Abstract—this research has aim to explain about existences ofpractical collaborative governance which can strengthen processand impact in development schema of welfare in frontier area,particularly in Sebatik, Nunukan. This research investigated theinvolvement of non-state stakeholders as voluntarilyparticipation by various component of groups either by externalproject or who were emergence various from local initiative. Byconducting interviews, focus group discussion, literatureresearch, documentation, and observation our findings are goingas follow: Firstly, minimum collaboration has occurred betweenmany sectors within government causes directly to the quality ofconstruction project in which have not optimal for publicsatisfaction, and also a certain group of citizen criticize the goalof the regional development. Second, the local initiative tocollaborate actually have grown in various sector such as health,education, information, alternative education, awareness ofsustainable economy practices at local level. Interestingly, thisresearch that public have awareness that infrastructure is notsingle-most importance issue in border area due to social capitalis also local concern. Big budget from local and national are notmerely the answer, but more collaborative governance andopenly public engagement will be meaningful and powerfulweapon to make state border’s much better.
State borders– which have been recognized as boundaryarea–are the conception and empirical element of nationconstructions. The frontier usually indicates the work ofsovereignty authority and nation identity.In particular, itbecomes the primary manifestation of state territorysovereignty, because it related to the determining ofdominionborderline, the usage of natural resources andterritorial integrity.Borderline with its boundary regionsmanagement holds the strategic meaning and function in orderto establish sovereignty entity, and it is also utilized as thefoundation of nation collective identities (Sanak, 2011).Boundary areas represent crucial and strategic significance in
security defense sight or economic, social and cultureviews(Dahuri and Nugroho, 2012).
Furthermore, boundary areas are the Indonesia’s front face,which are used by other countries as the barometer to measureand assess Indonesia’ssuccess. Thus, as the representative ofIndonesia’s condition, frontier zones will be able to identifythrough their welfare and proper public facilities. However, infact, the existing policy both national or regional governmentdecision still recognize it as not priority area in developmentagenda. Particularly, it is identically by lags, poverty, and lessof infrastructures. In addition, border regions noware used asa contestation stage among regimes (security, politics,economicand culture), where every regime acts their visionand missionindividually without any collaboration or synergyamong them. These circumstances have been being morecompounded by political activities among government both innational or regional level, or even the competition in eachcentral government.
For more than a decade, the problems in state borders hadnot been paid much attention by the government. Thedevelopment policies only put its focus on the areas with highnumber of population, easy access and having goodopportunity to be developed.The effort to escalate thedevelopment in entire region in Indonesia was started from1999 to 2004, whichincluded the frontier areas based on theprinciple of decentralization and local autonomy. Thedirection of state boundary improvement was regulated withinlong-term development plan (RPJPN) from 2005 to 2025.Within the RPJPN, it is explored that the frontier zone will beevolved by the altering of the development orientation whichevolves its focus frominward-looking to be outward-looking.The orientation adjustment was aimed to ensure that stateborder areas are able to advance to be enormous portal foreconomic and trade agenda with neighbor countries(ArmidaS.Alisyabana, 2010).
Based on the guideline of RPJPN, it emerged thedevelopment euphoria of state borders by all sectors and
82 This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/).
International Conference on Democracy, Accountability and Governance (ICODAG 2017)Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research (ASSEHR), volume 163
government institutions withinthe mid-term developmentplan(RPJM) 2005-2009. National development planningagency (Bappenas) and the ministry of the interior affairs(Kemendagri) found that there were 26institutions holding thedevelopment program for boundary areas.There have been 72programsin the work unit level of (Satker) first echelon. Inaddition, the existence of a number of institutions whichhandle the state borders development policy without anycoordination affect the unsuitable and overlapping programsand policy. Besides, it causes the waste of costs, ineffectivework, unclearness of frontier area problem database and theirresponsibility of mistakes. The database, which is related toboundary zones management, becomes more crucial infrontier problem mapping and identifying. It is useful asdiscussion material in implementing and discoveringmanagement model of state borders area. Therefore, theabsence of complete and valid database impededarrangementprocess of the policy.
North Borneo is new established province on 22nd April2013. Not only as new territory, but the boundary zone atNunukan, North Borneo is also strategic area for countrysecurity defense. The separation of Sipadan and Ligitan Islandwhich was the part of east Borneo territory become areflection and evaluation for all stakeholders. Moreover, theestablishment of new province is based on deep considerationin order to ensure the countryside and frontier zones can bemanaged effectively, thus it cannot be claimed by neighborcountries as their own area. Besides, the previous province,East Borneo was the large region. The geographic zone whichis located in all boundary-lines of Indonesia includes Nunukanand Malinau while the territories of Malaysia includeSarawakand Sabah areas. Nunukan district has 14.493 km2, and itpresents 140.842numbers of populations(BPS of Nunukandistrict, 2010). Generally, the society economic circumstancesat Nunukan frontier zone are still in left behind if it comparedto Malaysia. The main basic problem is that the regionisolation, so it affects the zone development agenda in allsectors, which are included humanresources, education,health, infrastructure and agriculture in larger meaning.
II. FROM CONVENTIONAL TO COLLABORATIVE APPROACH
A. Security as Conventional Approach
Seeing the problem of state border must be viewedfrom multidimensional perspective (Noveria, 2017). As far asthe writer concern, there are two approaches which are utilizedto understand state borders problems, which are: securityapproach andprosperity approach). In particular, securityapproach assumed that the frontier problem was onlygeopolitical discourses. Thus, the boundarymust be in tightguarding by military power in order to avoid external threat.Commonly, security approachis defined as an approach whichemphasizes its focus on the state ability to keep the frontierarea safety and self-defense from other countries threat. Thistype of approach emphasize that the frontier is focused in usefor Strategic-military function, national unity, countriesdevelopment and identity improvement. Consequently, themarine defense system establishment, land and air sectors toretain itself from external threat become the most priority. Theimplementation of boundary security management is usually
predominated by state high institutions, moreover forstakeholders who take the responsibility in security sector. Inother words, it only involves state officer.
Boundary regions are the fundamental part of a country, so itshould be repaired and maintained well in order to achieve theelegance,comforts and beautiful looking. As a result, it doesnot only require the security defense establishment, but it alsoneeds the prosperity development for societies. Therefore, thenew approach paradigm is crucial to be reformed in managingthe boundary from security to prosperity approach. Inparticular, the assumption of the approach is that frontiermatter was not only about geopoliticsdiscourse, but it alsoabout sociological problem. In addition, sovereignty threat ofcountries does not always come from external, but it alsoappears from internal side. The rate of proper borders societywelfare is the government main asset to strengthen the securityin frontier area. Finally, to keep safety in frontier area cannotbe achieved if the local entity of state borders interest is beingignored.
B. Prosperity Approach in Collaborative Governance
The establishment of welfare includes three mainmaterials, which are: life standardenhancement, empowermentimprovement through determining system in economicalinstitution and accessibilityexpansion. The government shouldattend and involve themselves among the societies bypresenting proper policy and fulfilling the citizen’s necessity,and they are also obligated to provide the high quality ofinfrastructure and prosperity. As a result, it emerges thecommunity consciousnessand strengthens national identity tokeep the sovereignty of the country. This concept defines theusage of boundary as regions building and communitywelfare. The prosperity approach orientation is recognizingthe community as the subject, the main actor who determinesthe progression of frontier zone.
Prosperity approach has cornerstone role in the strangenessand weakness of governance.inadequate governancetends toemerge inoptimal policy implementation of welfareestablishment in state borders. Otherwise, strong governancewill support the implementation of policy development forsociety prosperity. Furthermore, this approach also ensuresthe provided budget, professional state officer and theinvolvement of non-state actor including the community inhigh, medium and low level.
State borders’ strategic of security through “securityapproach” is essential, but the domination of this approach hasa negative implication on individual security. To ensure thesecurity of the person, it needs an approach which oriented onsovereignty. In implementing these two approaches, it needs asimultaneously practice in order to inhibit the imbalancebetween one aspect and others. The domination of “securityapproach” will lead in appearing of pseudo-security, becausethe economic pressure will be the factor that encouragesbordersociety to fulfill their needs based on their own ways.The phenomenon will have a great potential to interfere apeacefulness and orderliness. Nevertheless, if the “prosperityapproach” dominated the circumstance, it will disregard the
83
Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research (ASSEHR), volume 163
security, and it has a potential to emerge the threat on the unityand sovereignty of nation.
When the approach is implemented by its own ways, itshows that there is an ignoring of one aspect from one aspectto another. Therefore, it requires a comprehensive approachwhich combines the “security” and “prosperity approach”.Both need to be conducted simultaneously in order to avoidthe lameness in expanding the frontier region. This approachnamed “integrated approach”. It assumes that the function ofborder area is not only as a functional politic of defense andsecurity, but also as a function of region establishment andsovereignty. Basically, this approach is involved manyaspects, such as security, welfare and others that implementequally. It also seems more objective and realistic as anapproach, because it will conduct all aspects equally, and itrequires a participation of all stakeholders and societycomprehensively.
III. METHODOLOGY
This study is a proper method to observe the phenomenon“will to improve” in order to expand the sovereignty in theborder area as the same as the strength of qualitative researchwhich was conducted by Denzin and Lincoln (1994:2) asfollows:
“Qualitative research is multi method in focus, involving aninterpretative, naturalistic approach to its subject matter.This means that qualitative researchers study in theirnatural setting, attempting to make sense of or interpretphenomena in terms of the meanings people bring to them.Qualitative research involves the studied use and collectionof variety of empirical materials, case study, observational,historical, interactional, and visual texts-that describeroutine and problematic moment and meaning inindividuals’ lives.”
It means that fulfilling the diversity of information hasbecome the primary characteristic of this research. As whatCreswell (1998) stated that the researchers have to hold theprincipal aspect of “complex and holistic” both in data andanalyzing phase. This study is the same as the characteristic ofqualitative research, such as naturalistic, descriptive data,focus on process, inductive, and making-meaning. In currentstudy, border area is full of complexity related to the socialaspect, security, politic and ecology which demanding the bestplan in order to maximize the achievement of sovereignty(Dahuri and Nugroho, 2012).
These multidimensional aspects will be assisted by theapproach of data collection, such as observation,documentation (both the discourse of legal document andmedia and literature), deep interview and Focus GroupDiscussion (FGD) with the stakeholders. These kinds oftechnic are selected to reach a valid, qualify and factual data.Moreover, as what Lincoln and Gube (2008) stated that thecollected data will be validated by four quality of criteriawhich consists of credibility, transferability, dependability andconformability (Emzir, 2012:79)
Credibility is related to how the data is trusted.Transferability shows the diversity of context. Dependabilitydefines as a repetition of the similar situation, andconformability defines that the perspective of researcher isdistinctive. These four validation tools above are differencefrom usual validation of quantitative data, such as internal,external, reliability and objectivity of analysis. Linear modelof Miles and Huberman, Bogdan and Bilken and Grounded aresimilar to the theory of Strauss and Corbin. This study willutilize the technical analysis which nearly similar asqualitative approach of Miles and Huberman, and it also paysmuch attention to other relevant approaches like GroundedTheory.
Reduction process will be conducted by Strayss andCorbin Model through many procedural methods: (1) datareduction; (2) tematization; (3) determining the historicalpattern; (4) expanding the historical pattern and theorization;(5) analysis in connecting between theme and recent theoryand discovering the relation to other themes; (6) to sum up theconducted study.
IV. BIG BUDGET, LESS DEVELOPED, AND PROBLEMS
One of the biggest problems in managing the border regionof Indonesia is the stakeholder had not been involved yet inmany contexts, such as creating, implementing, monitoringand evaluating the policy of boundary management. Theenacted policy is still in state-oriented, especially in nationalgovernment. Recently these days show that there are still lackof role and contribution of civil society and private sector inmanaging the policy. From the institutional aspect, themanagement of frontier region among nation is solvedpartially by many boundary committees which have ad-hoccharacteristic and related-stakeholder of central institution.Whole discoursing and evaluating for institutional capabilitywhich handle the boundary area have not been done yet. Thus,the reason why the overcoming of the problems tend to bepartial, incomprehensive, and has not influenced the mainproblem yet. Self-interest and fundamental necessity of bordersociety has not been the main consideration yet.
Ironically, they are affected by the regulation. They are theone who understand the primary needs, important and notimportant problems related to boundary areas. Frontier tendsto be the place where people play their political contestant andbe the “exercise of policy” which has egocentrismcharacteristic and project-oriented. Surprisingly, much ofbillions rupiah which is used for many border projects, areuseless and inapplicable in achieving many developments,such as international market, bus station and school. Anaffirmative action without a strength fundamental philosophywill lead the weak building in reaching social-economicwelfare.
A. Less Collaborative, but Good Prospect
This study has identified the colabolator from thestakeholder, maping the problems both security defense andprosperity, formulating the colaboration pattern in “sharevision” and participation and creating the type of boundaryarea management which is based on “stakeholder collaborative
84
Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research (ASSEHR), volume 163
governance” with the approach of “share-vision” andparticipation. This fact then used to create a type of frontierregion management which is based on “stakeholdercollaboorative governance” in networking perpective,partnership and initiating the implementation of the method.
Program planning on developing the frontier area isineffective method. It shows from the unclear output andoutcome’s program. These facts indicate that there are stillless planning and integrating related to boundary management.Moreover, project mentality has been the primary problemsboth in planning and implementing the program. Particularly,it effects on constant of boundary region development. Peoplewho lived there tend to be in under poverty line, and evenemerge many issues, such as boundary pole, infraction theborder of sovereignty, interchange the nationality ofIndonesia, declining the nationalism belonging, lack ofaccessibility, lack of infrastructure, limited access of educationand health care and other illegal activities in the frontier area.As a result, society regime tend to be weaker and edgerbecause of lack of resources and authority.
In fact, the government had enacted a regulation on UUnumber 43, 2008 about state region. It interprets that inmanaging the state region and boundary areas, the governmentestablish an institution which related to national and districtmanagement. Implementing the institution’s authority isregulated through state policy. The work relation of institutionbetween national and district management should be based oncoordinative characteristic. The obligation of managementinstitution is to enact the regulation for developing the frontierregion, budgeting plan, coordinating the implementation,evaluating and controlling function. Institutionally, throughthe president regulation is established State Border NationalAgency(BNPP) on January 28th, 2010 followed by StateBorder Local Agency (BPPD, only until 2017). Thisorganization is regulated by the role of Ministry of Nationalaffairs No. 31, 2010. Before emerging these two regulations,many provinces and district government have established aboundary area institution. The problem is BNPP be able toarrange the concept of policy direction and the strategy ofboundary management in a sort time, and how BNPP canwork effectively, concerning that many institutions haveestablished and arranged the program for expanding theboundary region? From these perspectives, the crucialcontribution from other stakeholder except the governmentitself, such as civil society and private sector to assist BNPP towork effectively and to hold a comprehensive guidelinerelated to policy direction and strategic development ofboundary region based on UU No 43, 2008.
Based on the review above, participation of allstakeholders in term of collaboration on many contexts,include planning, implementing, controlling and evaluatingthe policy of boundary area management needs to beconcerned. Through the stakeholder collaborative governance,it can be identified for every stakeholder except governmentfrom national to village level. Moreover, it can be clear boththe role and relation pattern which has the similar autonomy,share the benefit and risk, and combine the resources withhigh intensity in long period of time (Dwiyanto, 2012).Through the management which based on stakeholder
collaborative governance, there will probably implement sharevision and realize cooperatively, high participation of allrelated aspects, broad networking, strong partnership andsynergic (Fosler, 2002 and Munro, 2008).
Several circumstances stated that there is still sectorialwork which does not offer collaborative model. Nevertheless,based on conducted FGD, health and education sectors haveshown outstanding collaboration in small scale. Thetransparency of sub-district government on the variousprograms from non-government or outside the region revealsthe positive impact obviously. For instance, sponsorship forboundary state school and private school or even volunteeringprogram from campus illustrated well-organized andprospective collaboration model. Meanwhile, more than 90private companies sector in North Borneo had not beenconducted a synergic work with the government over thesetimes.
It is the fact that the boundary at Sebatik is the area whichwas functioned for smuggling and illegal trafficking bothdrugs and humans. Besides, sovereignty and poverty stillpredominate and as the huge responsibility for thegovernment. All this time, the higher allowance was allocatedfor state border securityaffairs, whereas, welfare program isstill in left behind. Thus, the military post with completeweapons, it is needed to be placed in frontier for the sake ofnations sovereignty from the conflict and external menace.However, it is unsuitable action for job field sector and humanresource development of border society. Therefore, indeed theproblem of border area is not only security defense itself, butalso economic, social, and culture. It is verily that securityapproach domination prospers the country, whereas, it usualdisserve the communities of frontier zone.
B. The Answer Might be not Money
It is the fact that the boundary at Sebatik is the area whichwas functioned for smuggling and illegal trafficking bothdrugs and humans. Besides, sovereignty and poverty stillpredominate and as the huge responsibility for thegovernment. All this time, the bigger allowance was allocatedfor affair of state border security, whereas, welfare program isstill in left behind. So, the military post with completeweapons, it is needed to be placed in frontier for the sake ofnations sovereignty from the conflict and external menace butit is unsuitable for job field sector and human resourcedevelopment of border society. However, indeed the problemof border area is not only security defense itself, but alsoeconomic, social, and culture. It is verily that securityapproach domination prospers the country, whereas, it usualdisserve the communities of frontier zone. Unfortunately,theweakness of this approach is because the society has beenrecognized as an object. Moreover, to show off themilitaryarmy title in border state will only emerge false obedient,awareness and nationality. It occurred, for theunsupportedwelfare sustainabilitydevelopment by utilizing thevarieties of local powers with collaborative practices amongsectors both local and national government. In line with Syarifhidayat (2007) findings, local elites have their own agendatoward local development—whether they are puttinginfrastructure as priority instead of social welfare in the
85
Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research (ASSEHR), volume 163
region. It leads to the situation what researcher callcompetition for elites control rather than popular control(Santoso in Paskarina 2017).
Although it needs much more budget, the communitiesbelieve that the infrastructure and security establishment areessential to implement. However, theyare not recognized asthe primary priority, for the existence of culture sector whichfundamentally guarantee the sustainability of theestablishment itself. The development method by involvinglocal resources tends to have brighter future and essentialmeaning of output. Commonly, it is the fact that thedevelopment is separated from native interest and societymatters. Therefore, this issue has been already strong enoughin several interviews in this research.
V.CONCLUSION
The lack of the number of inter-sector collaborationswithin government (local, local-national) producesinefectiveestablishment, because the outcome has not been reached andfelt yet by the public, and they perceive that the developmentcircumstances were only project-minded. Secondly, localinitiative has been growing in several sectors include health,information, alternative education, sustainable local economicawareness, and also onconsciousness of local identity whichrequiresthe bound of public participation, for instance, thediscourse of Nunukan division. Interestingly, the public haverealized that the infrastructure is not the only boundaryprimary affairs. To hold relative critical thinking about theamount of big budget in state border, become huge potential tocreate collaborative governance who can work better in thefuture.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
We would like to express my gratitude and appreciation toall those who gave us possibility to complete this paperespecially to the sponsor: DIKTI and the Department ofGovernment Affairs and Administration of UniversitasMuhammadiyah Yogyakarta. Thanks to Nunukan Board ofMuhammadiyah whom helped so much during our fieldresearch in the area. Last but not least, for colleagues at thedepartment, we do thank you very much for adequatefeedback and productive discussion.
REFERENCES
[1] Mungin, Burhan. 2007.Penelitian Kualitatif : komunikasi, Ekonomi,Kebijakan Publik, dan Ilmu Sosial Lainnya, Jakarta, Kencana PrenadaMedia Group.
[2] Poerwandari, E.Kristi. 1994, Pendekatan Kualitatif dalam PenelitianPsikologi, Jakarta : LPSP3 Fakultas Psikologi UI.
[3] Bourchier, David dan Hadiz, Vedi R. 2003.Indonesian Politics andSociety A Reader. London dan New York: RouledgeCurzon.
[4] Hadiz, Vedi. 2000. Dinamika Kekuasaan: Ekonomi Politik IndonesiaPasca-Soeharto. Jakarta: LP3ES, 272-304.
[5] Hidayat, Syarif. 2007. Too Much Too Soon, Local State ElitesPerspective on and the Puzzle of Contemporary Indonesian RegionalAutonomy Policy. Jakarta: Raja Grafindo.
[6] Yoshino, Kosaku. 1995. Consuming Ethnicity and Nationalism:AseanExperiences. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
[7] Sen, Amartya. 2006. Identityand Violence: the Illusion of Destiny. NewYork dan London: W.W. Norton & Company.
[8] Brancati, Dawn. “Decentralization: Fueling the Fire of Dampening theFlames of Ethnic Conflict and Secessionism?.” InternationalOrganization60 (2006): 651–685.
[9] Li, Jieli. 2002. “State Fragmentation: Toward a TheoreticalUnderstanding of the Territorial Power of the State.” SociologicalTheory 20(2): 139-156.
[12] Nugroho, Iwan dan Dahuri, Rokhmin. 2012.Pembangunan Wilayah:Perspektif Ekonomi, Sosial dan Lingkungan. Jakarta: LP3ES.
[13] Paskarina, Coroline et.al (eds). 2015. Berebut Kontrol atasKesejahteraan: Kasus-kasus politisasi demokrasi di tingkat lokal.Yogyakarta: Polgov-PCD
[14] Pratikno. 2005. Good Governance and Governability. JSP UnversitasGadjah Mada, Yogyakarta.
[15] Uwe, Flick. 1995.An Introduction to Qualitative Research, London :SAGE Publications.
[16] Flick Uwe, 1995.An Introduction to Qualitative Research, London :SAGE Publications
[17] Patilima, Hamid. 2005.Metode Penelitian Kualitatif, Bandung :Alfabeta.
[18] Creswell, John W 1994, Research Design Qualitative and QuantitativeApproach, London : SAGE Publications.
[19] Blaikie, Norman. 2000.Designing Social Research, Cambridge UK :Polity Press.
[20] Denzin, Norman K &Lincoln Yvonna S. (Eds.), 2008, The Landscape ofQualitative Research, London : SAGE Publications.
[21] Moleong,Rexy J. 2006.Metodologi Penelitian Kualitatif, Bandung :Rosda.
[22] Sugiyono. 2006.Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif, Kualitatif, dan R & D,Bandung : Alfabeta.
[23] Nasution, S. 1988, Metode Penelitian Naturalistik – Kualitatif, Bandung: Transito.
[24] Noveria, Mita et.al (eds).2017. Kedaulatan Indonesia di WilayahPerbatasan: Perspektif Multidimensi. Jakarta: Buku Obor.
[25] Wuryandari, Ganewati, et.all., 2009. Keamanan di PerbatasanIndonesia-Timor Leste : Sumber Ancaman dan KebijakanPengelolaannya. Yogyakarta : Pustaka Pelajar .
[26] Sanak, Yohanes. 2011. Human Security dan Politik Perbatasan.Yogyakarta:PolGovUGM.
86
Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research (ASSEHR), volume 163
