Does decentralisation promote learning? Local political settlements and education policies in Indonesia

ABSTRACT

This article examines the effect of local political settlements on education policies in a decentralised political system. Under what conditions does decentralisation promote learning-enhancing policies? Despite the numerous works on decentralisation and education, little is known about how local politics influences student learning. We develop a novel approach to the politics of education policies by looking at the effect of local political settlements on education policymaking. Using a heuristic case study method comparing three districts in Indonesia, we found that constraints on the discretionary power of the district head over employment decisions in the bureaucracy matter for the development of learning-enhancing policies. Such a constraint can pave the way for the development of the bureaucratic capacity required for local governments to pursue quality-promoting reforms. In the absence of such a constraint, the extent to which district governments will implement learning-enhancing policies depends on district heads’ commitment to learning.

KEYWORDS:

• Education
• learning
• decentralisation
• political settlement
• bureaucratic capacity
• Indonesia

Acknowledgments

This research was funded under the RISE Programme by the United Kingdom’s Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO), the Australian Government’s Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT), and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. We are grateful to Andrew Rosser, Daniel Suryadarma, and Shintia Revina who have generously shared their thoughtful ideas, comments, and suggestions for the initial research design and the draft of the article. We also thank Chris Bjork, Scott Guggenheim, and RISE anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments and criticism to improve the clarity of the article. We are indebted to Ridwan Muzir, Nuzul Iskandar, Muhammad Irvan Nur Iva, Nasrullah, Akhmad Fadli, Fajri Nida, Ratna Yunita, and Rizwar Anshari for their help and insights in data collection. We are also grateful to Alia An Nadhiva for her excellent research assistance. We also would like to express our sincere thanks to our informants, who have generously shared their time and knowledge with us so we can finish this article. The initial version of the article was presented at the 2021 ASA Sociology of Development Conference and the 2022 Annual Midwest Political Science (MPSA) Conference. We thank the participants of the conference for their valuable questions and feedback. We would also like to thank anonymous reviewers of this article for their thoughtful and constructive criticism and suggestions. The remaining errors are our own.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Ethical standards

The authors declare that the human subjects research in this article was reviewed by the Atma Jaya University Institutional Review Board under the Ethical Clearance Number 0156/III/LPPM-PM.10.05/02/2019.

Notes

1. Adat means tradition. The term may refer to the holders of local traditions in many regions in Indonesia. In some regions, adat actors are traditional political leaders.

2. Interview with a senior bureaucrat on 31 March 2021.

3. Interview with a senior bureaucrat on 24 March 2021.

4. Interview with a local NGO officer on 11 November 2020.

5. Group discussion with three national NGO officers who have built partnerships with Lontara and other districts in Indonesia. The interview was conducted on 20 October 2020.

6. Interview with a senior bureaucrat on 11 November 2020.

7. Interview with a member of the local legislature on 6 February 2021.

8. Interview with the chief editor of a local newspaper on 8 February 2021.

9. Interviews with a former bureaucrat on 15 February 2021 and a school principal on 2 February 2021.

10. Interview with a local academic on 15 February 2021.

Additional information

Funding

The work was supported by the RISE Programme.