Penelitian ini bertujuan menganalisis kegagalan bisnis pemerintah desa dalam pengelolaan Badan Usaha Milik Desa (BUMDes). Bisnis pemerintah desa salah satunya dapat dilihat dari pengelolaan BUMDes. Mengelola BUMDes berarti pemerintah desa menjalankan sebuah bisnis publik karena memanfaatkan dana desa sebagai modal utama BUMDes. Prinsip bisnis pemerintah yang paling penting adalah adanya relasi yang baik antara pemerintah dan pelaku bisnis. Oleh sebab itu penelitian ini berfokus menjawab pertanyaan bagaimanakah relasi yang dibangun antara pemerintah desa dan pelaku bisnis yang ditunjuk dalam pengelolaan BUMDes di Kabupaten Banyumas. Relasi yang dimaksud dalam hal ini adalah hubungan bisnis antara pemerintah desa dan pengelola BUMDes. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah deskriptif kualitatif. Informen penelitian ini meliputi unsur pemerintah desa, pengelola BUMDes dan juga masyarakat desa yang pernah berhubungan dengan BUMDes. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa relasi yang dibangun antara pemerintah desa dan pengelola BUMDes di Kabupaten Banyumas belum mengarah pada relasi bisnis yang saling menguntungkan. Penyebabnya adalah ketidakmampuan pengelola dalam memberikan nilai lebih kepada pemerintah desa. Pengelola masih menempatkan dirinya subordinat pemerintah desa, sehingga tidak memiliki kewenangan untuk melakukan berbagai inovasi. Pemerintah desa masih cenderung mendominasi peran mereka dalam pengelolaan BUMDes. Relasi bisnis yang mestinya dilandasi semangat entrepreneurship, etika bisnis dan kejelasan peran masing-masing pihak belum muncul dalam relasi antara pemerintah desa dan pengelola BUMDes.

No abstract

THE POLICY OF PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT IN PURWOKERTOABSTRAKPotensi kemacetan telah terlihat Purwokerto sebagai salah satu kota transit di Indonesia. Potensi ini terjadi akibat lonjakan jumlah kendaraan pribadi, sementara angkutan umum kian ditinggalkan karena kualitas layanannya yang kurang memadai dan tidak mampu menjawab tuntutan publik. Hal ini mengindikasikan gagalnya kebijakan tata kelola transportasi publik yang diselenggarakan pemerintah daerah. Untuk itu, sebuah alternatif kebijakan diperlukan guna mengatasi masalah transportasi publik. Pengembangan alternatif kebijakan dilakukan dengan teknik participatory policy analysis dalam paradigma analisis kebijakan deliberaitf. Teknik analisis kebijakan yang menekankan pada pengembangan alternatif kebijakan dengan melibatkan unsur masyarakat yang terkait dengan kebijakan dalam proses dialog untuk mengembangkan alternatif kebijakan. Proses dialog untuk pengembangan alternatif kebijakan tersebut dilakukan dengan memerhatikan aspek reciprocity, relationship, learning dan creativity di antara aktor kebijakan. Penelitian dilakukan dengan pendekatan penelitian kualitatif, dengan pemilihan informan menggunakan teknik pusposive sampling terhadap mereka yang dianggap berkompeten dan mewakili setiap unsur masyarakat yang terkait dengan kebijakan transportasi publik di Purwokerto. Penelitian berhasil bahwa pilihan kebijakan reformasi pengelolaan transportasi publik merupakan alternatif ideal untuk menjawab tuntutan publik akan transportasi publik yang berkualitas dan dapat diandalkan. Berdasarkan temuan penelitian, meskipun proses dialog kolaboratif mampu menghasilkan alternatif kebijakan, namun proses dialog itu sendiri tidak terjadi tanpa ada fasilitative leadership dan civil society. Komitmen elit pemerintah yang memfasilitasi (fasilitative leadership) dan adanya kesadaran serta wahana bagi masyarakat menyuarakan kepentingannya (civil society) menjadi aspek yang melengkapi model collaborative policy making.ABSTRACTThe potency of traffic density and congestion is already visible in Purwokerto as one of the city transit in Indonesia. It occurs due to the surge in the number of private vehicles, while public transportation is increasingly abandone, because the public transportation is no longer able to fulfill the public demand with its inadequate quality service. This indicates the failure of public transportation management policy organized by local government. Therefore, an alternative public transportation is needed to address the problem. The problem that arises in this research is what is the alternative policy that can be taken by local government? The development of policy alternative is carried out with Participatory Policy Analysis (PPA) technique. PPA was a deliberative policy analysis technique emphasize on the effort of alternative policy development by involving the public elements associated with public transportation policy were involved in the dialogue process to develop policy alternative. The dialogue process to develop the policy alternative was carried out by observing the aspect of reciprocity, relationship, learning, and creativity among the policy actors. This research was carried out using qualitative approach, with the selection of informant using purposive sampling technique. This research has found the public transportation reform policy are the most likely alternative to solve public interest about quality of public transportation. This research also has successfully developed the model of collaborative policy making based on the research finding, although the process of collaborative dialogue is able to produce the alternative policy; however this process of dialogue itself is not going to happen without the facilitative leadership and civil society. The commitment of government in facilitating (facilitative leadership), the awareness and a place for people to voice their interest can be the aspects that complete the model of collaborative policy making.

This paper discusses the imbalance of the role of stakeholders in the accountability of village enterprise management. One of the stakeholders dominates, this has hampered corporate actions based on public governance on the accountability of BUMDes management. Accountability is only carried out  as a form  of procedural accountability to the village government and district government. Even though there is a horizontal accountability mechanism to the public, it does not work effectively. One of the reasons for the accountability failure of BUMDes management is the unclear role and responsibility of stakeholders in managing BUMDes. Rural Communities, Representative Institutions (Badan Permusyawaratan Desa), Private Sector, and the ohter Village Institutions do not have proportional roles and responsibilities in the accountability mechanism for BUMDes management. It means the capacity of stakeholders in the accountability process of BUMDes management is relatively low. Even though the capacity of stakeholders is important to strengthen the accountability of BUMDes management, because all stakeholders can monitor and evaluate the management of BUMDes, so that the dominance of the Headman and BUMDes’s manager can be controlled. Therefore, in overcoming the vacancy in the role of stakeholders, this research proposes the need to create an accountability mechanism based on public governance, where all stakeholders will interact with each other with the aim of influencing the results of public policy. They interact with each other in the management of public organizations to fulfill various interests of the community. To integrate the role of stakeholders in the accountability of BUMDes management it is advisable to use an information system that can bring together all stakeholders in managing a BUMDes. The information system can be used to strengthen the accountability model based on public governance on the management of BUMDes.

The emergence of rural community owned enterprises khown as BUMDes has been in line with evolution of public administration pradigm, from OPA to NPM who implemented in local government. Local potency development becomes a substantial aspect to improving local competitiveness. Hence, BUMDes formation is one of the models financial capacity to develop local potency in rural level. The aim is comparing traditional and public enterprise based management in local potency management. The results show that there is a fundamental difference in the management of local potency in rural level. Consequently, We argue that has been on the right track, the evolution of the government business model to the public enterprise for the management of local potency in rural level. Evolution of BUMDes is from a bureaucratic to the business sector model, but as a social business not profit maximizing businesses.