Phenomenological Studies of Grounded Participation: Important Contributions to Meaningful Programs?


 
 
Development program should result in resolution for public problems. There is a need to harmonize the longterm program (i.e. RPJMD) with its budget allocation. It found that some regions did not have those synchronized programmed, including Kabupaten Blitar. The spirit of increasing public wealth did not follow with the budget that tends to allocate in routine expenses. In that, this research is encouraged to see how program development practices in Blitar through Musrenbang. The results show that the Musrenbang already covered those kinds of public participation. Because the guidelines already mentioned it in its guiding book. So, they obey it. Unfortunately, when the proposal is submitted to the higher level, i.e. Musrenbang Kabupaten, the program are not inline with a longterm plan. This condition may cause the proposal are rejected or even accepted it would not solve the fundamental problems identified by the government 
 
 



INTRODUCTION
The economic growth model according to Rostow explains that one element of economic growth is capital formation in the form of machinery, factories, highways, and other infrastructure facilities. Gunalp and Gur (2002) research on 34 developing countries shows the results that the size of the government as indicated by total government spending has a positive and significant influence on economic growth. The results of research conducted by several researchers still give mixed results. Harianto and Adi (2007) researched districts/cities in Java and Bali in the 2001-2004 period stating that capital expenditure had a positive and significant effect on changes in PAD. Nugroho and Rohman (2012) give the opposite results. Capital expenditure has a negative influence on the growth of local government performance in the province of Central Java.
Theoretically, economic and community welfare indicators that can be influenced by local governments through spending policies are unemployment, poverty, and economic growth. Capital expenditure plus goods and services expenditure is government expenditure which has a significant influence on the economic growth of an area other than the private, household and foreign sectors. Therefore, the greater the value of capital expenditure and the expenditure of goods and services the better the effect on economic growth (DJPK, 2011).
Whereas capital expenditure leads to investment, namely expenditures made in the context of capital formation which in nature adds assets in the form of (1) land capital expenditure, (2) capital expenditure for equipment and machinery, (3) capital and building capital expenditure, (4) capital expenditure roads, irrigation and networks, and (5) other physical capital expenditure. With investments made by both the government and the private sector (national and foreign private) business opportunities arise, the purchasing power of the people will increase so that their demand for goods and services also increases, triggering producers to invest. In turn, investment pumps up purchasing power, so that people's purchasing power increases again and so on. Thus, increasing investment will increase national income.
According to the 2014 LAKIP published by the Blitar Regency BPPKAD, 78% of the total regional expenditure is for personnel expenditure, the rest is for goods and services and capital expenditure. Blitar Regency has the main target of development as stated in the Medium Term Development Plan (RPJM) is the welfare of the population. The welfare of the population will be achieved if the government can solve economic problems, where infrastructure plays an important role in economic development.
This phenomenon raises a question: how is the process of public participation in the preparation of the Blitar Regency Government budget so that there is a mismatch between the main objectives of the RPJM and the proportion of goods and services expenditure and capital expenditure compared to employee expenditure?

Participatory Governance
Participatory Governance, according to Muluk (2005:58), gives a role to the government to protect every community from injustice or pressure from other members of the community and is tasked with enforcing the administration of justice with certainty. Musgrave and Musgrave (1991) in Muluk (2005:58) further explain the role of government develops into an allocation function. This function shows the role of government to overcome the failure of market mechanisms by providing public goods or allocating all available resources so that they can be used both as private and public goods and determine the composition of public goods. Fung and Wright (2003:15) state that participatory government is empowering a group of people to participate in making sensible decisions through deliberation and discussion. Participatory Government Empowerment has conceptual values which include participatory empowerment, deliberation and feasibility. The principles of participatory Governance are (1) Practical orientation. The hallmark of government participation is that all developing governance structures are directed at solving public problems; (2) Bottom-Up Participation. Participation that solicits proposals or aspirations from ordinary citizens to apply knowledge, intelligence, and interest to the formulation of solutions, (3) Generation of Consultative Solutions. Deliberation is the third typical value of empowered participatory Governance. Decision making during deliberations, participants, listen and consider alternative options.
Participatory government is the implementation of community participation in development planning. The goal of participatory government is to obtain accurate information from the community in order to realize appropriate regional development.
Stages of the implementation of the community participation based development planning process must include a program based on facts in the community. The program needs to take into account the ability of the community in terms of technical, economic and social aspects. The program must consider elements of group interest in society. Programs need to take into account the ability of the community in terms of technical, economic and social. The program must include elements of groups interest, community participation in the program implementation, involving existing organizations, load long-term and short-term, provide facilities for evaluation, and take into account conditions money, time, tools and energy available (Cahyono, 2006).

Integration of Development Planning and Budgeting
Planning and budgeting are a series of interrelated activities (Sumardi, 2010). Every plan must focus on the existing fiscal capacity. So it needs to be considered in each application and the consequences of the integration of planning and budgeting activities. Based on the Departemen Dalam Negeri SE no. 050 of 2005, four crucial aspects need to consider in integrating planning and budgeting activities are as follows: (1) At the beginning of the preparation, the government should identify the number of financial resources or indicative budget. since it is a factor considered in starting in the discussion in the village development planning meetings, subdistricts, the Regional Work Unit Work Forum, and district/city and provincial development planning meetings.
(2) The priority of activities for each SKPD is the same concept since the results of the Regional Development Budget Work Plan (RKPD), SKPD Work Plan (Renja) to SKPD Budget Work Plan (RKA). For this reason, the RKA format can already be used as an attachment to the Renja SKPD, although it may not be complete.
(3) In addition to fiscal capacity (for the fiscal year), the RKPD and SKPD plan designs are prepared based on the results of district/city or provincial development planning meetings. The results of the SKPD forum need to be the primary reference, if not the only reference in the formulation and discussion of policies general budget, and SKPD budget priorities and ceilings.
(4) The DPRD or regional government understands the activity of escorting the consistency of priority activities resulting from planning for participation in the budgeting process.
(5) Every participant in planning must have access to every output of the stages of the planning and budgeting process. If there are inconsistencies in the material/substances of the budgeting with the results of participatory planning, the drafting team provides an official explanation from the government and DPRD (the principle of transparency and accountability in good governance).

METHOD
Research questions that seek to answer the question "how" is more appropriate using a qualitative approach. Therefore, researchers used in-depth interview techniques to explore informants' perceptions related to the musrenbang process from the village level to the district level.
The selection of informants uses a stratified purposeful sampling technique in order to provide an overview of the participation process according to the point of view of each subcategory that has different characteristics. The selection of informants classifies under three categories of informants, namely local government informants (as the organizer of the musrenbang and budget users), DPRD (as a legislative body that authorizes local government budgets) and the community (as the primary stakeholder).
A semi-structured interview used to keep an interview on track. This study uses Fung and Wright (2003) approach that employs 3 (three) important indicators of public participation. First, practical orientation (or Musrenbang) directed to overcome practical problems for the development of a region's development. Second, Bottom-Up participation (participation that solicits proposals or aspirations from ordinary citizens to apply knowledge, intelligence, and interest to the formulation of solutions). Third, a process of generation of consultative solutions (a deliberation to provide/create solutions in general).
The number of informants in each category was determined until it reached the saturation point, where no more responses or new answers obtained from the results of the interview. A triangulation procedure is performed to obtain trustworthiness. It conducts by comparing responses from each category, between informant in the same subcategory, thus verify the informant's response with observations in the field. The first informant is obtained by determining specific criteria. For the subcategory of Regional Government, the specified criteria are the highest responsibility in the regional government. Then the first informant is the head of Bapeda.
Field observations are needed so that researchers better understand the complexities that may occur during the study. The researcher was directly involved in the musrenbang process as a participant even though he did not get an official invitation to feel the same atmosphere as other musrenbang participants.
The question begins by asking their general opinion about the importance of musrenbang for them. It is essential to know the purpose of attending the Musrenbang. The next question will flow following what they think about the Musrenbang and how they see the implementation of the Musrenbang. Thus each informant may go through different questions from one informant to another.

First Phenomenon: Practically Oriented Musrenbang
The characteristic of participatory government is that all government structures are directed at solving public problems (Fung and Wright, 2003). Thus the Musrenbang is directed to overcome practical problems for the development of a region. The Musrenbang process in Blitar District is directed and starts from the village level called the MusrenbangDes continues with the District Musrenbang to the District Musrenbang.

Form of musrenbang proposal.
Based on the guidebook, Musrenbang covers aspects of health, education, infrastructure, environment, economy, cooperatives and government. The results of the Village Musrenbang in the form of report proposals or program proposals from the results of village deliberations in the MusrenbangDes. The proposals from the village already cover the above aspects, although it is not guaranteed that the proposal will become a program.
"…..for example there are proposals for the construction of the Polindes, the construction of roads" (Asep: Kaur Ekobang Desa Kandangan).
Asep explained that each village needed to submit proposals covering the fields of health, education, infrastructure, environment and economy, cooperatives, agriculture, and so on under the Musrenbang manual. In the Musrenbang manual, the types of proposals are provided. However, each village does not have to submit proposals for each of its fields but instead submit proposals based on needs at the village level.
"There are currently 3 (three) priority proposals, namely education, health and facilities and infrastructure. The current priority in the health sector is the Posyandu Revitalization. For other fields, it is also important but not yet a priority "(M. Taufik: Head of Dandong Village) To overcome practical problems in an area, Musrenbang not only provides a point of proposal form that covers several aspects but also invites participants from various fields of representation so that the proposal is representative and following direct facts. So that participants are heterogeneous Musrenbang.
"Participants in the Musrenbang include all elements including women, civil servants, PLMK". (M. Taufik) "…..Getting to the top the more complete. In villages that are sure to come, community leaders, including midwives, farmer groups and breeders".
Above statement conclude that the participants present at the Musrenbang have represented various aspects and are heterogeneous. Participants from the group of civil servants represented the fields of education, government, infrastructure, midwives represented the health sector; farmer groups represented the agricultural sector, livestock groups represented the livestock sector.
The proposal must also be reported in every Musrenbang implementation. There needs to be a responsible person by the level to ensure the smooth implementation of the Musrenbang. "….at the village level, the village head headed, but in the implementation will be assisted by the development sector. At the sub-district level, then the district head" (M. Taufik) "….coordinating Musrenbang so that they get proposals as needed" (Suprayitno: Kasi Pembangunan Kecamatan Ponggok).
"The Musrenbang responsible is under the duties and functions of the Blitar District Bappeda. "....... in our village, we gave them delegation of authority to do that accompanied by PNPM. Including in the sub-district, we delegate to the subdistrict for the subdistrict level Musrenbang. ……..". (Eko: sekretaris Bappeda) Thus it can be concluded that the form of the Musrenbang proposal is basically: the Musrenbang proposal is in the form of a report from the lowest level, namely the village with the Team from Bapeda as the person in charge. Nevertheless, these responsibilities are delegated at each level.
Based on the conclusions above, the responsibility for implementing Musrenbang is under the practical orientation because the program originates from proposals that are coordinated and supervised starting from the village until agreed by the SKPD.

The program is carried out from a follow-up proposal.
The proposal needs to be followed up. Follow up is done by escorting the proposal. This needs to be escorted because the program that should have been carried out from the follow-up to the proposal in the Musrenbang so far has not been implemented well.
"If the Musrenbang is rarely carried out because it is at the Regency level, we have a proposal for how much it is accommodated and then taken to the sub-district can enter. However, at the district level, it failed. If the previous year no one has been funded. If funds from PIK and PNPM are often funded" (Asep).
"The Musrenbang promise that is not realized, in our opinion, can hamper development in the Selorejo sub-district". "There is a proposal from the RT as well as from the paving environment problem. Already agreed, this year. However, it is not yet implemented. Estimated 500 m in length" (Nisto Utomo: peserta wakil masyarakat Selorejo).
Suprayitno and Edi stated the same thing. Programs that are often realized are programs funded by the PIK (Regional Indicative Ceiling) and PNPM, while the Musrenbang program from SKPD has not been realized to the maximum. This is supported by the statement of the participants in the Selorejo District Musrenbang. From this statement, it can be interpreted that the proposals agreed below are still not well-realized at a higher level.

The program effect on the solution of a problem.
Each program proposed is expected to overcome the problem, even though the program has not been able to overcome the problem as a whole.
"Yes, actually it can solve the problem, for example, in the field of health with the construction of the Polindes building, want to seek treatment so close. But if you solve the problem as a whole is not yet because the tools available are not complete" (Asep).
"….The gradual resolution of society ". So the implementation of the program has a positive impact on solutions to solving community problems. Nevertheless, it has not overcome the problems of society as a whole because the resolution of community problems is made in stages. The statement of Mr. Nisto Utomo also supports this as the community and Mr. Danuri as the head of the Selokajang village: "The realized program may overcome the problem, but it is not yet complete. Maybe this year reached half, the next year can be proposed again. One is fulfilled, all of them can not immediately." Based on this statement, it can be interpreted that every program that been realized can overcome the problem but not solve the problem completely. The problem will be solved gradually by proposing a new program to complement the existing program in the following year. This happens because not all proposals approved following the requests and needs of the community.

Follow up on the proposals that have been submitted.
There are many kinds of proposals from the Musrenbang results, so there is a need for priority scale. Priority scale is needed because of limited resources. Therefore, the priority scale used as a basis for deciding whether programs or problems are urgent and need to be resolved immediately. Follow-up on the agreed proposals needs to be guarded and championed to the next stage. As stated by Mr. Eko, the follow-up to the proposal has been submitted as follows: "At this village level, priorities for the village will continue to be discussed. In the sub-districts, the priorities appear Later on at the district level we will re-select which sub-district priorities are then synchronized with the work program plan and SKPD work plan. If that score is better, then enter the RKPD priority program and enter the SKPD, then it will be budgeted and accommodated. It will even be followed up on the SKPD forum. Then from the SKPD forum will make the SKPD work plan" (Eko: Sekretaris Bappeda) "Hasil usulan dari MusrenbangDes dibawa ke Kecamatan, kemudian dikompetisikan ke kecamatan. Jika di Kecamatan nilainya tidak layak maka gugur. Tapi kalau nilainya layak maka bisa dikompetisikan lagi di tingkat Kabupaten" (Sunarso: Panitia Pelaksana Musrenbang Kecamatan).
Proposals agreed in the MusrenbangDes submitted to the sub-district level then proposed to a higher level. All proposals are competed, meaning that only proposals with the highest rank will be submitted in the District Musrenbang. An essential keyword, in this case, is "competed". Not all proposals are funded but competed.
Policies are undertaken to solve public problems that have not been resolved The scale of priorities caused some proposals could not be realized and funded because Blitar district's regional budget was not yet proportional to the number of proposals available. So we need to emphasize the priority that must be done that has an impact. This is supported by the statement of Mr Tunggul that: "…..Moreover, we also need to convey pathways to convey, long-term support not only through Musrenbang, first through technocratic channels or through SKPD proposals, participatory proposals that we are currently carrying out, and third through political channels, if politics is a path that might be able to you go through the proposals of community aspirations through regional representatives. Electoral districts can bring the aspirations of fortification through political channels." (Tunggul) Based on the statement above, it can be interpreted that the unrealized follow-up of proposals can be funded by other sources such as technocratic channels through SKPD proposals, or political channels through regional representatives. It can also be realized through other funds starting from the central government, DAK (Special Allocation Funds) or funds from the province.
Policies are needed to solve public problems. However, public issues are broad in scope, so not all public problems can be solved in the short term. The solution to overcome the public problem is presented as follows: "Specific policies to solve public problems are to solve problems of basic needs of the community, improve services to the community and develop the potential that exists in the region.". (Eko: Sekretaris Bappeda) Based on the description above it can be concluded that the policies undertaken to solve public problems that have not been resolved are: As stated by Eko, the policy to solve public problems is to solve basic needs problems and improve the quality of public services and develop regional potential. Solving public problems requires a long period so that each regional issue is contained in the RKPD. Because these problems cannot be solved together in the same year, it is necessary to plan long and medium-term and then break down to the RKPD so that it becomes an annual work program. Through an annual work program, the policy of solving public problems is carried out. Funding can be funded with other funds ranging from central funds, DAK (Special Allocation Funds), funds from the province or through political channels.
Bottom-up participation. Fung and Wright (2003:16) explain that bottom-up participation is participation that solicits proposals or aspirations from ordinary citizens to apply knowledge, intelligence, and interest to formulate solutions.

Musrenbang participant.
The Handbook has required the representation of various parties from aspects of health, education, infrastructure, environment, economy, cooperatives and government. There must also be representatives of women, community leaders and residents. Various elements have attended the Musrenbang in Blitar district. At the village level involved in the Musrenbang are all and government. Ideally, the participants who attended also included some of these aspects. The presentations by the participants above showed that the Musrenbang in Blitar District viewed from the participants present was ideal because there were representatives from every aspect. This shows that the aspirations of the Musrenbang in Blitar Regency are divergent so that the proposals are representative and meet bottom-up participation criteria.

Level of knowledge, intelligence, and interest in formulating solutions.
Effective solutions to overcome changing public problems require knowledge, experience and interest in the formulation of solutions. In this case, the level of education is used as a standard to see the level of knowledge, intelligence, and interest for the formulation of solutions. Participants who attended the Village Musrenbang consisted of various educational backgrounds.
"Those who attended the village Musrenbang included all of them, there were junior high school graduates, there were institutions, there were CPNS too" (Danuri).
Not only based on Danuri's statement, the musrenbang document also proves that the diversity of knowledge and education that is reflected by the type of profession can be interpreted that proposals are obtained from people with different educational backgrounds. CPNS represent the community from D3 and S1 level education while junior high school graduates represent the majority of the local community. So with so many educational backgrounds, proposals may be obtained through serious thought by ordinary people or experts in their fields. Therefore it shows the interest of the community to be involved in the formulation of solutions.

Proposal sources and proposal programming process.
From a public participation perspective, the formulation of a solution can be seen in the process of soliciting proposals, the source of proposals and the process of proposing programming. Good sources of proposals come from residents. In Blitar District, the proposal was origin from the observations and experiences of the community. The community experiences become the primary source of a proposal so that deficiencies and problematic conditions are proposed to the head of the RT. The RT Chairman then conveyed it in the Village Musrenbang.
"... the proposal usually comes from the observation of the people themselves. For example, the RT evaluates, based on his observations, that now is the time to build a moat? This as a simple example. Or is this the right time to repair the bridge? Because if it is not repaired, then the village road can be interrupted. The results of the residents observations will be deliver to the village proposal through musrenbangDes.…." (Danuri).
"….Those who have a realistic opinion are the civil servants who are nearby. For example, in the Ngluweng area, Pak Jokoboyo needs to coordinate with the farm leaders to discuss the irrigation problem. " The village, through the civil service, has the task of identifying the problem of truth and the importance of proposals for village development. Thus the community proposal is verified by competent parties. Alternatively, conversely, a proposal sourced from several figures or experts, is offered to the community to be discussed. For example, what medical equipment needs are essential for puskesmas or posyandu. Health workers who know the condition of the equipment needed, then shared during the village Musrenbang.

Meeting layout during musrenbang.
Musrenbang spatial planning must set appropriately in order to produce an effective and efficient deliberation process. Spatial planning must allow each participant to have the same opportunity to see, hear and feel in an equal position so that all participants can interact freely and feel comfortable.
There are several discussion settings in the Musrenbang in each region of Blitar Regency. First, arrange the room with a class model. Arranging a room with a class model means arranging a room by making a distance of four rows of chairs. Community elites (SKPD, Dapil, Camat, Lurah, Village Heads) sit in the front row while the women's group, the group representative of local leaders and youth, sit in the back. The second layout of the U-shape model. So it was made several layers without tables, it could be in the hall, village hall, or other buildings in the village. It is expected that with seating arrangements like this, the atmosphere is equal and intimate. Thus, women and other groups who are usually less courageous to appear in public forums can become more involved. The third layout is cafe model room. So the participants were gathered and each group had one table and several chairs around the table. From these discussions, it can be concluded that spatial planning in the Musrenbang, especially in group discussions, each region has a different model. Even though the spatial planning model is different, the goals and expectations are the same, namely, to create a comfortable, effective and efficient atmosphere of deliberation.
Based on the explanation of indicators related to bottom-up participation, it was concluded that the Musrenbang process in Blitar District met the criteria for bottom-up participation. It was proven that those involved in the Musrenbang included various aspects, both from the elements of the community and officers. Viewed from an educational background, the people involved in the Musrenbang are also divergent so that the proposals are representative. Besides, the source of the proposal comes from his own experience and observations. Generation of consultative solutions. Fung and Wright (2003:17) explain that the generation of consultative solutions is a deliberation to provide / create solutions in general. Decision making during deliberations, participants listen and consider alternative options.

Participant activeness.
Practical deliberation requires the activeness of participants. An active atmosphere is needed to stimulate citizens participation. They have to involve in providing solutions and thinking about the progress of the region. In the Village Musrenbang the majority of participants actively submitted their opinions both personal opinions and the opinions of community representatives who were represented by the head of the RT.
"... at my place, the party invited to the village musrenbang was the head of the RT. In our region, there are not many people who make proposals. Usually, I, as the head of the RT, is the only person thinking about the proposal ... " (Nisto Utomo).
"My people are active, in general, they are indeed active in many activities" (Danuri).
Based on a search to the Village Musrenbang document, the two informants' statements can be verified that each village has different characteristics. Participants actively submit their proposals through the MusrenbangDes, but that does not mean they deliver directly but through the apparatus in their respective regions, such as the RT head.

The proposal can be heard both ways.
Musrenbang will be efficient if the proposal submitted can be heard both ways, especially in the MusrenbangDes. The way that the MusrenbangDes can be heard both ways is that each participant is free to submit an opinion, both in the form of proposals and questions. Musrenbang has an open concept in order to motivate the public to express their opinions.
"The Musrenbang begins with the freedom to ask anything. The goal is that deliberation can live. Everyone is free to ask. Problem-solving is not the priority; if there is any problem, the village head will later consider. The important thing is that the atmosphere of the discussion seems lively. So as not to agree, without thinking about it seriously. They can discuss any topic, about development, health, education, no limitation. " (Danuri) Based on these statements and observations during the musrenbang process, it can be interpreted that proposals can be heard both ways because Participants are free to express opinions, proposals or ask questions, the concept of Musrenbang is open to anyone, Motivates the public to dare to convey their thoughts, Provides speakers who are ready to respond to each suggestion, opinions or questions from the public.

The way to defend.
Deliberation, in any form, including MusrenbanbangDes, aims to reach an agreement. The moderator must pay attention to each proposal because each participant will try to defend his proposal. The way to defend a proposal is to tell the conditions in real terms. The moderator or the chairperson of the meeting, who is usually led by the village head or lurah, must develop a conducive atmosphere for discussion so that the meeting can run smoothly. Each participant is allowed to express their opinions for further ranking. Ranking of proposals is the basis in deciding which programs are essential and urgent to be realized.
This final result will be offered back to meeting participants to be approved and forwarded to a higher level. "….For example, there are two similar proposals, namely proposing the repair of damaged roads on two different roads. Both roads have damaged conditions, so the team will assess the level of damage that is more severe and the level of community interest in accessing the road. In essence, not all proposals are implemented but must choose what is essential and urgent. " (Danuri) Based on the statement, it is concluded that to maintain the proposal in the MusrenbangDes was: free the community to tell the problem or background of the proposal submitted, rank the proposal based on the scale of priorities and the most pressing issues, discussed and discussed until finding a best proposal. This is also supported by the criteria in the Musrenbang Proposal. In group discussions it is necessary to agree together on the criteria used in evaluating proposals in the group discussion process. The main criteria for the proposed PIK (Regional Indicative Ceiling) and SKPD Renja are: Authority / authority is in the SKPD (not in the Village), Also utilized by the community of other villages in the vicinity, and Supports the achievement of the SKPD Renstra and Renja.
While the supporting criteria are: Can not be done by the village community themselves, The volume of activities is quite / substantial, Can not be funded from village funding independently. (District Musrenbang Handbook). Given these criteria, deliberation to reach consensus has written guidelines in the process of achieving final results.
"In RKPD the development priorities refer to the Regent's 5-year planning document. The Regent has the role of forming the RPJMD or the Regent's vision and mission. We only crackdown the RPJMD, divide one year, one year, then we take the fifth year, what are the development priorities in Blitar district. The priority is stated in the RKPD document." (Eko) Perbup on General Guidelines for Musrenbang Chapter V article 8 explains that the village / kelurahan Musrenbang Proposals pay attention to the conditions and the main problems faced. So the way to determine development priorities is: Refer to the Regent's five-year planning document, RPJMD or the Regent's vision and mission. RPJMD has broken down annually so