Quo Vadis Bureaucracy Reform Of Indonesia: Overview Of Bureaucratic Reform Phase l Vs Phase II
- DOI
- 10.2991/aapa-18.2018.35How to use a DOI?
- Keywords
- reform, bureaucracy, indonesia
- Abstract
Bureaucracy reform has become a necessity in many countries (including Indonesia) and in line with the administrative paradigm shift from Old Public Administration to New Public Services. Indonesia’s Bureaucratic reform (BR) in 2010 has become a milestone for the government to build good governance, and done by all ministries/agencies. For that purpose, Grand Design Bureaucracy Reform takes time from 2010- 2025, where every five years drawn up Road Map, detailed plan of reform each stage. The goal of BR is the realization of a clean and free government of corruption, collusion, and nepotism, the realization of improved public services quality, and the increasing capacity and accountability of bureaucratic performance. BR has passed phase I (2010 - 2014), but raises some problem to be solved that are; bureaucracy that has not been completely clean and accountable, bureaucracy that has not been effective and efficient, and public services that have not had the expected quality. Almost seven years of BR has been running and entering period II (2015 - 2019), but not showing a passable change. Based on the findings of ICW in 2016, corruption figures of Civil Servants reached 47% or 515 people became suspects. During the reform period, ASN was most caught up in corruption, involving 3,417 people. In terms of service quality, the Ombudsman Indonesia received complaints during 2016, of which complained 1,200 agencies about their services. This paper intends to criticize the journey of bureaucratic reform during the phase I and the current period, rated from the dimensions of target achievement indicators and achievements. This article was written based on literature review and secondary data analysis on the phase I of BR report, and data on the achievement of the current year reform report. The data were compared and then analyzed. The BR in the phase I refer to national and global indicators, namely indexes of corruption perception, government effectiveness and competitiveness, and in phase II only refers to national indicators. The results found that the phase I bureaucracy reform has not been able to demonstrate good reform performance since it has not met the target of all indicators. Phase II used indicator is more internally, but not yet measured its success. BR in the phase I and phase II are more reporting and do not touch on the essence of the bureaucracy itself, bureaucratic reform is more of a "reform bureaucratization" and still relies on the approach of reporting in evaluating its success
- Copyright
- © 2018, the Authors. Published by Atlantis Press.
- Open Access
- This is an open access article distributed under the CC BY-NC license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/).
Cite this article
TY - CONF AU - Mantrini Indri Hapsari AU - Ismi Dwi Astuti Nurhaeni AU - Sudarmo Sudarmo PY - 2018/03 DA - 2018/03 TI - Quo Vadis Bureaucracy Reform Of Indonesia: Overview Of Bureaucratic Reform Phase l Vs Phase II BT - Proceedings of the 2018 Annual Conference of Asian Association for Public Administration: "Reinventing Public Administration in a Globalized World: A Non-Western Perspective" (AAPA 2018) PB - Atlantis Press SP - 371 EP - 381 SN - 2352-5398 UR - https://doi.org/10.2991/aapa-18.2018.35 DO - 10.2991/aapa-18.2018.35 ID - Hapsari2018/03 ER -