1 / 28

INDONESIA DEMOCRACY AND DEMOCRATIC GOVERNANCE ISSUES NATIONAL SURVEY – 2008

INDONESIA DEMOCRACY AND DEMOCRATIC GOVERNANCE ISSUES NATIONAL SURVEY – 2008. Alan Wall Democracy International March 2009. The authors’ views expressed in this document do not necessarily reflect the views of the

audra-gonzales
Download Presentation

INDONESIA DEMOCRACY AND DEMOCRATIC GOVERNANCE ISSUES NATIONAL SURVEY – 2008

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. INDONESIA DEMOCRACY AND DEMOCRATIC GOVERNANCE ISSUES NATIONAL SURVEY – 2008 Alan Wall Democracy International March 2009 The authors’ views expressed in this document do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States Government

  2. Methodology • Last in series of 3 annual surveys • 2000 person random sample • Nationally representative • Margin of Error for national data +/- 2.2% • Additional 500 oversample for provincial data analysis only • Face to face interviews • Field work implemented 30 May to 12 June 2008

  3. Focus • In the 2006 - 2008 period survey focus has narrowed a little • Many common questions in all three years • For 2008, the following subject areas were covered Support for democracy Justice system Parliament Rule of law Institutions of governance Law enforcement agencies Pluralism/religious tolerance Gender equity Local government/decentralization Overseas workers Corruption • Breadth rather than depth: not ask why or how come to opinions • A huge amount of data from the three annual surveys

  4. A Few Key Issues - 1 • Some regression from 2007, but in general more positive than 2006 • Continued but less broad commitment to democracy – more motivated by tangible benefits. Indifference becoming more widespread • No significant changes in attitudes on pluralism. Cultural tolerance, but religion a more divisive issue • In all three years more awareness of/ more satisfaction with executives than legislatures. Improvements in satisfaction with most institutions since 2006, but decline from 2007 • Positive views on local government services and accountability. Main local government issue is transparency, as in ‘06 and ‘07

  5. A Few Key Issues - 2 • Increase in % who believe police subject to influence: little change for courts, prosecutors (majority for police and local courts) . • Continuing widespread trust in media - and police, despite belief that they are subject to influence. • Increasing incidence of payment for free government services • Widespread concern about impact of corruption – more so on national than local issues. Unusually strongly expressed feelings on its impact. • Papua - not as positive as ‘07, but better than ‘06 • Aceh – some continued consolidation of ‘06 gains • North Sumatra - relatively negative.

  6. Support for Democracy • No significant change ’07-’08 • Since ‘06 increase in those indifferent • Relationship of education and SES level to indifference • Similar decrease in those preferring democracy • Decrease greatest amongst urban, secondary educated, low SES • Aceh : 28% prefer democracy (majority in ‘06 & ‘07) • Papua: 32% prefer democracy

  7. Tangible benefits more likely to be chosen • Low choice of some key principles • Decrease in choice of some principles • Human rights, equal gender rights exceptions to this • Democracy supporters more likely to choose principles, indifferent choose tangibles • Importance of economic success in building support for democracy Meanings Attached to Democracy

  8. Pluralism in Indonesia • No significant changes in 2006-2008 period • Strong support for cultural pluralism • Lesser support for religious pluralism – though still majority on public religious issues • Support for political diversity tempered by respect for majority view. INSERT GRAPHIC TO ADD MAP MAP IS 6.17” TALL

  9. Awareness of Institutions (in %) • Except for Const. Court, a majority is aware • Few decreases since ‘06 • Lesser awareness of national legal/ anti- corruption institutions – but has increased on ‘07 • Most widespread awareness of local admin., executive & DPR

  10. Net Satisfaction Ratings of Select Institutions % Of Those Aware Of Institution • Generally down on ‘07, up on ‘06 • More positive for local level institutions – KPU best of national institutions • More positive attitudes to ‘integrity’ bodies • DPR negative – worse than 2006 • North Sumatra all rated negative • Jakarta also relatively negative

  11. Who Knows Their Elected Representatives? • Increase in those who know regent/ mayor • Few know name of a legislative representative • Regional differences: • Governor: South Sumatra (99%), Jakarta (87%), Papua (80%), WIJ (78%), NTT(0%). • Regent/mayor: South, North Sumatra, WIJ, over 90%, Papua 88% • DPRD-2 representative: Papua (37%), WIJ (20%), Aceh (17%)

  12. Trust in Local Leaders and Officials • For all, more have high than low trust • % which ‘trust’ higher than in ‘06, mixed compared to ’07 • More likely to trust traditional leaders than local government officials – in all provinces (very large gap in Aceh) • In most cases rural more likely to trust than urban • Many are not aware of local NGO/community group leaders, or local judicial officials

  13. Who Is Most Trusted to Solve Local Disputes • Change in preferences since ’06 • From police to local government officials, and increasingly, to traditional leaders • Differences between urban/rural in ‘06 &’07 in using police, local government officials not present in ’08. • Rural still more likely to use traditional leaders • Majority in Aceh, West Sumatra, WIJ most trust traditional leaders

  14. Trust in Other Institutions • High trust in media – esp. TV (59%) • 44% trust in police – return to similar level to ’06 (52% in ‘07) • Split attitudes to political parties – no improvement since 2006 • Many still not aware of NGOs – lack of depth in civil society? • Almost 50% not aware of internet news

  15. Tax Value: % of Those Paying Taxes • Decline in taxpayer base since 2006 • 49% pay land tax (62% 2006) • Only 2% say pay income tax (6% in 2006) • 41% say pay no tax (30% 2006) • OF THOSE PAYING TAXES: 65% in 2008 say services received at least equal to taxes paid. Decrease from 73% in 2006, but up from 37% in IFES 2003 survey

  16. Net Ratings on Local Government Issues (in %) • Improving net ratings on accountability, service provision and accountability • Large improvement on services • Some improvement on responsiveness (to neutral) • Negative and declining net ratings on transparency (+ high DKs - >20%)

  17. Net Ratings on Local Government Capabilities (in %) • Less positive than ‘07, more positive than ‘06 – except for finance • High DKs for finance (>30%) • Finance negativity reflects opinion on financial transparency. • Much more negative in North Sumatra

  18. Back to 2004 support for religion playing no role • In ‘08, majority believe that religion should play no/ minor role • 38% think it should play main or important role (down from 50% in 2007) • Split attitudes of Muslim respondents in ‘08: 42% say at least an important role; 39% say no role • Regional differences: majorities pro important role in East Java, South Sulawesi; majorities pro no/little role in North & South Sumatra, West & Central Java, Aceh Religion’s Role in Political Affairs

  19. Government Regulation of Public Behaviour • Majorities support regulation of women’s mobility, oppose regulation of religions people may practise • Fairly even split on women’s clothing • Near 50% oppose regulation of criticism of public figures • No significant differences in opinions of men and women, or urban/rural • Secondary+ educated less likely to agree with regulation

  20. Equal or better Opportunity for Women in Various Areas of Life (Trend) (in %) • Improvement since ’06 in opinions on opportunities for women in most areas – especially credit, family finance, policy influence. • Leadership opportunities an exception • Large majorities all 3 years in social (health, education) and some economic areas believe women have at least equal opportunity • Both genders have similar views

  21. Effectiveness of Government Anti-Corruption Efforts • Return to 2006 opinions after negative move in ‘07 • As in ‘07, relationship with awareness of/satisfaction with BPK, KPK • Majority negative views in Jakarta, East Java • In Aceh, 15% agree are effective; in Papua 22%, both with very high unaware/DK

  22. Institutions & Groups Inappropriately Attempting to Influence Court Decisions • Few significant changes in opinions since 2006 – slight decrease for higher courts • Government officials (75%), most likely to be mentioned, then politicians (62%). 34% say NGOs • All groups more widely mentioned in Jakarta. High in South Sulawesi, East Java for government officials and politicians. • Government officials seen as most likely to successfully use influence

  23. Outside Influences on Justice System • Police most likely to be seen as influenced (71% - increase on ‘07 and ‘06) • Most at similar levels to ‘06 • Local courts increase on ‘07 • Police seen as most likely to be subject to influence: 39% say always/usually, (36% in ‘06), Const. Court least likely (12% vs 15% in ’06 - but 59% DK) • Urban residents more likely to believe institutions are influenced, rural not to have an opinion

  24. Percent Reporting Making Irregular Payments • These are services that should be free • Steady increase since 2006 in those paying for KTP, registering birth, irregular payments to police • % of applicants paying for KTP ranges from 90% in WIJ (compared to 65% in Papua), 82% in East Java to a low of 24% in Aceh • Rural more likely to say have paid for KTP; rural/urban similar for others

  25. Corruption in Provision of Local Services • Different perceptions of specific local vs national corruption issues • On all issues but education, housing, a plurality say there is corruption • Urban more likely to think there is corruption than rural • Most widespread in North Sumatra for price of sembako (85%) and for critical services (69%), for education in WIJ (53%) • <35s, high SES more likely to say affects jobs.

  26. Impact of Corruption on Provision of Local Services : % of Those Who Believe There Is Corruption • Marked by high proportion of ‘very bad’ rating • Over 80% of those who believe there is corruption on any issue rate the effect as bad or very bad • As %’s of national population, those who say bad/very bad effect are : 42% for clinics etc 41% for sembako 36% for government services

  27. Corruption in National Economy/ Governance • More widespread belief that there is corruption in national level issues than at local level • The vast majority in all demographic groups believe there is corruption in the national economy. • Urban more likely than rural to believe corruption affects parliaments (74% to 56%) : 90% in Jakarta. • Jakarta higher for all • On all issues, younger, higher educated more likely to believe there is corruption

  28. Impact of Corruption in National Economy/Governance: % of those Who Believe There is Corruption • Very high ‘very bad’ effect ratings • As % Indonesian population: 79% believe that corruption has bad/very bad effect on the economy 55% on parliaments 51% on business competition 51% on foreigners opinions of Indonesia

More Related