No abstract

No abstract

Indonesia had recorded more than 132,000 COVID-19 cases, making it the nation with the highest number of cases in Southeast Asia-higher even than China's officially-reported figures.Many scholars and pundits have blamed this outcome on a disjointed policy response at the national level and incompetence on the part of the national bureaucracy in implementing these policies. But sub-national governments (provincial and city/district) have also played an important role in determining Indonesia's response to the crisis, claiming that they have shared responsibility for addressing the crisis.While local governments have often framed their responses in technocratic terms-that is, as being based on rational technical calculations about how best to address the public health and economic effects of the crisis-these responses have also been driven by deep-seated political and economic interests. Specifically, they have reflected efforts by local politicians to strengthen their grip on power. Furthermore, the claiming of responsibility for managing the crisis and concomitant authority by local governments has inhibited an effective response to the crisis.While many local leaders have tried to inject innovation and creativity into their handling of the pandemic, they have often had political interests or been constrained by the interests of others that have run counter to what is required to combat the continuing public health crisis.