Consider both the good and bad effects of Indonesia's policy on moving its capital city

Indonesia is going to move the capital city to East Kalimantan. It should involve many individuals and groups.

Consider both the good and bad effects of Indonesia's policy on moving its capital city


nusantara as Indonesia new capital city

East Kalimantan was where the central government of Indonesia wanted to build the new capital city. The Ministry of National Development Planning and the National Development Planning Agency (Kementerian PPN/BAPPENAS) say that Kalimantan, outside of Java, should be the next capital city for several reasons. The first is about the number of people. Statistics Indonesia (BPS) data from 2015 shows that about 57% of Indonesia's population lives on Java Island. The second worry is how much the economy adds to the gross domestic product. In 2018, 58.49% of the country's GDP came from Java Island, mainly from the Jabodetabek area. Third, data from the Ministry of Public Works and Public Housing (Kementerian PUPR) in 2016 show that Java also needs help getting enough water.

The fourth thing to consider is that Java has a lot of land changes. Based on the modeling of the Strategic Environmental Assessment (KLHS) and BAPPENAS, the amount of developed land in Java is about five times higher than in Kalimantan. The second reason builds on the first: Java has enormous urbanization growth, especially in Jakarta, Bogor, Depok, Tangerang, Bekasi, Puncak, and Cianjur. About 32 million people live in the area, written as Jabodetabekpunjur. The last reason Jakarta has many environmental problems is flooding, land subsidence, heavy river pollution, high traffic congestion, etc. (Menteri PPN/Kepala BAPPENAS, 2019).

On the other hand, some people don't like the idea of building a new capital city. House of Representatives (HCR) members had some negative things to say. They say that policy can be changed slowly, even though Indonesia has a high poverty rate and money problems. At the same time, four well-known economists disagree with the plan. David Henley, a professor of Contemporary Indonesia Studies at Leiden University, said that moving the capital to a new city could make the political elite less aware of how people live. Didik J. Rachbini, a senior researcher at the Institute for Development Economics and Finance (INDEF), said the Indonesian government should be more serious about this policy. He also thought that Kalimantan's economic equality would remain the same.

A senior economist at INDEF, Fadhil Hasan also points out that not all countries can move their capital city. People gave examples like Malaysia, from Kuala Lumpur to Putrajaya, Australia, and Seoul, from Seoul to Sejong. Professor Emil Salim of the University of Indonesia's Faculty of Economics and Business said comparing Indonesia, which is made up of many islands, to other countries was wrong. He also said the central government's reasons were unjust and unreasonable.

As an example of a significant policy, this kind of policy is an excellent example of why the central government should pay more attention to the pros and cons in the public sphere. Since, as Dye (2002) said, "public policy is whatever governments choose to do or not do," it would be wise to include as many other stakeholders as possible in this policy.


This paper uses data from other sources. This paper uses several academic journals, published statistical data, and a published survey report to give information that can be used to make policy.

Literature Review

This paper is more of an "analysis of policy" than "research on policy." Weimer and Vining (2011) say these terms differ in several ways. Policy research is about predicting the effects of changes in variables that can be changed by public policy. On the other hand, policy analysis is about comparing and evaluating different ways to solve social problems by public actors. They also said that "clients" for these two terms are other. Policy actors in the same field will use policy research results, while policy analysis results will go to specific decision-makers. Policy research also includes using formal methods to answer questions about policy and/or predict what will happen. On the other hand, policy analysis tends to expect how different options will work by putting together research and theory that has already been done. Both policy research and policy analysis have deadlines, but the deadline for policy analysis is shorter.

There are two types of policy analysis: analysis 'of' policy and analysis 'for' policy. Gordon, Lewis, and Young devised this way of grouping things. Later, some scholars used this way of grouping things, but in a slightly different way. Hogwood and Gunn (1984) put "evaluation" in both "analysis of policy" and "analysis of policy," but Parsons (1995) and Hill (2005) put it in "analysis of policy." Table 1 shows how these scholars are different from each other. This paper, in the form of an analysis of policy, will give information that can be used to make policy.

Several scholars have looked into the idea of moving to the capital city. Ishenda and Guoqing (2019) tried to find out what causes capital cities to move. They looked at factors like gross domestic product (GDP) per capita, economic growth, area, population, density, the form of government, territorial forms, and capital type. Using the logistic model to look at the data, they can see four essential variables: GDP per person, area, population, and population density. They said that Indonesia has met all four requirements and could move to its capital city soon. Table 2 shows the capital cities of several countries that have moved since World War II.

In his work from 2019, Shalih said that moving to the capital city should consider a disaster. The government of Indonesia should use a multi-hazard risk perspective when planning space for a study on where to move the capital city. The capital city should never be in danger from a natural disaster. He also said that building individual, community, and regional resilience is just as important as preparing for any type of disaster that could happen.

Several groups in civil society are worried about moving the capital city from Jakarta to East Kalimantan. Whose New Capital City is it, Anyway? They said that the move was a bizarre thing to do. In the province of East Kalimantan, many mining companies are linked to names in political parties and even in the cabinet. The move could also hurt the environment in some way.

It's also essential to think about the legal and democratic sides. Mihradi (2019) reminds us how important the first part is. So much has been said about the capital city of Indonesia, from the constitution to the rules for each sector. When moving from Jakarta to another area, you have to make many changes. The next part, democracy, is about being open and getting people involved. The central government needs to be clear about academic papers or policy papers that support the idea of moving Indonesia's capital city.

A plan is still being made to move Indonesia's capital city. The central government is still writing a Bill of Rights for the Capital City. But moving has been written into the Government Work Plan (RKP) 2020 and the National Medium-Term Development Plan (RPJMN) 2020–2024.

Findings Analysis

After talking about the pros and cons above, the central government has a few choices:

  1. The first choice is to keep things the same. It means the central government should keep doing what it does now.
  2. Second, the central government could put the project on hold. They should give a good research or study report that shows moving to the capital city is what the people of Indonesia need right now. The study also looked at other things, such as laws or rules, the environment, budget, money issues, etc. They should look at how other countries that have moved their capital cities have done it. BAPPENAS could reach a consensus by combining the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and the assurance region model of data envelopment analysis (DEA). Takamura and Tone (2003) used this method to plan some government agencies' move out of Tokyo, Japan. Or, the central government could do multiple criteria decision analysis (MCDA) by bringing in stakeholders. But before mapping and analyzing stakeholders were required, not all stakeholders could participate in decision analysis. Due to limited funds, BAPPENAS, which is part of the central government, should only use this option.
  3. The third way to get things in order is to "call a meeting." This could make the ideas of the Indonesian people stronger. A lot of people, especially younger people, have good ideas. In this second turn, President Joko Widodo of the Republic of Indonesia is joined by some Millennial Special Staff. They might be hiding some great ideas. Diaspora Research and Innovation were just started by the Indonesia Endowment Fund for Education (LPDP) and the Ministry of Research and Technology. One goal is to stop the spread of the COVID-19 coronavirus disease (LPDP, 2020).

The author thinks the best suggestion is the second one. As I've already said, moving to the capital city of Indonesia is a critical policy. It should be viewed from many different angles because it will affect many other things and pose many risks. Using AHP and DEA together, as was done in Japan, is something the author strongly recommends.


Here, the author gives a detailed plan for carrying out the second option above:

  1. Do stakeholder mapping. As a first step, the government, or just BAPPENAS, should diagram the relationships between the stakeholders and the issues. This diagram helps people understand which problems are significant and how their relationships with those issues might connect them to others (Bryant, 2003).
  2. BAPPENAS moves on to the next step: do a comparative site evaluation based on the map. In this step, the most important people from the mapping are involved. From now on, things will be more open, and people will be more involved.
  3. The third and last step is spreading the word. When the study or research is done, getting the word out will be very important. There may be more than one thing to think about. The study will be easier to understand because of the sharing.


Indonesia's central government could begin as soon as possible. Because the idea is already in the Government Work Plan (RKP) 2020 and the National Medium-Term Development Plan (RPJMN) 2020–2024. The lack of time will be one of the biggest worries. The government seems to want to finish moving the capital city by 2024. As President of the Republic of Indonesia Joko Widodo wants, it will be a race against time to build a modern and eco-friendly capital city. The COVID-19 pandemic will, of course, be a big problem. The economy is in a recession because of this pandemic, and in the end, this is hurting the national budget (APBN), maybe not just in 2020 but also in 2021.


The critical policy is to move the capital city of Indonesia. There must be a lot of people and groups involved. Because of this, the author says that a stakeholder map should be the first step in making decisions about this policy. Then, the central government, most likely BAPPENAS, would include them in making decisions. Lastly, the results of any studies or research that have been done in the past must be made public.


Bryant, J. (2003). The Six Dilemmas of Collaboration: Inter-organisational Relationships as Drama. Chichester: Wiley.

CNBC Indonesia. (2019, August 26). Jokowi Pindahkan Ibu Kota, 4 Ekonom Senior Ini Tak Setuju. Diambil kembali dari

Dye, T. R. (2002). Understanding Public Policy (10th ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Gordon, I., Lewis, J., & Young, K. (1977). Perspective on Policy Analysis. Public Administration Bulletin(25), 26-30.

Gustinara, A. (2019, November 15). Rencana Pemindahan Ibu Kota Negara dari Perspektif Struktur Ekonomi. Diambil kembali dari PPI Delft:

Hill, M. (2005). The Public Policy Process (4th ed.). Essex: Pearson Education Ltd.

Hogwood, B. W., & Gunn, L. A. (1984). Policy Analysis for the Real World. New York: Oxford University Press.

Ishenda, D. K., & Guoqing, S. (2019). Determinants in Relocation of Capital Cities. Journal of Public Administration and Governance, 9(4), 200-221. doi:10.5296/jpag.v9i4.15983

Johansyah, M., Rupang, P., Apriando, T., Zamzami, Meutia, H., Saini, A., . . . Prayoga, A. P. (n.d.). Ibu Kota Baru Buat Siapa? Jakarta: FWI, JATAM, Pokja 30, Pokja Pesisir dan Nelayan, Trend Asia, dan Walhi.

LPDP. (2020, April 10). Launching Riset-Inovasi Diaspora bersama Menristek/BRIN, DIPI, dan Para Ilmuwan Indonesia di Mancanegara. Diambil kembali dari LPDP:

Menteri PPN/Kepala BAPPENAS. (2019, June 26). Dampak Ekonomi dan Skema Pembiayaan Pemindahan Ibu Kota Negara. Jakarta: Kementerian PPN/BAPPENAS. Dipetik May 6, 2020, dari

Mihradi, R. M. (2019, August 14). Menimbang Multidimensi Pemindahan Ibu Kota. Diambil kembali dari

Parsons, W. (1995). Public Policy: An Introduction to the Theory and Practice of Policy Analysis. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

Patton, C., & Sawicki, D. (1993). Basic Methods of Policy Analysis and Planning (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Pratomo, H. B. (2019, May 5). 5 Pro dan Kontra Rencana Pemindahan Ibu Kota Presiden Jokowi. Diambil kembali dari

Shalih, O. (2019). Pemindahan Ibukota Negara Indonesia, Perspektif Kebencanaan. Dalam N. S. Rahatiningtyas, & F. Hashilah, Aplikasi Spasial untuk Pembangunan (hal. 65-70). Depok: Departemen Geografi UI.

Takamura, Y., & Tone, K. (2003). A comparative site evaluation study for relocating Japanese government agencies out of Tokyo. Socio-Economics Planning Sciences, 37(2), 85-102. doi:

Weimer, D. L., & Vining, A. R. (2011). Policy Analysis: Concept and Practice (5th ed.). New York: Routledge.


Post a Comment