Obstacles to Regional Development in the Prosperity of Indigenous Papuans

 

Obstacles to Regional Development in the Prosperity of Indigenous Papuans

By Cak Bro (Member of Birokrat Menulis.org)

 

A.   A. Introduction

A few months ago I attended a webinar held by the Directorate General of State Property, Ministry of Finance with the theme of BMN Certification in Ministries/Agencies with sources from UGM Legal Experts on land. In the question and answer session, there were many complaints from the heads of the KPKNL Office who discussed the customary or customary land rights who complained about their territory even though the land had been certified by the ATR/BPN. The legal expert admitted that the government currently does not have complete data on customary land rights because it has not been reported to the local BPN office.

Sometimes land disputes often occur because of the overlapping of land that has been officially certified by the National Land Agency with the customary land of the local community. The legal expert regretted the court's decision that won the dispute case because the certified land was considered legal. Judges should be careful to examine more deeply the recognition of indigenous peoples' ownership rights even though they have not been reported because there are laws that protect the interests of indigenous peoples.

What's even more sad is that some indigenous peoples who report ownership to the BPN office are actually considered individual ownership or certain groups to be certified. As a result, clashes often occur between customary groups when some want to sell for economic reasons, and some refuse because customary land is considered ancestral land or sacred land that must be preserved. This phenomenon should be our reflection, due to economic progress and development which instead of prospering the local community, it has a negative impact on the indigenous population due to a shift in cultural values ​​(due to economic needs), even erosion or dilution of the preservation of community culture and local customary law. .

Likewise, when there is development in an area, it is as if the government is "taking down" the interests of the indigenous people. Conflicts or social frictions that occur, where indigenous peoples try to defend their customary lands as their ancestral heritage, are always considered as obstacles to development because the handling is carried out in pseudo rationality without understanding the real basis of the problem.

This should be our reflection again, what are the main objectives of development and modernization carried out in the regions? Is the development carried out for the sake of the central government's interest alone or only for the immigrant population, because because the results of development are not enjoyed by the community or indigenous people who should be the main goal or stakeholder.

The author in this case, tries to find literature related to development in Papua on the grounds that Papua is the only province that has laws that protect the interests of indigenous Papuans, even the provinces of Papua and West Papua have special autonomy rights and are supported by development funds. In very ideal conditions, the author has an assumption (hypothesis) that the development carried out there will certainly prosper the indigenous Papuan people. But in reality, after decades of development, the expected conditions have not yet yielded the expected results. Is there a conceptual error in the pattern of development strategies and their implementation?.

B.   B. Development in Papua

Since the Determination of People's Opinion (Pepera) in Papua in 1969 in Papua until now, the government has paid special attention to the Papua Province in order to align it with other provinces by boosting various developments in Papua. However, there is a misunderstanding in implementing the policy, because the development carried out seems to make a kind of modernization window there but does not reflect development to fulfill the basic needs of the Papuan people. As a result, the Papuan people (as indigenous people in Tanah Papua) have so far not felt or enjoyed the development carried out on their land.

Various policies have been set by the government by granting privileges compared to other regions, for example in 2001 Papua and West Papua obtained the status of special autonomous regions based on Law No. 21 of 2001 for the Papua region and Law No. 35 of 2001 for the West Papua region. 2007 on the Acceleration of Development in Papua and West Papua. The existence of special autonomy rights is a policy improvement because previous developments have not had a real impact on the Papuan people, where local governments are given the broadest authority to formulate, formulate, and design development strategies needed by local communities.

Whereas with special autonomy status, Papua has received a Special Allocation of Funds focused on Health and Education of 2% of the total national General Allocation Fund (DAU). You can imagine that in the last dozen years, tens of trillions of funds have been disbursed by the government for development in Papua. The real impact of development to narrow the distance/gap with other provinces has not been clearly seen because based on the ranking of development progress indicators, Papua is still in the lowest rank compared to other provinces, including indicators of illiteracy, school dropouts, prevalence of infectious diseases, and others.

C.   C. Causes of Development Failure in Papua

The conditions that occur should be our reflection together why this can happen?. Hasn't the Papuan government formulated a development program strategy according to the needs of the people there? Not to mention Papua's abundant natural wealth, isn't it also the basic capital for local revenue (PAD) as an additional support for development funds. These questions should be our study, there may be errors related to the paradigm of development patterns that have occurred so far. The author's curiosity was slightly answered after searching on google and getting a book entitled "Basic Values ​​of Papuans in Managing Governance (Governance): Anthropological Reflexive Studies" made by the policy research institute in Yogyakarta, namely the Partnership for Governance Reform Center for Learning and Advancing Experimental Democracy Indonesia Forestry and Governance Institute, 2012.

The book states that there is a misunderstanding in the pattern of development in Papua. When development occurred before special autonomy, the pattern of development was more focused or the paradigm of "development in Papua", so after the determination of special autonomy only shifted to the paradigm of "development for Papua". Why does this happen? One of the reasons is that the development strategy and design do not pay attention to the locality aspect or the local wisdom policy of the Papuan people.

The meaning of "development for Papua" is that in the application of policies, the pattern of development is only to imitate or copy and paste the regional development patterns of other provinces, especially the success of the western regions of Indonesia. Indeed, there is nothing wrong with referring to the pattern of development so that it can be as successful as other regions, but it should be adjusted to the regional conditions and culture of the people there.

Thus, in the design or formulation of development programs, both in terms of planning and implementation policy plans, they still use the regional or provincial approaches or assumptions and indicators that are referred to and become less realistic. Or in other words, the development pattern that is applied is based on rationality to catch up and not based on locality to meet the needs of the Papuan people. As a result, the development is carried out only as a showcase for the Papuan people or in the interests of the central government because the impact does not increase the value of the community's ability to improve their own welfare.

D.  D. Errors in the Regional Development Pattern Paradigm

According to the book, it also describes the failure of development patterns that should be able to improve people's welfare. caused by 3 factors, namely a) first, the pattern of development is assumed to be based on rationality and administrative behavior; b) second, there are differences in the values that exist there and are considered to be contrary to these assumptions, because they are irrational and inhuman, so they must be eradicated; and, c) third, development tends to ignore the customs and culture of the community which are considered obstacles and are not considered development potentials.

1.   Development Assumptions Based on Modern Rationality Universally

Mistakes that occur in development in Papua are due to the formulation of policies based on the assumption of modern rationality and administrative behavior as universal principles. In this case, the implementation of development is carried out with a uniform pattern (universal) and is considered the Papuan community to be homogeneous and not creative. Policy makers should see the heterogeneity of the Papuan people with their problems as the basis for assumptions, so that the development implemented is a solution to overcome the problems that occur there.

This happens because of the views of policy makers who think that rationality must be single (uniform) and it seems that it is enough to clone development from other regions that are successful to be implemented in the targeted area. However, the problem is not that easy. What is considered good for one group is not necessarily good for another group, and vice versa. The good and the bad of a problem is a perspective that is influenced by the values ​​that live and the culture that develops in society. Thus the values ​​that develop in Papua are not necessarily the same as the values ​​and culture that develop in Javanese society.

In addition, the assumption that rationality is universal arises because of the assumption that humans are not dynamic-creative creatures, but passive creatures. Whereas in reality, people who live in traditional societies are also creative and dynamic creatures. He will always be in a dialectical process with his environment. According to Peter L. Berger and Thomas Luckman, this problem requires a kind of internalization, objectivation, and externalization process. In this dialectical process, the educational factor is one of the factors that has a very significant role.

The difference between educated and uneducated people is not only a matter of graduation certificates but rather the development of a thinking paradigm that becomes the mindset of the community to see the various problems that occur. Because each individual is in a dialectical position with his environment, the rationality that appears tends to change along with the dialectical process and this is locality.

 

2.   Cultural Values and Local Wisdom as Obstacles to Development

One of the fundamental concerns of Papua's development that is not based on local values is the uprooting of the Papuan people from their local roots. If this kind of awareness is not instilled in the perspective of policy makers, both Papuans and non-Papuans involved in Papua's development, it is not impossible that the development strategy formulated will lose its spirit. Idealism to build Papua to be more prosperous and more dignified will only become a jargon or as a mere display case, because apart from the failure of the construction itself, the value of Papua is also lost.

Papua must be a land of hope for all Papuan people where they can live a decent, prosperous and happy life like their brothers and sisters in other areas. It is not a dream if the development of Papua is based on the needs of the community, involves community participation, and is based on the values of the Papuan people.

 

E.   E. Closing and Discussion

Development is not merely the ability to narrate and translate community needs in the form of programs, but how the community can be involved (participate) in the development process. Involvement in the development process is not only in the form of community involvement (as workers) to build, but also community involvement to take advantage of it. Because only community involvement starts from the development process to the utilization of development results, development will provide significant benefits for increasing the standard of living and dignity of the community.

To encourage active participation of community involvement in the development process, what is needed is development that is based on and involves the local potential of the community. The main error that often occurs in the development paradigm is that modern rationality has universal values ​​so that it can be applied in societies with different conditions. Therefore, the failure was not due to the immaturity of the program strategy being implemented, but rather to two things, namely the failure to read the priority needs of the community and the failure to understand the values ​​of the community in formulating development strategies. As a result, the development carried out tends not to reflect the needs of the community on the one hand, and creates the impact of conflict in the community over resistance on the other.

One solution to overcome this problem, policy makers and designers of development patterns should consider and/or provide space for social and cultural systems that live and develop in society. In other words, the development bureaucratic system in Papua must be translated and consider the socio-cultural system that lives and develops in society.

 

Reference:

1.      1. Nilai-nilai Dasar Orang Papua Dalam mengelola Tata Pemerintahan (Governance): Studi Refleksif Antropologis, Partnership for Governance Reform Centre for Learning and Advancing Experimental Democracy Indonesia Forestry and Governance Institute, Kemitraan bagi Pembaruan Tata Pemerintahan, Jakarta, 2012.