การเมืองของกระบวนการกําหนดนโยบายน้ำของอินโดนีเซีย กรณีศึกษาบริเวณ Kuta และ Sanur ในจังหวัดบาหลี ประเทศอินโดนีเซีย

Tanaporn Nithiprit

doi:10.14456/rcmrj.2022.252663

Authors

Tanaporn Nithiprit Faculty of Political Science, Chulalongkorn University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.14456/rcmrj.2022.252663

Keywords:

Water resource management, Deliberative democracy, Community Participation

Abstract

This research aimed to investigate the conflicts over water resources in the Kuta and Sanur area in Bali, Indonesia. After administrative decentralization, local governments are required to become more self-reliant and generate income by themselves. Such income may be overly concerned with the interests of the government, so it affects both the community and the stakeholders. The objectives of this thesis were divided into 3 items, namely: 1) To study the evolution of water resource allocation in local areas of Indonesia, 2) To analyze the influence of actors involved in the allocation of water resources, and 3) To analyze the model of the deliberative democracy process used to correct the allocation of water resources in local areas of Indonesia. This research is based on the hypothesis of institutional design in the management of water resources, including Community Opinion Process. Stakeholder groups, involved in a deliberative democracy or relationship building of a horizontal nature which was more potent than a vertical nature, were more likely to reduce conflicts in the allocation of water resources in the area.

The results indicated that in the context of the Kuta and Sanur area in Bali, Indonesia, despite the initial inequality, the interests of the villagers in areas where water resources were severely scarce were continually considered in the negotiating forum to find a solution together. Thus, the hypothesis that the elements leading to equitable allocation of water resources and enabling the local population of Kuta and Sanur in Bali, Indonesia to have equal access to water without water scarcity would include: The first feature was that the local government listens to the opinions of the community and the second feature was the process of resolving conflicts characterized by deliberative democracy. The first and the second features were evident from the establishment of Water Management Committees (WMCs). The third feature was the cooperation of the business group in formulating water resource management policies that can be seen from the cooperation model on groundwater protection, which was cooperation between regional and local authorities.

References

Ardika, I., Wayan, I., Parimartha, G., & Agung, A., Wirawan, B. (2013). Sejarah Bali: Dari Pra-Sejarah Hingga Modern. Denpasar: Udayana University Press.

Arnscheidt, J. (2009). ‘Debating’ Nature Conservation: Policy, Law and Practice in Indonesia. Leiden: Leiden University Press.

Baiocchi, G. (2003). Participation, Activism, and Politics: The Porto Alegre Experiment. In Fung, Archon and Wright, Erik Olin. ed. 2003. Deepening Democracy. pp. 47-70. London: Verso.

Beetham, D. (2006). Democracy, a Beginner's Guide. Oxford: One world.

Bevir, M. (2011). Governance as Theory, Practice, and Dilemma. In The Sage Handbook of Governance, ed. Mark Bevir, 1–16. Los Angeles: Sage.

Blank, Y., & Rosen-Zvi, I., (2010). The Spatial Turn in Legal Theory. HAGAR Studies in Culture, Polity and Identities, 10(1), 37–60.

Blaug, R., & Schwarzmantel, J. (1988). Democracy: A Reader. George Square, Edinburgh : Edinburgh University Press. pp. 6-8.

Blomley, N. (1994). Law, Space and the Geographies of Power. New York: Guilford Press.

Blomquist, W., & Schlager, E. (2005). Political Pitfalls of Integrated Watershed Management. In Society & Natural Resources: An International Journal, 18(2), 101-117.

Bohman, J. (1996). Public Deliberation: Pluralism, Complexity and Democracy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Cited in Owen, David S. 2001. "Review Essay Deliberative Democracy." Philosophy & Social Criticism, 27(5), 117-124.

Bohman, J., & William, R. (1997). Deliberative Democracy: Essays on Reason and Politics. Cambridge, Massachusetts: the MIT Press.

Bowman, M. (2002). The Ramsar Convention on Wetlands: Has It Made a Difference? Yearbook of International Co-operation on Environment and Development 2002/2003.

Brown, R. (2005). Impediments to Integrated Urban Stormwater Management: The Need for Institutional Reform. In Environmental Management, 36(3), 455-468.

Brown, R.R., Ashley, R., & Farrelly, M.A. (2011). Political and professional agency entrapment: an agenda for urban water research. In Water Resources Management, 25(15), 4037-4050.

Castro, J.E., Kaika, M., & Swyngedouw, E. (2003). London: Structural Continuities and Institutional Change in Water Management. In European Planning Studies, 11(3), 283-298.

Desa, P. (2007). Profil Desa Pecatu, Kecamatan Kuta Selatan, Kabupaten Badung, Provinsi Bali, Tahun 2008. Jakarta: Departemen Dalam Negeri, Dirjen Pemberdayaan Masyarakat dan Desa.

Kumler. L. M., & Lemos, M.C. (2008). Managing waters of the Paraíba do Sul river basin, Brazil: a case study in institutional change and social learning. In Ecology and Society, 13(2), 22.

Laurajane, S. (2006). Uses of Heritage. London: Routledge.

Lees, S. H. (2001). Kicking Off the Kaiko: Instability, Opportunism, and Crisis in Ecological Anthropology. In Ecology and the Sacred: Engaging the Anthropology of Roy A. Rappaport, ed. E. Messer and M. Lambek, 49–63. Michigan: University of Michigan Press.

Lefebvre, H. (1991). Production of Space. Oxford: Blackwell.

Lemos, M. C., & Oliveira, J.L.F. (2004). Can Water Reform Survive Politics? Institutional Change and River Basin Management in Ceara´, Northeast Brazil. In World Development, 32(12), 2121-2137.

Lewis, J., & Belinda, L. (2009). Bali’s Silent Crisis: Desire, Tragedy, and Transition. Lanham and Plymouth: Lexington Books.

Liefrinck, F.A. (1969). Rice Cultivation in Northern Bali. In Bali: Further Studies in Life, Thought, and Ritual, 3–4. The Hague: W. Van Hoeve.