| Summary: | Fire that swept Buntok Beringin Market on August 5, 2007 to make South Barito
regency government took a new policy without changing the relevant regulations that
market presence as one source of local revenue from user charges retribution on traders.
In addition, the measures taken by local governments can not be separated from the fate
of traders who hang their livelihoods from trading in these Buntok Beringin Market. The
existence of local government interests and the interests of traders against the policy,
making contestation of interests both in policy formulation, can not be avoided. This is
due, in the formulation of all interests will try to be processed in such a way so as to
produce policies that can accommodate both of actors. However, logically of course very
rarely there is a policy that is able to accommodate both of actors. Therefore, how well
resources are used by actors to win the contestation, be something significant for the
study.
Based on that fact, the question of the research is how to contestation of interests
between local government and the traders in retribution policy formulation in the Buntok
Beringin Market, South Barito Regency post-fire?
This study used a qualitative approach using case study method. While to obtain
data necessary documentation techniques will be used against a variety of formal and
informal documents that support. Next is the interview related to the resource persons, as
well as part of the confirmation of the documents that have been obtained. The latest
research techniques are observation field. To support the research methods used to
answer the research questions there are two theories used in, retribution policy
formulation in Buntok Beringin Market and actors contestation in public policy
formulation.
Based on research by the obtained findings that contestation in retribution policy
formulation in the Buntok Beringin Market, more as a form of arena used by local
governments to show their dominance against the trader. This is evidenced by not
reaching the trader wishes to be able to sell back, where they think strategically. In
addition, the retribution which, according to the traders will not be levied on the
unpermanent market, turned out to be collected back by local governments, without any
socialization with the merchant. Although in the end user charges retribution until now
has been reduced 50% from that determined by the local government. The dominance
was partly realized through constructive dialogue with the traders. But partly realized by
displaying local government as an actor who really has the power and authority to
regulate society. This is compounded by dependence on local merchants for the
provision of trading facilities that can accommodate all the traders. Contestation that
occurs not in the form of violence. But done through meetings between actors. And
follow up meeting with the submission of a request to an actor who has authority.
|
|---|