POLITICAL BUDGET IN ARRANGING LOCAL INCOME AND EXPENDITURE BUDGET OF SUNGAI PENUH TOWN IN 2012
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15575/jispo.v9i1.4479Keywords:
Political Budget, Local Income and Expenditure Budget, Dynamics of PoliticAbstract
Budgeting process is a political activity that is the monitoring tool for society toward government. This process will involve various elements which have an interest in the budget arranging process. They are not only Executive element, but also Legislative. The purpose of this research is to analyze the dynamics of Allocation Budget Contestation of Direct Expenditure in Arranging Local Income and Expenditure Budget (APBD) of Sungai Penuh Town in 2012. This research is descriptive research by using a qualitative approach. The location is chosen to help the researcher to understand the problem of research. The location is determined purposely and based on the problems that happened in the field that related to Political Budget in Arranging Local Income and Expenditure Budget process of Sungai Penuh Town in 2012. The Location is in the Government of Sungai Penuh Town and around the society. Triangulation technique is chosen in this research because it uses some data from interview and documentation. According to Principal and Agent Theory, there are 4 stages in the budgeting process. They are Executive planning, Legislative Approval, Executive Implementation, and Ex-pose Accountability. Based on the result of this research, Dynamics of Allocation Budget Contestation of Direct Expenditure in Local Income and Expenditure Budget of Sungai Penuh Town are: 1) there is a Mutual Coordination Relationship between Executive and Legislative in Arranging Local Income and Expenditure Budget process. It stars from composing General Budget Policies–Provisional Budget Priorities and funding Level (KUA-PPAS) and Integrated Work Plan and Budget (RKA) and the agreement between Mayor and Sungai Penuh Legislative. 2) In interdependence, there are political domination and transaction among institutions in arranging until determining Local Regulation. Domination is between Executive and Legislative. 3) Negotiation (Lobbying) evidence in Executive and Legislative relationship. Legislative doesn’t have an authority to make work plan, but Legislative can change the budget even they can change the program that they want. It makes negative negotiation happens.
References
Abdul, H. (2008). Auditing: Dasar-Dasar Audit Laporan Keuangan. Yogyakarta: UPT STIM YKPN
Abdullah, S., & Asmara, J. A. (2006). Perilaku Oportunistik Legislatif Dalam Penganggaran Daerah. Simposium Nasional Akuntansi, 9, 23-26.
Bogdan, R., & Taylor, R. (1992). Pengantar Metode Kualitatif. Surabaya: Usaha Nasional.
Buku Memori DPRD Kota Sungai Penuh Masa Bhakti 2009-2014.
Buku Rancangan Awal Rencana Pembangunan Jangka Menengah Daerah (RPJMD) Kota Sungai Penuh Tahun 2011-2016.
Dobell, P., & Ulrich, M. (2002). Parliament’s Performance in the Budget Process: A Case Study. Policy Matters 3(2): 1-24.
Eko, S. (2008). Pro Poor Budgeting: Politik Baru Reformasi Anggaran Daerah Untuk Pengurangan Kemiskinan. Working Paper, IV, June. 2008. Yogyakarta: Institute For Research and Empowernment (IRE).
Halim, A. (2012). Teori, Konsep dan Aplikasi Akuntansi Sektor Publik. Jakarta: Salemba Empat.
Haris, S. (2007). Desentralisasi dan Otonomi Daerah : Desentralisasi Demokratisasi & Akuntabilitas Pemerintah Daerah. Jakarta: LIPI Press.
Herzon, Y. (2011). Politik Anggaran: Studi Tentang Proses Perumusan Kebijakan Anggaran Belanja Langsung SKPD Dalam Penyusunan APBD Tahun 2011 Di Kabupaten Kerinci Provinsi Jambi. Yogyakarta: Universitas Gadjah Mada.
Keefer, P., & Khemani, S. (2003). The political economy of public expenditures. World Bank, Washington, DC.
Mardiasmo. (2002). Otonomi dan Manajemen Keuangan Daerah. Yogyakarta: Andi Offset.
Moleong, L. J. (2007). Metodologi Penelitian Kualitatif. Bandung: PT. Remaja Rosdakarya.
Peraturan Daerah Kota Sungai Penuh Nomor 04 Tahun 2012 Tentang Anggaran Pendapatan Dan Belanja Daerah Kota Sungai Penuh Tahun Anggaran 2012.
Pratiwi, R. N. (2012). Politisasi Anggaran Sektor Publik. Interaktif: Jurnal Ilmu-Ilmu Sosial, 1(2).
Seabright, P. (1996). Accountability and Decentralisation in Government: An Incomplete Contracts Model. European Economic Review, 40: 61–89.
Sugiyono. (2012). Metode penelitian kombinasi (Mixed Methods). Bandung: Alfabeta.
Sulton, S. (2015). Siklus Politik Anggaran di Kabupaten Ponorogo Studi Kasus Dana Hibah dan Bantuan Sosial APBD 2013. Jurnal ARISTO, 5.
Von Hagen, J. (2002). Fiscal Rules, Fiscal Institutions, and Fiscal Performance. The Economic and Social Review, 33: 263–84.
Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia No 25 Tahun 2004 Tentang Sistem Perencanaan Pembangunan Nasional.
Wildavsky, A. (2012). Dinamika Proses Politik Anggaran. Yogyakarta: Matapena Consultindo.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish their manuscripts in JISPO agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal;
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal; and
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their websites) after publication process, or prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
