STI Policy Review

Science & Technology Policy Institute (과학기술정책연구원)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Understanding the Evidence-Based Policy Making (EBPM) Discourse in the Making of the Master Plan of National Research (RIRN) Indonesia 2017-2045

  • Published : 2018.11.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The government of Indonesia has initiated the Master Plan of National Research (RIRN) 2017-2045 as a policy umbrella of national research activity. The initiative has been in place since 2015, yet the process required a long period of coordination. And with the extensive movement of evidence-based policymaking (EBPM), there has been a call of expectation towards policymakers to accurately use scientific evidence in their policymaking process. However, the complexity of policymaking process renders the ideal notion of EBPM questionable. This research attempts to understand how the EBPM as an idea can shape the interactions of actors in the policymaking process by using the discursive institutionalism as the analytical framework. By conducting ten interviews with actors involved in the making of RIRN and close examination of the policy documents for content analysis, this research describes the institutional features of EBPM discourse in Indonesia, which are reflected in the interactions of policy actors in the policymaking process of RIRN. This research also offers descriptive and learning narratives on the role of discourse in the policymaking process.

Keywords

JCOGDN_2018_v9n1_30_f0001.png 이미지

FIGURE 1. The Content of RIRN in the Spectrum of Policymaking Process

JCOGDN_2018_v9n1_30_f0001.png 이미지

FIGURE 1. The Content of RIRN in the Spectrum of Policymaking Process

TABLE 1. List and Profle of Interview Respondents

JCOGDN_2018_v9n1_30_t0001.png 이미지

TABLE 1. List and Profle of Interview Respondents

JCOGDN_2018_v9n1_30_t0001.png 이미지

TABLE 2. EBPM Discourse in RIRN Making

JCOGDN_2018_v9n1_30_t0002.png 이미지

TABLE 2. EBPM Discourse in RIRN Making

JCOGDN_2018_v9n1_30_t0002.png 이미지

References

  1. Accordino, F. (2013). The Futurium-a Foresight Platform for Evidence-Based and Participatory Policymaking. Philosophy and Technology, 26(3), 321-332. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-013-0108-9
  2. AIPI. (2017). Sains, Teknologi, dan Pendidikan Menuju Indonesia 2045: Buku Putih [Science, Technology, and Higher Education for 2045 Indones: White Book]. Jakarta: AIPI.
  3. Asmara, A. Y. (2012). Meningkatkan Pemanfaatan Hasil-Hasil Riset Kebijakan dalam Proses Pembuatan Kebijakan Iptek di Indonesia. Journal of S&T Policy and R&D Management, 10(1), 49-60.
  4. Asmara, A. Y., & Handoyo, S. (2015). Pembuatan Kebijakan Berbasis Bukti: Studi Pada Proses Pembuatan Kebijakan Standarisasi Alat dan Mesin Pertanian di Indonesia [Evidence-Based Policymaking: Study on Policymaking Process for Standardization of the Agriculture Tools and Machinery in Indonesia]. Warta KIML, 13(1), 38-57.
  5. Bachtiar, P. P. (2011). Producing Evidence to Inform Policy Process in Indonesia: The Challenges on the Supply Side. Bulletin SMERU, 32, 3-11.
  6. Banks, G. (2009). Evidence-based policy making: What is it? How do we get it? ANU Public Lecture Series, presented by ANZSOG. Canberra: Productivity Commission.
  7. Bell, D. (1973). The Coming of Post-Industrial Society: A Venture in Social Forecasting. New York: Basic Books.
  8. Bogenschneider, K., & Corbett, T. J. (2010). Evidence-Based Policymaking: Insights from Policy-Minded Researchers and Research-Minded Policymakers. New York: Routledge.
  9. Cairney, P. (2016). The Politics of Evidence-based Policy Making. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
  10. Choi, B. C. K., Pang, T., Lin, V., Puska, P., Sherman, G., Goddard, M., . . . Clottey, C. (2005). Can scientists and policy makers work together? Journal of Epidemiol Community Health, 632-637.
  11. Datta, A., Jones, H., Febriany, V., Harris, D., Dewi, R. K., Wild, L., & Young, J. (2011). The political economy of policymaking in Indonesia: Opportunities for improving the demand and use of knowledge Diagnostic Studies. Jakarta: Overseas Development Institute.
  12. Datta, A., Nurbani, R., Satria, G., Antlov, H., Fatonie, I., & Sabri, R. (2018). Policy, change and paradox in Indonesia: Implications for the use of knowledge. Jakarta.
  13. Dhakidae, D. (2003). Cendekiawan dan kekuasaan dalam negara Order Baru. Jakarta: Gramedia Pustaka Utama.
  14. Durnova, A., & Zittoum, P. (2013). Discursive Approaches to Public Policy. Revue francaise de science politique, 63(3), 569-577. https://doi.org/10.3917/rfsp.633.0569
  15. Fischer, F. (2003). Reframing Public Policy: Discursive Politics and Deliberative Practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  16. Flink, T., & Kaldewey, D. (2017). The new production of legitimacy: STI policy discourses beyond the contract metaphor. Research Policy.
  17. Government of Indonesia(2018). Draft Peraturan Presiden Republik Indonesia tentang Rencana Induk Riset Nasional 2017-2045 [Presidential Decree Draft on the Master Plan of National Research 2017-2045].
  18. Hanida, R. P., Irawan, B., & Syamsurizadi. (2015). The Analysis of Planning and Budgeting Policy for Making More Significant Local Government Planning Policy in Indonesia. International E-Journal of Advances in Social Sciences, 1(2), 287-293.
  19. Holmes, J., & Clark, R. (2008). Enhancing the use of science in environmental policy-making and regulation. Environmental Science and Policy, 11(8), 702-711. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2008.08.004
  20. Hope, M. R., Ringa. (2012). Discursive institutionalism and policy stasis in simple and compound polities: the cases of Estonian fiscal policy and United States climate change policy. Policy Studies, 33(5), 399-418. https://doi.org/10.1080/01442872.2012.722286
  21. Jackson, S. F. A., Fazal, N., & Giesbrecht, N. (2010). Hierarchy of Evidence: Which Intervention Has the Strongest Evidence of Effectiveness. Paper presented at the Canadian Bes Practices Portal for Health Promotion and Chronic Disease Prevention.
  22. Kallerud, E. (2010). Goals conflict and goal alignment in science, technology and innovation policy discourse. Paper presented at the EAAST 2010 Conference: Practicing Science and Technology, Performing The Social, University of Trento, Italy.
  23. KSI. (no year). About Knowledge Sector Initiative. Retrieved 17 February, 2018, from http://www.ksi-indonesia.org/en/pages/knowledge-sector-initiative
  24. Lee, K., Platts, J., & Minshall, T. (2016). Explorations of Evidence-based Policymaking (EBPM) for Reconciling Science and Policy: Developing a Conceptual Framework for Improved Understanding of EBPM in Wind Industry Emergence. Science and Technology Policy Review, 6(2), 146-173.
  25. Lewis, J. M. (2003). Evidence-based policy: A technocratic wish in a political world. In V. Lin & B. Gibson (Eds.), Evidence-Based Health Policy: Problems and Possibilities. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  26. Likens, G. E. (2010). The role of science in decision making: does evidence-based science drive environmental policy? Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 8(6), e1-e9. https://doi.org/10.1890/090132
  27. MacDougall, J. J. (1976). The Technocratic Model of Modernization: The Case of Indonesia's New Order. Asian Survey, 16(12), 1166-1183. https://doi.org/10.2307/2643453
  28. McCann, L. (2014). A discursive institutionalist analysis of global policy ideas in the creation of the United Nations Peacebuilding Commission. Policy Studies, 35(5), 458-483. https://doi.org/10.1080/01442872.2014.946481
  29. Mietzner, M. (2009). Indonesia's 2009 Elections: Populism, Dynasties and the Consolidation of the Party Systems. Sydney: Lowy Institute.
  30. Neilson, J., & Wright, J. (2017). The state and food security discourses of Indonesia: feeding the bangsa. Geographical Research. doi: 10.1111/1745-5871.12210
  31. Nutley, S., Powell, A., & Davies, H. T. (2013). Alliance for Useful Evidence: Alliance for Useful Evidence.
  32. Nutley, S., & Webb, R. (2000). Evidence and the policy process. In H. T. Davies, S. Nutley & P. C. Smith (Eds.), What Works: Evidence-based Policy and Practice in Public Service (pp. 13-41). Portland: The Policy Press.
  33. OECD. (no year). Multifactor Productivity. Retrieved 05 February, 2018, from https://data.oecd.org/lprdty/multifactorproductivity.htm
  34. Parkhurst, J. (2017). The Politics of Evidence: From Evidence-Based Policy to the Good Governance of Evidence. Oxon and New York: Routledge.
  35. Pawson, R. (2006). Evidence-based Policy: A Realist Perspective. London: Sage Publication.
  36. Polkinghorne, D. E. (1995). Narrative configuration in qualitative analysis. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 8(1), 5-23. https://doi.org/10.1080/0951839950080103
  37. Pratikno. (2012). Pengambilan Keputusan Berdasarkan Kepentingan Politik [Decision Making Based on Political Interest], Antara News. Retrieved from http://www.antaranews.com/berita/336388/pengambilan-keputusan-berdasarkan-kepentinganpolitik.
  38. Purwaningrum, F. (2016). Managing challenges and cultivating collaborations in Indonesia's knowledge society. International Social Science Journal, 66(219-220), 63-78. https://doi.org/10.1111/issj.12084
  39. Ristekdikti. (2017a). Pemaparan RIRN 2017-2045 [Presentation of RIRN 2017-2045]. Jakarta.
  40. Ristekdikti. (2017b). Rencana Induk Riset Nasional 2017-2045. Jakarta: Retrieved from http://simlitabmas.ristekdikti.go.id/unduh_berkas/RENCANA%20INDUK%20RISET%20NASIONAL%20TAHUN%202017-2045%20%20-%20Edisi%2028%20Pebruari%202017.pdf.
  41. Rosser, A. (2016). Resisting Marketization: Everyday Actors, Courts and Education Reform in Post-New Order Indonesia. In J. Elias & L. Rethel (Eds.), The Everyday Political Economy of Southeast Asia (pp. 137-156). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  42. Saltelli, A., & Giampietro, M. (2017). What is wrong with evidence based policy, and how can it be improved? Futures, 91, 62-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2016.11.012
  43. Schauz, D. (2014). What is Basic Research? Insights from Historical Semantics. Minerva, 52, 273-328. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-014-9255-0
  44. Schmidt, V. A. (2008). Discursive Institutionalism: The Explanatory Power of Ideas and Discourse. The Annual Review of Political Science, 11, 303-326. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.11.060606.135342
  45. Schmidt, V. A. (2011). Reconciling Ideas and Institutions through Discursive Institutionalism (Vol. 47-64). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  46. Shiraishi, T. (2014). Indonesian Technocracy in Transition: A Preliminary Analysis. Southeast Asian Studies, 3(2), 255-281.
  47. Souto-Manning, M. (2014). Critical narrative analysis: the interplay of critical discourse and narrative analyses. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 27(2), 159-180. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2012.737046
  48. Stone, D. (2002). Policy Paradox: The Art of Political Decision-Making. London: W.W. Norton.
  49. Sutcliffe, S., & Court, J. (2005). Evidence-Based Policymaking: What is it? How does it work? What relevance for developing countries? London: Overseas Development Institute.
  50. Sutmuller, P. M., & Setiono, I. (2011). Diagnostic on Evidence-based Public Policy Formulation under Decentralisation. Jakarta: KSI.
  51. Viva. (2017). Anggaran Riset dan Inovasi Rp1,7 Triliun untuk 2018 [Budget for Research and Innovation in 2018 is IDR 1.7 billion], Viva. Retrieved from https://www.viva.co.id/digital/971853-anggaran-riset-dan-inovasi-rp1-7-triliununtuk-2018
  52. Wahlstrom, N., & Sundberg, D. (2018). Discursive institutionalism: towards a framework for analysing the relation between policy and curriculum. Journal of Education Policy, 33(1), 163-183. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2017.1344879
  53. Wonglimpiyarat, J. (2011). Government programmes in financing innovations: Comparative innovation system cases of Malaysia and Thailand. Technology in Society, 33(1-2), 156-164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2011.03.009
  54. World Economic Forum. (2015). Global Competitiveness Report 2015-2016. Geneva: World Economic Forum.
  55. WSJ (Producer). (no year, 16 February 2018). Said On the Street: What Indonesians Think About the Fuel Subsidy Debate.
  56. Znoj, H. (2007). Deep corruption in Indonesia: Discourses, practices, histories. In M. Nuijten & G. Anders (Eds.), Corruption and the Secret of Law: A Legal Anthropological Perspective. Hampshire: Ashgate.