Rural electrification in Indonesia : policy implementation in theory and practice

Abstract

The study of policy implementation in developed countries is relatively new, virtually starting with the major Wildavsky and Pressman study of the Oakland project (1971)- and even less has been done so far in relation to Third World countries. This thesis is an attempt to throw light on the degree to which implementation of a government policy in Indonesia conforms with the various objectives of the government in formulating such a policy and what problems emerge in the implementation process. In Chapter 2 and 3, the formulation and the implementation of the rural electrification program in Indonesia, and East Java in particular, is investigated. In order to understand the process of implementation of the program at the lower level and to examine what happened to the program when it reached down to the target group, this study has looked at the two different rural areas (one agricultural and one industrial in character) of Pare and Pandaan, which have both had long experience of electricity service (Chapter 4). This study has found that the length of supply of electricity seems to bear no relationship at all to the growth of industry. There is very little evidence to support the proposition that the program has improved income, created employment opportunities or stimulated much industrialization in rural areas. Instead, in the absence of many household activities in the area concerned, electrification has stimulated higher consumerism among electricity consumers. In Pare, the existence of a variety of household activities prior to electrification has helped to increase slightly the average power consumption for productive activities, while in Pandaan the household consumers mostly used the power for consumption purposes. Moreover, the failure to take into account the existing unequal distribution of economic and social power in rural communities has added to greater inequalities (Chapter 4, 5 and 6). The main conclusion to this study is that planning should not be regarded as a process that is entirely separate from its implementation: on the contrary, the principles of good public policy call for constant monitoring, feedback and adjustment of both objectives, priorities and the mechanisms for implementation during the course of the program, not just at its conclusion. Moreover, the degree to which a program has achieved its objectives ought to be assessed on the basis of the quality as well as the quantity of the outcomes, not solely on the basis of certain numerical targets achieved. A preoccupation with achieving targets frequently gives rise to deviations from the various main objectives initially intended by the original policy makers.