Advertisement

Managing Development Assistance to Improve Fiscal Decentralization in Indonesia

  • Heru SubiyantoroEmail author
Article
  • 3 Downloads

Abstract

Empirical evidence and argument is presented concerning the benefits of multi-donor facilities as a mode of development assistance within the field of decentralisation in Indonesia. Principal benefits include the quality and relevance of support provided, combined with significant economies of scale for donor partners and for government. Most important of all, however, is the fact that assistance provided under such facilities is genuinely government-led, making the multi-donor facility a preferred mode of aid delivery and management for the Government of Indonesia. Future success will hinge on the willingness of all development partners to participate constructively in such facilities; to exercise patience as well as commitment in order to give them sufficient time to work; and to be prepared to advance incrementally in ways that are not always in the precise direction or at a pace that conform neatly to individual or institutional predilections.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Cox, Kevin R. and Andrew Mair. 1988. “Locality and Community in the Politics of Local Economic Development,” Annals of the Association of American Geographers, Vol. 78, No. 2 pp. 307–325. Stable URL: https://doi.org/www.jstor.org/stable/2563810. Accessed: 05/09/2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Haider, Donald H. 1981. “Balancing the Federal Budget: The Intergovernmental Casualty and Opportunity”, Publius, Vol. 11, No. 3/4, The State of American Federalism, pp. 21–38; Stable URL: https://doi.org/www.jstor.org/stable/3329896. Accessed: 15/09/2009.Google Scholar
  3. Hedge, David M. 1983. “Fiscal Dependency and the State Budget Process”, The Journal of Politics, Vol. 45, No. 1, pp. 198–208. Stable URL: https://doi.org/www.jstor.org/stable/2130331. Accessed: 05/09/2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Marlow, Michael L. 1988. “Fiscal Decentralization and Government Size”, Public Choice, Vol. 56, No. 3, pp. 259–269. Stable URL: https://doi.org/www.jstor.org/stable/30024865. Accessed: 05/09/2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Martinez-Vazquez, Jorge and Bob Searle (eds.) 2007. Fiscal Equalization: Challleges in the Design of Intergovernmental Transfers, Springer, New York.Google Scholar
  6. Methé, David T. and James L. Perry. 1980. “The Impacts of Collective Bargaining on Local Government Services: A Review of Research”, Public Administration Review, Vol. 40, No. 4 pp. 359–371. Stable URL: https://doi.org/www.jstor.org/stable/3110262. Accessed: 28/08/2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Sharpe, L. J. 1980. “Is There a Fiscal Crisis in Western European Local Government?”, International Political Science Review / Revue internationale de science politique, Vol. 1, No. 2, Recent Changes in Urban Politics: National-Local Linkages pp. 203–226; Stable URL: https://doi.org/www.jstor.org/stable/1600993. Accessed: 28/08/2009.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Japan Economic Policy Association (JEPA) 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Secretary of the Directorate General of Fiscal BalanceMinistry of FinanceIndonesia

Personalised recommendations