Analysis of the Implementation of Risk-Mitigation Governance in Public Services Near Yogyakarta

The public service risk mitigation implemented by local governments in Indonesia in tackling potential risks and the impact of development on local areas is important for governance reform. This study aims to analyze the public service risk mitigation carried out by the Government of Kulon Progo Regency in the YIA area. This study is a type of qualitative research with an instrumental case study methodology. Data were collected by analyzing secondary data, as well as primary data through interviews and observations. The analysis was carried out using triangulation techniques, policy adoption, comparison, searching for data explanations and inductive reasoning, and FGDs. The study findings show that risk-mitigation governance can shape public service providers to face potential risks due to reducing negative impacts on citizens’ basic rights and inequalities in the community. The risk-mitigation governance implementation runs led by the commitment of risk-oriented-local leaders, harmonization of regulations has not integrated to local-sector-law, stakeholder involvement with engagement the participation of basic service users, the private sector, as well as university, community representatives, media, and NGOs, with a collaborative and adaptable approach. Compliance and synergy among stakeholders are the most important factors forming public service risk mitigation.

Administration, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, University of Proklamasi 45 Yogyakarta. From January 2021 to December 2022, he has been a consultant for strengthening the implementation capacity of the System on Management of Aspirations and Public Service Complaints as a local coordinator in the Yogyakarta Special Region, which was continued as a consultant on these activities until now on a part-time basis. He holds a Doctorate degree in Management and Public Policy from the Faculty of Social and Political Science, Universitas Gadjah Mada. Idham Ibty has an interest in research and empowering citizen participation in the field of public services, localgovernment and multi-stakeholders collaboration in regional local areas and villages, as well as governance reform in handling potential risks of inequality in society and risks of natural disasters.

Subando Agus Margono is a
public policy lecturer at the Faculty of Social and Political Science, Universitas Gadjah Mada. He completed his bachelor's degree in 1986, master's degree in 1999, and doctorate in 2013 at UGM in the field of Public Administration and Policy.

Introduction
The implementation of public services based on legalsector regulation reform has the aim of achieving the values of protecting the rights of citizens (Bessette & Pitney, 2010), and is oriented towards the interests of achieving equality, sustainability, and mutual growth involving stakeholders (Freeman et al., 2010). The process of managing public services uses a participatory approach, taking sides with the community by looking at the dynamic development of the situation and environmental conditions. This alignment is intended to manage public services in an open, inclusive, accountable manner and the process of monitoring public services based on the influence of trust, satisfaction, and usefulness on the success of public services for citizens (Bessette & Pitney, 2010;Dwiyanto, 2015), in accordance with the preparation of the formation of laws and regulations for the protection of citizens' rights (Indrati, 2020).
In the local development of the Kulon Progo regency, where the Yogyakarta international airport is being built, there are public service sectors such as education, health, social, economic, licensing, and investment as well as the environment, which have potential risks. It is indicated that it can cause citizens' rights to be violated. Kasarda reported that the construction of an international airport is part of the concept of a modern airport city, a combination of the three pillars of infrastructure access with business facilities, transportation interconnections, and logistics facilities that guarantee a sense of security and effectiveness.
This development pattern is a city development strategy in the context of investment and business activation (Kasarda, 2019).
The airport city concept requires risk management which aims to prevent potential losses that cannot be controlled both from the side of the government, business people, and the global user community (Kasarda, 2019). Likewise for service providers and the community around the YIA development area. The local government does not yet have regulations that are directly related. However, the local government's efforts to prevent risks and impacts from developing the area already have activities and actions.
Based on the literature review, the novelty of the importance of public service risk mitigation can be described as follows. The governance of public service risk mitigation is one of the efforts in responding to situations and conditions that are dynamic and tend to change which have the potential to raise various kinds of risks originating from internal and external sources. Internal risk sources are regulation, institutions, human resources, finance, and technology. While external sources are such as natural disasters, non-natural disasters, and social disasters which can have an impact related to the implementation of public services.
The potential and various risks that arise can be used as a background in the formation of public service risk-mitigation governance in identifying and preventing potential risks that arise so that the implementation of public services runs optimally such as health, social-economic, and environment (WHO, 2013). The government as the organizer of public services innovates and transforms following developments and situations that affect risks in public service governance (Dwiyanto, 2017). Furthermore, risk mitigation management, both regarding disasters (Mileti & Peek-Gottschlich, 2001) and private company risk management, requires a systemic and standardized framework so that values, principles, and procedures to achieve public service goals can be realized.
Therefore, risk-mitigation governance includes potential risks from natural and non-natural disasters described in disaster management, responsiveness in the management of disaster risk mitigation caused by nature is influenced by various elements such as preparedness; assessment of vulnerabilities and threats by involving the community and increasing the operational capacity and capability of the organizers and the community (Benson et al., 2007). Meanwhile, non-natural disaster risk mitigation refers to efforts to reduce human vulnerability to non-natural hazards such as social and economic disasters and environmental health, and Abraham added it as well as building individual, community, and state resilience to protect against the impacts of hazards (WHO, 2013). Whereas in realizing risk-mitigation governance, it is closely related to the risk management process which is an organizational policy procedure to manage, monitor and control the organization's exposure to risk (Prioteasa et al., 2018). The application of risk management can provide a broad and varied spectrum for organizations to provide benefits such as reducing income volatility, reducing costs and losses, and improving decision-making processes.
Related to indicative gaps in the mapping of stakeholders, it can be the first stage of assessment in the division of roles and functions of various parties and airport development sectors (Freeman et al., 2010;Kasarda, 2019;Prioteasa et al., 2018). Their attention goes to the stages of implementation and control of potential losses and impacts that occur. There is the issue of the process of establishing policies and adapting management as the core of the organization. As an internal problem is the leadership and apparatus of public service providers, as well as citizens, are direct users of their products/services and sovereign owners. In addition, partner leaders are suppliers of production or service needs, financing and finance, marketing and public relations, to research and development. Meanwhile, the framework of external stakeholders (Freeman et al., 2010) includes interested parties, such as the government, legislature, private sector, mass media, universities, and civil society organizations. The mitigation mapping process requires the participation of interested parties consisting of various groups to identify risk sources to risk factors and find the root of the problem using integrated data (Z. J. Yang et al., 2014). The deliberation process arranged in a series of meetings with various interested parties in public administration is one part of the efforts to realize risk mitigation (Bessette & Pitney, 2010;Martinovski et al., 2005).
There are several factors governing riskmitigation efforts, which are used for this study, namely; (1) risk assessment, which is an effort to identify potential losses or threats caused by nature and non-natural by taking into account the character of the area, quality of government services, availability of infrastructure, demographic aspects by setting priorities and scoring the highest score based on community needs (van Iersel et al., 2017). (2) mapping and participation of stakeholders (Freeman et al., 2010;Prioteasa et al., 2018) as well as the implementation of accountability, transparency, effectiveness, and efficiency which are the responsibility and fulfillment of accountability from the participation of the organizers' interested party services in determining the success of work units at all levels of government (Dwiyanto, 2015). In addition, the elements of accountability, effectiveness, and efficiency are risk-mitigation processes at the level of plan exposure and the need for implementation related to risk-mitigation practices (Prioteasa et al., 2018).

(3) integrated data and
IoT technology, referring to the use of technology, coordination with interested parties, as well as in conducting supervision, risk-mitigation control in developing preparedness and responding to change and uncertainty (Prioteasa et al., 2018). (4) information, communication, and knowledge are useful in identifying risks in the implementation of risk mitigation, the integration of information, communication, and knowledge that is carried out has a great influence on making decisions in risk-mitigation governance (Yang et al., 2014).
(5) human resource competence is part of the aspect of increasing competence and professional behavior of human resources in responding to changing situations with continuous improvement (Prioteasa et al., 2018). (6) supervision and control, aims to ensure that the implementation of the riskmitigation process runs with quality standards that are aligned with the objectives of the risk-mitigation mechanism in accordance with the plans and steps that have been prepared (Prioteasa et al., 2018).
(7) integration in the formulation of policies and regulations, namely the decision-making process that has been determined through the process of involving interested parties (Klaus, 2018). In this case, there is adaptive capacity, namely the combination of attributes, strengths, and resources available to the organizers as applied in disaster management and health emergencies as reported by Iersel et al. (2017), private companies (Prioteasa et al., 2018), as well as in communities and nongovernmental organizations (Scolobig et al., 2016) both systemically and between stakeholders.
One issue of this study is related to YIA and the area development process which has implications for various potential risks. This includes the emergence of social conflicts (Cahyono, 2017), violence against minorities (Ahnaf, 2017), vulnerability to natural disasters such as floods, earthquakes, tsunamis, hurricanes, volcanic eruptions, and weakening of community

Methods
This study aims to explain the risk-mitigation process in the implementation of public services by the Kulon Progo regency government in handling the risks of YIA area development using a qualitative case study method. The data collected comes from the participant of the study in the YIA area in Kulon Progo Regency, which uses a case study approach. In order to achieve it, a database  Table 1.

Source and Title, Content of Legislation
Indications and Criteria driving forces for public service risk mitigation Law Number 25 of 2009 concerning Public Services Establishment of complaint management in each unit of the public service provider; Planning and service pay attention to compliance, prudence, prevention, management of maladministration, service integrity, and financial accountability; community participation, and gender equality and social inclusion affirmation in the implementation of public services; and management of public complaints. Law Number 23 of 2014 concerning Regional Government Education, Health, Social, Economic, Disaster, Safety, Public Order, and Citizen Protection Affairs require planning, budgeting, management, monitoring and evaluation, and community participation with standards. Law Number 37 of 2008 concerning the Ombudsman of the Republic of Indonesia Complaints, aspirations, and community supervision require reporting procedures; Public service supervision standards include reaching the role of people with different economic statuses, geographical location distance, and differences in physical and mental capabilities. Handling natural disasters, non-natural disasters, and social disasters, and community participation in the implementation of preparedness, emergency response, and recovery, including the handling of aid and compensation for all residents as victims. Unified data management; Implementing community-based disaster risk management systems and novelties; early prevention of various risks requires an early warning system, and the use of technology; facility of information on weather anomalies and climate change, coordination of stakeholders and DRR Forums in districts/cities and provinces. Procedures for implementing minimum service standards by: collecting data; need fulfillment calculation of basic services; preparation of plans for the fulfillment of basic services; and implementation of basic service fulfillment; Capacity building with disaster risk-mitigation competence; The disaster risk-mitigation framework requires details on handling natural disasters, epidemics/ epidemics/pandemics of health diseases, social disasters, disasters of economic inequality and environmental damage; engagement, participation, and collaboration with stakeholders. The need for adjustment of development planning with the priority of the national vital object of YIA Airport in Kulon Progo Regency with the existence of vulnerabilities, threats, and potential residual risks as well as the impact of socio-economic and environmental inequality in an integrated manner. Enforcement of supervision requires ethics and accountability of the reporting party; Complaint service facilities by mediating disputes regarding law and mala-administration; Technical standards for basic livelihood protection services; development of means of communication and public consultation, disclosure of information and the participation of all parties to help resolve conflicts in social peace, protect the rights and obligations of citizens; prevent multi-hazard, deal with potential risks.

Source: Analysis Results
causing citizen or community shocks due to unpredictable disasters or the emergence of Working Group is in FGD analysis as reported by Scolobig et al. (2016); also in the protection of livelihoods in agriculture ("bela-beli" as retail-distribution in modern store in collaboration with AlfaMart) including improvement of related basic service regulations. e. Overcoming multi-stakeholder access to the YIA and local-Regional development.
Following the result analysis, it was found the facilitating public consultation as reported by Martinovski et al. (2005)  (4) The user and community also have a role in planning, organizing, controlling and evaluating as reported by Prioteasa et al. (2018) in collaboration with the culture-based organization that develops in the community as social capital in the preparation, formation, and implementation of decisions in efforts to mitigate risks that may occur due to disasters and impacts.
The participation of multi-stakeholders ensures clarity of interests, aspirations, and problems facing the potential for multiple risks.
In the general procedure of implementation in the delivery of public services, it is shown as the main approach for governing risk mitigation by

Public Service Risk-Mitigation Stages
Risk-mitigation implementation is described as a procedure for anticipating, socializing, communicating, empowering, and organizing a series of human activities and resources within the organization of public service providers to achieve the desired value of public services. The risk-mitigation work process carried out by the Regency Government includes the following.

a. Compliance
The main stage is compliance determines the public service risk-mitigation implementations led by the Regency Government in dealing with multi-stakeholders to handle potential risks from disaster shocks and the impact of YIA development. The element of compliance is obeying ethics and rules (Martinovski et al., 2005), and obeying and enforcing regulations (Scolobig et al., 2016). This was carried out by the Regent who continuously conveyed it as an interest orientation to public service organization leaders and apparatus of public service providers. This includes building a common understanding and disseminating integrated information and data.
Therefore, awareness of compliance with regulations is developed for all heads of public service providers or work units. On the other hand, many regulations have not been harmonized.
Coordination of governance integration that contains risk mitigation requires corrective action for policy integration, as well as adaptive in the consistency of behavior and building a teamwork team that is oriented towards riskmitigation implementations as long as policies and procedures are still sectoral.

b. Approach and Role of Stakeholders
The second is the risk-mitigation process using stakeholder involvement that includes a participation approach, information disclosure, and accountability elements. That is also reported by Cook et al. (2016)

c. Early Detection, Risk Assessment and Preparedness
The third is early detection, risk assessment, and preparedness. This is the main stage in implementation to find out early databases on

e. Adaptation of Risk-Mitigation Governance
The fifth is risk-mitigation governance adaptation. The Regency government adjusts activities and finds resources to support the regional budget in tackling the impacts and potential risks and or impacts of YIA development.

Formation and Public Service Capacity
The sixth is the activity of integrating risk mitigation into the process of formulating the policy and local-public service regulations up to the stages of implementation and evaluation.
The policies taken require clarity of context and urgency, parties who initiated them, parties who will benefit, and clear residual risk to be borne, policy goals and objectives, indicators, and activities to achieve performance, budget clarity, and parties who are responsible if risks occur or charged, and the actions and consequences of costs or damages from evaluations performed if they fail. Prioteasa et al., (2018) reported that it is related to taking the possible benefits such as reducing income volatility, lowering cost and losses, increasing profitability and income, improving the decision-making process, a good allocation of resources, and increasing stakeholder satisfaction.
The integration of risk mitigation into the public service management mechanism adopts the process of establishing derivative regulations from the implementation of public service laws and the need for the formation of local sector laws or regional regulations. As described in the sub-chapter adaptation of risk-mitigation management above, regional leaders are willing to take risks to be transferred or exchanged for the benefit of creating service conditions that can generate and improve community trust. Therefore, the need for policy adoption requires procedures by observing governance practices regarding various alternative solutions to public service risk-mitigation problems, such as human resources's involvement in the integration of risk mitigation and strengthening it in the process of the organization.
Meanwhile, a study on risk-mitigation governance shows the importance of consistent compliance in its implementation mechanism, which is explicitly stated as an element that dynamics capacity systematically. This capacity is shown by collaboration amongst stakeholders on their attributes, strengths, and resources available in the community or organization that are used to achieve goals. As a reference in every public administration activity that is in direct contact through services to the community, both in the field of administrative affairs, services, goods, or a combination of these services. With an adaptive nature, the elements can be further elaborated in the application of technical rules, both those concerning systems, procedures, quality standards, reporting requests for information aspirations and complaints, as well as its supervisory. This is a derivative of the value of public services through risk-mitigation governance by local governments which is stated as a measure of the success of the vision and mission as outlined in the regency's Local Midterm Program Planning (RPJMD). The integration of risk mitigation with the procedures for formulating policy has not been regulated. Evidence of community participation in multi-stakeholder collaboration on cross-case data that can build consensus on conflicts of livelihoods, social, population data, and workers from outside the region/foreigners, up to the level of joint decision-making need to use databases on aspirations and public complaints. It is necessary to carry out further studies on procedures with intensity and creativity that are appropriate for the community, and risk-mitigation governance in the public complaint-handling system mandated by regulations with participation engagement.