ABSTRAK
Key words: implementation, policy content, context of implementation, participation, coproduction
Lebak District enacted Local Regulation Number 6/2004 on Transparency and Participation in Governance and Development in Lebak District. This local regulation is considered to be a regulation on transparency and participation that is rather comprehensive. This research aimed to examine the implementation of this local regulation as a policy, particularly on the provisions on participation, and explore the factors explaining the way the implementation was conducted. A case study was undertaken on the implementation of the participation stipulations in the drafting of Local Budget 2008 of Lebak District. This research was an exploratory research with a descriptive qualitative approach aiming to describe the issues examined based on the data collected. Data collection methods used were guided interviews, desk study and non-structured observation. The interviews engaged key informants from different stakeholders of participation and budget drafting issues in Lebak District. Local Regulation 6/2004 was enacted with the definition of participation covering coproduction, a concept where citizens work with the government to deliver public services. Research results show that the implementation of participation policy in Lebak District during the local budget drafting for 2008 was not yet effective. Implementation of the participation policy in general goes very slowly – as policy was not yet implemented as designed – but there was an indication that things are moving forward, as there was an accumulation of learning and preparation leading to the stages as stipulated by the regulation. The two dimensions examined to explain the implementation process, i.e. the content of policy and the policy implementation context, are considered to have contributed to the way the implementation has been taking place. From the content of policy, the relatively dominant group that have an interest in participation agenda and see the benefit of the policy contributed to the fact the implementation is imminent. However, the scale of change envisaged, the disperse sites of decision making, the quantity of policy implementers and the amount of resources to be committed did not allow the implementation to take place faster. Similarly, from the implementation context, progressive actors supporting the participation agenda are dispersed in many different institutions. However, local political situation requires the stakeholders to be prudent in demanding for faster policy implementation so as to avoid backlash.
