviewed: government officers, quasi-government officers, labor union representatives, and public policy experts. One out of the six interviewees was referred by another interviewee. The authors contacted the respondents to confirm their availability, willingness, and consent to be interviewed. Table   1 shows the information about the respondents.

Data collection: semi-structured in-depth interview and secondary data
Data collection was conducted between For credibility purposes, the author provides complete and transparent information on research purpose, data gathering, and research process.

Data analysis
The authors transcribed data collected from recorded interviews. The interview transcripts were then analyzed, coded, and grouped by themes using qualitative data analysis software. Analysis continued throughout the writing process.
The authors also analyzed related regulations, available government documents, reports, presentations, and websites describing the national social security system's implementation and its progress and challenges. The authors conducted a gap analysis to see differences between actual implementation and the initial objective of national social security programs.
The authors also discussed the findings with two interviewees to get further feedback on the results; this was also part of the triangulation process needed to ensure the reliability and validity of the findings.

Results and Discussion
The general findings of the in-depth interviews with the six respondents and the gap analysis are that each stakeholder has the right to express their opinion and that the policy should capture those varied interests among stakeholders.

Policy Intention
The national social security system's However, what specific individuals choose to do, especially how institutional leaders decide to behave, will inevitably affect Social Security decisions (Arnold, 1998). Disharmony between regulations and SJSN Law exists; it affects the implementation of the national social security programs, diverting the system from its initial goals and creating frustration among stakeholders involved in implementing the national social security system. 'In my opinion, the existing regulations are in place, it is good. However, d e c i s i o n -m a ke r s w i t h l i m i te d knowledge of the system may say, "Oh, this is not the time." I think this is the problem. Increasing understanding in terms of substance is critical; education to policymakers needs to be done. Concerning best practices, for example, during this pandemic, what was the best, what other countries did. Then the integration between regulations and between agencies needs to be improved. Some egocentric things should be eliminated; there is no need to be afraid of losing their authority. So that this country has better social security so that overlapping and disharmony do not occur.'  The lesson learned from this case is that the garbage can policy approach has hindered the government in meeting the old-age savings program's initial goal. Therefore, if the garbage can approach is used, it may need to be combined with a rational approach to ensure that the policy can be sustained and the policy goals are met.
Nevertheless, the policy aims to provide guidance during certain times; therefore, it may be adjusted to suit environmental changes; hence rational approach.
'…the regulations follow the times and so on as well as the conditions that occur.' (R-6, male, labor union). 'In the past, it was rare for the government to correct its policies; once published, it would be exercised and maintained for a long time. Now, we saw policy changes, either due to rapid changes that occur or public response. In my opinion, this is a significant difference. We can also see this happen to the national social security policy. Some policies may no longer be suitable, and we feel the need to change them and so on, and we try to make changes gradually, including the regulations.' (R-4, male, government officers).

Managing Multiple Stakeholders' Interests
The government implemented the National Social Security System in 2014; however, social security is still considered a new concept in

Coverage of old-age savings programs by region, 2020
Source: BPJS Ketenagakerjaan, 2020 As a form of public policy, the National Social Security System policy may affect multiple stakeholders with varied interests; they include government, business associations, workers, public, and parliament. The absence of early political analysis has led to unfortunate outcomes and drives reform of the national agenda (Arnold, 1998); hence understanding stakeholders' influence and interest are essential to secure continued support and involvement of various stakeholders on the National Social Security System policy and implementation.
'Social security policies have many stakeholders. It is common to see a tug of war among stakeholders. However, the key is to build commitment first.' (R-3, male, public policy expert).
'….in the 90s, I noticed that the policy process was not as participatory as it is now. Mostly, it was the government who knew the problem and its solutions…..
After 1998 we carried out reforms that changed the policy process; the participation of various parties was more pronounced, including public debates in the mass media. There were many good comments and feedback that were also considered in the formulation of a policy. In my opinion, this change is fundamental because from how it used to be one-way, now there is feedback and correction.' (R-6, male, government officer).
Parliament, as legislators, have an essential role in shaping social security policy (Pieters, 2006), particularly statutory law in Indonesia.

Furthermore, the legislators' buy-in might also
affect the policy implementation on the ground since they also represent their local constituents. 'Our position is unique. We are not given any authority in both SJSN Law and BPJS Law. However, sometimes we are asked to introduce or propose certain regulations. I am confused because the national social security council should have done this.' (R-2, male, government officer).
Nevertheless, most agree that the regulatory aspect containing the institutional arrangement should be used as a reminder to set aside the sectoral ego and point out each stakeholder's authority and territory.
'The national social security council is an independent agency that has to coordinate the implementation of national social security programs. This Council needs to be repositioned as originally designed in SJSN Law.' (R-6, male, labor union).
'So, follow the articles on the law, show what the authority of the national social security council is and what should be done.' (R-3, male, public policy expert).
'…the roles of the technical ministries, social security administrators, and external supervisors, especially the national social security council, in policymaking, are stated in the regulations; thus, I believe all parties are subject to the regulations with regards to their respective roles, functions, and authorities. The technical ministry indeed initiated the policy regarding employment social security with several stakeholders. Studies and research usually come from us, but we usually must go to the national social security council because the Council's role is to provide a guideline for social security policymaking. The Council has capability; ministries also use studies conducted by the national social security council as a basis for policymaking.' (R-5, male, quasi-government officer).
This finding shows that transparent institutional governance is essential to avoid duplication or confusion. Regulation supporting transparent institutional governance is needed; hence, harmonizing existing policies and regulations is crucial for governance.

Operational
Social security is considered a new concept for most Indonesians, where culturally, they  The rational approach should be adopted by realizing that sub-national and local governments should be given more roles to support national social security programs. The support from the local governments should not be limited to only creating awareness and providing public education but also in ensuring the supply side, expanding participation, ensuring compliance among the system members, and, to some extent, providing financing for the vulnerable in their region.

Evidence-based Policy
Designing policy and financing on the National Social Security System requires balancing social logic and financial logic. Social logic refers to the level of benefits to meet people's needs. As the National Social Security System is a mandatory contributory system, participant contribution to the system should finance the promised benefit; thus, financial logic applies.
The contribution amount should not only be set to match the promised benefits, but it should also be affordable to all and consider the stakeholders' willingness to pay (Government, firms, workers, public) into the system to maintain the system's financial sustainability in short-, medium-and long-term. Besides, total labor cost, job creation, and Indonesia's competitive advantages and attractiveness to investors are also critical factors for deciding the level of contribution required. 'We build a credible, well-thought, and well-informed policy based on an objective way of thinking, fairness, and so on. There will always be a challenge to convince others that it is a better policy.' (R-4, male, government officer) 'In my opinion, there should be a stronger foundation academically on problem and solution so that we can defend policy scientifically when the political influence is strong, for example, in determining pricing, which can cause the program to be unsustainable. Another factor is the rationality, efficiency, and effectiveness of the policy, whether the policy can be implemented immediately or, for example, years later to allow preparation for the socialization, system, and budget. Finally, the direct and indirect impacts of a policy, which must be measured.' (R-5, male, quasi-government officer) Balancing social logic and financial logic is not easy as it involves competing agendas, and to some extent, conflicting interests. On the one hand, people support the idea of having social security benefits for all. On the other hand, people may also be reluctant to contribute to funding the promised benefits. Balancing social and financial objectives has remained an issue, often resulting in the mismatch between the contribution (low contribution rate) and the benefit (comprehensive) contributing to the programs' future financial sustainability.
' A leader often makes a policy that may be different from what many think, but as long as the leader firms and is aware of what the consequences are, and the leader commits to guarding so that its implementation is following what he thinks; and then if there is something that needs to be corrected, the leader does not hesitate to fix it or move a little for obvious reasons; if these things are consistently applied, a credible view of the policy will emerge, not for individual interests but the interests of the wider community.
We do not defend policy blindly; we are ready to adjust, and so on. If we consistently build policies with this method, credibility will emerge from current and future policymakers.'

Resources
As stated in SJSN Law, the National Social Security System adopts the social insurance concept, which means the system depends on the benefits' contributions. There is also an element of tax financing, in which the government contributes to the system for the poor and vulnerable (Article 14 of SJSN Law). There has been an ongoing debate on financing the system for all either by mandatory contribution or tax financing. Those in favor of contributions argued that benefits linked to contributions might prevent the idea of overpromised benefits since it may affect the level of contribution required. The contribution also means the system guarantees benefit payments to people.
On the other hand, those who favor tax financing argued that if a contribution rate is applied to a specific limit of income, higher salary workers will pay less; the burden will be on lowincome or poor workers. This group also argues on the need to cover the informal workers through tax financing to join the system. However, informal sector workers range from professional experts doing freelance work and low-income workers with uncertain jobs. Hence the next debate is whether it should be targeted or universally funded. This group believes that the tax-financing approach may force the government to prioritize public policy expenditure hence encourage the government to coordinate social security and other services.
Tax-financing capacity depends upon the government's social policy, fiscal space, and development priority. Heller (2005) defines fiscal space as "the availability of budgetary room that allows a government to provide resources for the desired purpose without any prejudice to the sustainability of a government's financial position." With the current fiscal constraint and low tax base in Indonesia, it might be challenging to apply full tax financing unless the government refocuses its budget from any other necessary development priorities. However, this is not easy since Indonesia is also in dire need to provide interventions to avoid the middle-income trap by providing further policy intervention needed. Therefore, the finding shows that a rational approach should always balance financial and social goals to ensure the sustainability of the national social security programs in the future.

Implementation in Dynamic Setting
Discussion on welfare regimes, social security, and the findings concerning social security implementation challenges discussed in this section show that formulating social security policy options in dynamic settings requires a social policy perspective and a strategic management aspect of the social policy implementation to minimize risks. The public's potential positive

Conclusion
The findings show that Indonesia's constant evolution of its welfare regime creates uncertainty in social security policy implementation. While Indonesia continues adjusting its social security policy to match its political, social, and economic goals, the policymakers will need to ensure that the social security policy formulation process considers an integrated ecosystem model to minimize unintended risks that may jeopardize the social security system in the future. The integrated ecosystem model provides a new methodology to make the policy option formulation process more effective and provides a "know-how" approach that achieves the technical goal, which is an implementable policy. The findings may contribute to better policy options formulation that can support the effective implementation of the national social security programs in the future.