Abstract
First, this
paper introduces that globalization is beyond geography and economy as it
covers various aspects. Existence of
supranational institutions is evidence of globalization in public policy making.
UN produces Sustainable Development Goals that need to be integrated into
national policy making, which signifying the globalization of public policies. Nugroho
is questioning whether Indonesia policy-making should be SDGs-driven or Nawa
Cita-driven without addressing the No One Left Behind notion of SDGs. Next,
this paper proposes ‘glocalization’ as the framework of thinking. The early
glocalization concepts receive criticism in which they don’t address the issues
of power and the ability of agency to make difference. Then, this paper presents
theories addressing those issues and related study cases wherein glocalization
is practiced in the public policy planning process in Indonesia in its effort
to adapt the Sustainable Development Goals into its National and Regional
Action Plans and to address the notion of No One Left Behind of the SDGs. As a
conclusion, ‘glocalization’ needs to be the framework of thinking, specifically
in the making of public policies, wherein aspects of globalization are given
pathway.
Keywords: globalization, glocalization, Indonesian public policy,
power, adaptation
Background
Globalization is Beyond
Economy and Geography
The word ‘globalization’ implicates geographical and economic framework
of thoughts as presented in a couple of literatures[1]. D’Ercole
writes in his OECD report (2003) that globalization; which is understood as
“the growing integration of national economies through trade, technology, labor
and capital flows; is a key feature of today’s economic life”. Having said that,
he argues that globalization is not just an economic phenomenon, “it has
cultural, social and environmental dimensions” that bring people together more
closely. Similarly, Zollinger states that globalization is “a process of
increasing international integration in all fields[2]
(economy, politics, culture, environment, communications, etc.)” (Zollinger,
2007: 1). Amongst evidences[3] of
globalization is the existence of supranational institutions[4] to
facilitate international agreement. In 2012, United Nations came up with global
goals called Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to replace the Millennium
Development Goals/MDGs. SDGs signifies the globalization of public policies,
which will give pathway for dimensions, fields and aspects[5]
addressed by D’Ercole, Zollinger and IMF.
SDGs Driven
vs. Nawa Cita Driven Policy Making
Nugroho raises a question whether it is possible to synergize the global
development missions with Indonesian development missions (2016: 1) and identifies
that out of 17 Sustainable Development Goals, Nawa Citas are aligned and
congruent with SDGs no 1 – 9. He later came up with an issue of pro SDGs
development policy-making in the relative parallels and dissonance between SDGs
and Nawa Cita and proposes 3 (three) possible solutions. First, SDGs should be
seen merely as performance criteria to be fit-and-matched with the achievements
made out of the implementations of Nawa Cita. Secondly, Indonesian government
shifts its Nawa Cita policy to SDGs policy and lastly, Indonesian government to
integrate the key result areas into Nawa Cita. The solutions proposed by
Nugroho lay on the question of whether Indonesian policy-making is SDGs-driven
or Nawa Cita-driven without addressing the No One Left Behind[6]
notion of SDGs.
Thesis Statement
The Need
for Glocalization in Policy Making
This paper will discuss why glocalization, instead of globalization, should
be the framework of thinking in policy making to address the phenomenon of
globalization in any aspect. The study cases to support this thesis are events
in which I personally was involved. Those are the program planning process facilitated
by BAPPENAS[7]
and the local-realities-based program planning facilitated by Indonesia SDGs
Secretariat and community service organizations to address various goals in
SDGs.
Discussion
Limitation
of Discussion
This paper analyzes the adaptation of SDGs, as a product made by
supranational institution, in the public policy making in Indonesia. Analyzes
are based on the study cases presented related to policy-making events both
facilitated by government institution and jointly facilitated by government
institution and community service organizations.
Glocalization
Roudometof (2015: 1) informed that “to date, there is no glocalization
theory or theories as such in spite of the growing popularity of ‘the glocal’”.
Roudometof tried to theorizing ‘glocalization’ by comparing (: 12)
glocalizations offered by Robertson and Ritzer. He concluded that Robertson and
Ritzer interpretation of glocalization do not address the issues of power
(Robertson) and the ability of agency to make difference (Ritzer). Roudometof
thinks that “In Robertson’s framework, globalization is
ultimately transformed into glocalization, whereas in Ritzer’s framework,
glocalization is ultimately seen as a facet of globalization – as the way in
which global capitalism incorporates the local”.
Faulconbridge and Beaverstock study finds that “globalization is not
just about economy, international trade and employment” (Clifford et.al, 2008:
340) and summarize that globalization has impacted aspects of life from
cultural to political. Faulconbridge and Beaverstock (Clifford et.al, 2008:
332) present the term of ‘glocalization’ used by Swyngendouw in describing
globalization. He says that “globalization is actually a local-global or
‘glocalization’ process, in which instead of focusing solely upon the global as
a scale, we also need to recognize the interconnections between different
scales (local, regional, national and global) and how these make up the process
of globalization”. Meanwhile CERFE sees glocalization as “a strategy involving
substantial reform of the different aspects of globalization” with the goal
being both to establish a link between the benefits of the global dimension - …
-, while at the same time, establishing a bottom-up system for the governance
globalization” ((2003: 13-14).
Bottom-up approach talks about 2 (two) levels of policy implementation,
namely macro-implementation level and micro-implementation level. Berman
suggests that “at the macro-implementation level, centrally located actors
devise a government program; at the micro-implementation level, local
organizations react to the macro-level plans, develop their own programs, and
implement them” (Leidi, 2011: 8). The No One Left Behind notion of SDGs refers
to the
need to include everyone in societal processes, and conveys the notion that
people should not only be allowed to thrive, but should have a voice and
effective opportunities to shape the course of development (Trusteeship Chamber, 2016).
Glocalization
in Policy Making
BAPPENAS applies bottom-up approach in its preparation of the Pro SDGs
national development programs planning based on the President Regulation No. 59
Year 2017 on SDGs Implementation. This regulation mandates that National Action
Plans[8]
need to be prepared before being adapted in the Regional Action Plans[9]
(RAP) (BAPPENAS, personal communication, 2 November 2017). The word ‘adapted’
that I use is to translate the point in the regulation in which Regional Action
Plans may directly or indirectly support the achievements of SDGs (p. 3). The
study case as an example for the argument above is a program identification and
planning meeting that I was involved in. This meeting was specifically
discussing SDGs Goal 13[10],
Climate Action. Based on the various inputs from each participant of the
meeting, this meeting concluded that goal 13.a[11]
and 13.b[12]
were not relevant for Indonesia, indicator for 13.2.1[13] was
not relevant for Indonesia, local initiatives were not yet facilitated in the
program planning, and indicators should have been made as flexible as possible
based on the data to be collected from Ministers and/or government institutions.
A follow-up meeting was planned to be conducted involving more stakeholders to
address the No One Left Behind notion.
No One Left Behind notion is address in the president regulation, which mandates
that the preparation of RAP involves community service organizations,
philanthropies, business actors, scholars and other related stakeholders
(Article 15). An example of this point is not available yet as preparation of
RAP would be done soon after NAP is finalized. However, I would like to present
a study case of an event that I was involved in conducted jointly between the
government and community social services. This event was called Workshop of
National and Regional Action Plans and Road Map of SDGs facilitated by an alliance
called Partners for Resilience – Strategic Partnership (PfR-SP[14])
together with SDGs Secretariat of BAPPENAS. This workshop is meant to formulate
inputs for Indonesia SDGs Secretariat on NAP, RAP and Road Map of SDGs
specifically on Regional Watershed Management (Goal 6[15]
and 15[16]),
Food Sustainability (Goal 2[17]),
Resilient Cities (Goal 11[18]),
Coastal Management (goal 14[19])
and Gender Equality Goal 5[20]).
Government institutions, international NGOs, local NGOs and private sectors
were involved during the process. The inputs made were considering compatibilities
of goals and indicators in the global, national and regional level and at the
same time involving related stakeholders as mandated by the President
Regulation.
Conclusion
This paper has presented the arguments of the understandings of
globalization and concludes that globalization is beyond economy and geography.
In fact, there is globalization in public policy as signified by Sustainable
Development Goals. SDGs is learnt to be covering many aspects. These aspects of
globalization are given pathway through the SDGs. The interconnectedness of
SDGs with national public policy planning was raised and it ended up to
proposed solutions to address the interconnectedness. However, the solutions
did not take No One Left Behind notion of SDGs. Glocalization proposed in this
paper is analyzed to be addressing the interconnectedness and No One Left
Behind in general and specifically addressing the issue of power and ability of
agency(-ies) to make difference. The
study cases presented further describe the interconnectedness in the global,
national and regional levels involving many actors. This paper highlights that
glocalization refers to way of thinking or paradigm in adapting with changes
occurring in the globalization era in multi-level of policy making covering
various aspects.
References
CERFE Group (Ed). (May 2003). Glocalization: Research
Study and Policy Recommendations. Italy: Glocal Forum. Retrieved from http://www.cerfe.org/public/GLOCAL.pdf
Faulconbridge, J. R., and Beaverstock, J. V. 2008. Globalization:
Interconnected Worlds. In Clifford, N. J. et.al (Eds), Key Concepts in Geography (2nd Edition), London: SAGE.
Leidi, C. (2011, May 24). Top-down vs. Bottom-up. Bachelor Thesis. Retrieved from http://essay.utwente.nl/61106/1/BSc_B_Liedl.pdf
Ministry of Law and Human Rights. 2017. Peraturan
Presiden Republik Indonesia Nomor 59 Tahun 2017 tentang Pelaksanaan Pencapaian
Tujuan Pembangunan Berkelanjutan. Kementerian
PPN/BAPPENAS. Retrieved from http://www.sdgsindonesia.or.id/index.php/dokumen
Nugroho, R. 2016. Kebijakan
Publik di Indonesia. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.
OECD. 2003. Building Sustainable Societies: The Role
of Social Protection. OSCE Conference on
Globalization, Vienna, 3 – 4 July 2003.
Roudometof, V. 2015. Theorizing glocalization: Three
interpretations. European Journal of
Social Theory. SAGE. Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.851.4967&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Shava, F. M. M. (2017, November 15). 2030 Agenda for
Sustainable Development: A New Path for Development. UN. Retrieved from https://www.un.org/ecosoc/sites/www.un.org.ecosoc/files/files/en/2017doc/ecosoc.pdf
Trusteeship Chamber (2017, November 14). Ensuring that
no one is left behind: Envisioning an inclusive world in 2030. Sustainable Development Knowledge Platform. Retrieved
from https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.php?page=view&type=20000&nr=291&menu=2993
UN. 2016. Final list of proposed Sustainable
Development Goal Indicators. Report of
the Inter-Agency and Expert Group on Sustainable Development Goal Indicators. Retrieved
from https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/11803Official-List-of-Proposed-SDG-Indicators.pdf
Zollinger, U. (2007, June 26). The Effects of
Globalization on Sustainable Development and the Challenges to Global
Governance. Paper on behalf of the Swiss
Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC) on the occasion of the Certificate
Course, “Sustainable Development” at the University of Berne. Retrieved
from http://www.kingzollinger.ch/pdf/uz_referat_e.pdf
[1] Faulconbridge and Beaverstock study that
“globalization create new geographical patterns of flows and activity”
(Clifford et.al, 2008: 332). Indirectly clarifying the study, Duncan presents
that it “might be the in trade and capital transfers across national
boundaries” (2014).
[2] In their works, Both
D’Ercole and Zollinger do not categorize the fields into basic and non-basic
aspects of such as what International
Monetary Fund did. Those 4 (four) basic aspects of globalization according to
IMF are (1) trade and transactions, (2) capital and investments movements, (3)
migration and movement of people and (4) the dissemination of knowledge (G. Wirjawan,
personal communication, 2 October 2017).
[3] (1) The value of
trade has been soaring up since centuries ago, (2) lower transportation and
communication cost have helped trade and migration, (3) supranational
institutions exist to facilitate international agreement, (4) people around the
world know Coldplay and want to attend its tour (G. Wirjawan, personal
communication, 2 October 2017)
[4] For example, United Nations and coalitions of nations
such as G8 and G20 (G. Wirjawan, personal communication, 2 October 2017).
[5] “The SDGs cover
a wide range of issues such as poverty, hunger, health, education, gender
inequality, sustainable energy, infrastructure, economic growth and employment,
inequality, cities, sustainable consumption and production, climate change,
forests, oceans, and peace, justice and strong institutions These goals are
indivisible and interlinked and many of the targets cut across and support
multiple SDGs, which may facilitate policy integration and synergies across
different sectors” (Shava, 2017: 1).
[6] “It refers to
the need to include everyone in societal processes, and conveys the notion that
people should not only be allowed to thrive, but should have a voice and
effective opportunities to shape the course of development” (https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.php?page=view&type=20000&nr=291&menu=2993 )
[7] One of BAPPENAS
roles is policy / decision making, specifically to (a) prepare national
development plans, (b) prepare draft of national revenues and expenditure, (c)
control and evaluate the implementation of the development plans and (d) make
decisions in handling urgent and large-scale issues as required
[10] Goal 13. Take
urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts (UN, 2016: 17)
[11] Implement the
commitment undertaken by developed-country parties to the United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change to a goal of mobilizing jointly $100
billion annually by 2020 from all sources to address the needs of developing
countries in the context of meaningful mitigation actions and transparency on
implementation and fully operationalize the Green Climate Fund through its
capitalization as soon as possible (UN,
2016: 17)
[12] Promote
mechanisms for raising capacity for effective climate change-related planning
and management in least developed countries and small island developing States,
including focusing on women, youth and local and marginalized communities (UN,
2016: 17)
[13] Indicator 13.2.1
Number of countries that have communicated the establishment of
operationalization of an integrated policy/strategy which increases their
ability to adapt to the adverse impacts of climate change, and foster climate
resilience and low greenhouse gas emissions development in a manner that does
not threaten food production (including a national adaptation plan, nationally
determined contribution, national communication, biennial update report or
other) (UN, 2016: 17)
[14] PfR is an
alliance of the Netherlands Red Cross, CARE Netherlands, Cordaid, the Red Cross
Red Crescent Climate and Wetlands International
[16] Goal 15: Protect, restore and promote sustainable
use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat
desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity
loss
[17] Goal 2: End hunger, achieve food security and
improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture
[19] Goal 14: Conserve and sustainably use the oceans,
seas and marine resources for sustainable development
No comments:
Post a Comment