Search

This study analyzes and identifies two perspectives that are interrelated, namely the practice of deliberation and collaborative governance. The concept of deliberation in principle requires the achievement of democratic substance in collective decision-making. Meanwhile, collaborative governance is an achievement in finding the best way to implement a policy. This study used a qualitative approach to collect and analyze data. The results of this study explain that the practice of deliberation has not been able to provide a sense of justice for the actors involved in expressing opinions regarding the policy issue of handling slum settlements on riverbanks in Banjarmasin City. This is because the practice of deliberation in collaborative governance is not carried out collectively. Then, collaborative governance in the policy of handling slum settlements on river banks in Banjarmasin City brings together the interests of each actor, which lasts throughout the process of formulating and implementing policies. The practice of deliberation causes opportunities to mutually accommodate each actor's interests to occur more easily. As with collaboration between actors, it is influenced by several phenomena, namely actors having different interests and visions, which causes debates between actors, thereby hindering the deliberation process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

COVID‐19 has revealed the policy capacity of some governance institutions, both resilience and vulnerability. Hence, this circumstance has demanded public administration scholars and practitioners to rethink the existing governance practices, particularly in making effective crisis‐related policies. This paper reviewed primary and secondary studies exploring the application of policy capacity competencies in facilitating COVID‐19 handling in Asia. In achieving so, we did a systematic literature review of relevant studies published between January and October 2020. Applying the agreed search term to several databases, we found 2541 studies, while merely 30 were included for review. Findings from the studies are predominantly closely linked to operational capacity (n = 21). Other studies are related to political and analytical capacity (n = 14 and 7, retrospectively). We found that there are some dilemmas and inadequacy of understanding concerning the role of features in certain capacities (such as technology use versus individual privacy, the paradox of trust and legitimacy, or centralisation versus decentralisation), particularly in the time of crisis, which is a calling for future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The openness of the investment in Indonesia has become one of the main focuses in supporting the Nawa Cita Program by Jokowi and Jusuf Kalla. Unfortunately, the increase in investment is not balanced with the number of poor urban and rural population in Indonesia. Therefore, social inequality in Indonesia still tends to be quite large. One form of investment is the development of supermarkets. The goal of this study is to analyze the implementation of partnership policies between supermarkets and SME with a case study approach of supermarket chains with SME in Sidoarjo Town, East Java Province. This study uses a qualitative approach, through in-depth interviews on SME who partner with supermarkets in Sidoarjo. The results showed that the government-led partnership policy to improve the economy of society and overcome the gap on the growth of supermarkets did not run optimally. Thus, the Government's goal to create a mutually beneficial business partnership between supermarkets and SME can not be achieved, so that there needs to be an evaluation on the partnership policy made by the Government further so that the partnership policy can be successful.