Second Level Coping Mechanism: A Study on Problem Solving Measures Taken by Street-Level Bureaucrats Concerning Agrarian Policy in Cipari, Cilacap

Main Article Content

Deden Dani Saleh Wahyudi Kumorotomo Agustinus Subarsono Bambang Hudayana

Abstract

This article concerns the efforts carried out by lower level bureaucrats in order to implement their decisions. Prior studies generally describe the decision of street-level bureaucrats (SLBs) as decisions that have already been implemented. There have not been many studies describing the efforts of SLBs in realizing their decisions. Thus, this study intends to examine the efforts undertaken by the lowest level bureaucrats to implement the decisions they have made. The main reference used to analyze this phenomenon is by using the structural approach and the DNA of negotiation. To describe this phenomenon, the study explored a case of program implementation on land redistribution in the Cipari District, Cilacap Regency in 2010. Study results show that power, strategy, and distributive negotiation tactic, as well as personal values are key elements in implementing decisions. The results indicate that discretion is not always applicable since there are times when discretion is limited and thus it must be developed. Because this study relates to the success or failure of policy implementation, knowledge about ways of developing discretion becomes a substantial part in optimally developing public policy.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
SALEH, Deden Dani et al. Second Level Coping Mechanism: A Study on Problem Solving Measures Taken by Street-Level Bureaucrats Concerning Agrarian Policy in Cipari, Cilacap. Policy & Governance Review, [S.l.], v. 3, n. 2, p. 142-156, june 2019. ISSN 2580-4820. Available at: <https://journal.iapa.or.id/pgr/article/view/133>. Date accessed: 20 july 2019. doi: https://doi.org/10.30589/pgr.v3i2.133.
Section
Articles

References

Alfredson, T., & Cungu, A. (2008). Negotiation Theory and Practice: A Review of the Literature. Roma: EASYPol. doi: 10.1007/BF01000607

Anagnostopoulos, D. (2003). The New Accountability, Student Failure, and Teachers’ Work in Urban High Schools. Educational Policy, 17(1), 119–135. doi: 10.1177/0895904803254481

Bachriadi, D. (2012). Gerakan Sosial Pedesaan sebagai Politik: Sebuah Kacamata Teoritik. In D. Bachriadi (Ed.), Dari Lokal ke Nasional kembali ke Lokal: Perjuangan Hak Atas Tanah di Indonesia. Bandung: Agrarian Resource Center.

Baker, G. (2002). Civil Society and Democratic Theory: Alternative Voice. London & New York: Routledge Taylor and Francis Group.

Baviskar, S. (2018). Who Creams? Explaining the Classroom Cream-Skimming Behavior of School Teachers from a Street-Level Bureaucracy Perspective. International Public Management Journal, 0(0), 000. doi: 10.1080/10967494.2018.1478918

Dubois, V. (2010). The Bureaucrat and the Poor: Encounters in French welfare Offices. Surreys, United Kingdom: Ashgate Publishing.

Eden, C., & Ackermann, F. (2014). ‘Joined-Up’ Policy-Making: Group Decision and Negotiation Practice. Group Decision and Negotiation, 23(6), 1385–1401. doi: 10.1007/s10726-013-9375-1

Fells, R. (2009). Effective Negotiation From Research to Results. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511841491

Fisher, R. (1983). Negotiating Power: Getting and Using Influence. American Behavioral Scientist, 27(2), 149–166. doi: 10.1177/000276483027002004

Fuller, B. W. (2013). Disagreement and Alternative Dispute Resolution in the Policy Process. In E. Araral.Jr, S. Fritzen, M. Howlett, M. Ramesh, & X. Wu (Eds.), Routledge Handbook of Public Policy (pp. 347–360). New York: Routledge Taylor and Francis Group.

Gofen, A. (2014). Mind the Gap: Dimensions and Influence of Street-Level Divergence. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 24(2), 473–493. doi: 10.1093/jopart/mut037

Hupe, P., & Hill, M. (2007). Street-level Bureaucracy and Public Accountability. Public Administration, 85(2), 279–299.

Johansson. (2012). Negotiating Bureaucrats. Public Administration, 90(4), 1032–1047. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9299.2012.02025.x

Kantor Staf Presiden. (2016). Strategi Nasional Pelaksanaan Reforma Agraria 2016 - 2019. Jakarta: Kantor Staf Presiden.

Križ, K., & Skivenes, M. (2012). How child Welfare Workers Perceive Their Work with Undocumented Immigrant Families: An Explorative Study of Challenges and Coping Strategies. Children and Youth Services Review, 34(4), 790–797. doi: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2012.01.004

Lewicki, R. J., Saunder, D. M., Barry, B., & Saunders, D. M. (2007). Negotiation Readings, Exercises, and Cases Seventh Edition (Seventh Ed). New York: McGraw-Hill Education.

Lewicki, R., Saunders, D., & Barry, B. (2007). Essential of Negotiation. McGraw-Hill Irwin.

Lipsky, M. (2010). Street-Level Bureaucracy: Dilemma of the Individual in Public Services. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Macéa, C. M. (2014). Applying Negotiation Skills in the Design of Public Policies: Analysis of the City of São Paulo’ s Invoice Program. Sao Paulo.

Maynard-Moody, S., & Musheno, M. (2003). Cops, Teachers, Counselors: Stories Form the Front Lines of Public Service. Michigan: The University of Michigan Press.

Ott, U. F., Prowse, P., Fells, R., & Rogers, H. (2016). The DNA of Negotiations as a Set Theoretic Concept: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis. Journal of Business Research, 69(9), 3561–3571. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.01.007

Overbeck, J. R., & Kim, Y. K. (2013). Power, Status, and Influence in Negotiation. In M. Olekalns & W. L. Adair (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Negotiation. Cheltenham UK & Northampton MA, USA: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.

Pfetsch, F. R., & Landau, A. (2000). Symmetry and Asymmetry in International Negotiations. International Negotiation, 5(1), 21–42. doi: 10.1163/15718060020848631

Pratikno. (2007). Governance dan Krisis teori Organisasi. Jurnal Kebijakan Dan Administrasi Publik, 11(2), 121–138.

Pratikno. (2008). Manajemen Jaringan dalam Perspektif Strukturasi. Jurnal Kebijakan Dan Administrasi Publik, 12(1), 1–19.

Rahmawati, D. (2003). Gerakan Petani dalam Konteks Masyarakat Sipil Indonesia: Studi Kasus Organisasi Petani Serikat Tani Merdeka (SeTam). Jurnal Ilmu Sosial Dan Ilmu Politik, 6(3), 329–358.

Sager, F., Thomann, E., Zollinger, C., Der, N. Van, Sager, F., . . . Mavrot, C. (2014). Street-Level Bureaucrats and New Modes of Governance: How Conflicting Roles Affect the Implementation of the Swiss Ordinance on Veternary Medicinal Products. Public Management Review, 16(4), 481–502.

Saner, R. (2004). The Expert Negotiator: Strategy, Tactics, Motivation, Behaviour, Leadership (2nd ed.). Leiden - Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publisher.

Santoso, J. (2016). Gerakan Petani dalam Menuntut Hak Atas Tanah. Yogyakarta: Universitas Gadjah Mada.

Seva, M. (2015). The Decisive Role of Street-Level Bureaucrats in Environmental Management. Swedia: Lulea University of Technology.

Susskind, L. (2006). Arguing, Bargaining, and Getting Agreement. In M. Moran, M. Rein, & R. E. Goodin (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Public Policy (pp. 269–295). New York: Oxford University Press.

Tummers, L., & Bekkers, V. (2012). Discretion and its Effects: Analyzing the Experiences of Street-Level Bureaucrats during Policy Implementation. In H. Saetren & P. Hupe (Eds.), PSG XIII: On Public Policy (pp. 5–8). Bergen, Norway: Dept. of Public Administration Erasmus University Rotterdam.

Ury, W. (2007). Getting Pass No: Negotiating in Difficult Situation (Revised). New York - Toronto - London - Sidney - Auckland: Bantam Books. Retrieved from https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=sS2amtSiHYQC&pg=GBS.PR2

Wagenaar, H. (2004). “Knowing” the Rules: Administrative Work as Practice. Public Administration Review, 64(6), 643–656. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6210.2004.00412.x

Weingart, L. R., & Olekalns, M. (2004). Communication Process in Negotiation: Frequencies, Sequencies, and Phase. In M. M. Gelfand & J. M. Brett (Eds.), The Handbook of Negotiation Culture. New York: Stanford Business Books.

Zartman, I. W. (1997). The Structuralist Dilemma in Negotiation. Research on Negotiations in Organizations, 6(January), 227–245.