CO-PRODUCTION: STUDI TENTANG POLA-POLA PENYEDIAAN RUANG PUBLIK TERPADU RAMAH ANAK DI JAKARTA

Loa Mei Ling, Erwin Fahmi
| Abstract views: 27 | views: 11

Abstract

Public space has an important role for the development of city residents. Humans need a place to gather and interact with others. In DKI Jakarta, the reduced width and quality of public spaces, especially green open spaces, presents its own difficulties in creating adequate public space for various age groups and social classes of society. One step to get around this difficulty is to revitalize the function of the park into an interactive community park with a variety of functions called the Child Friendly Integrated Public Space (RPTRA). This program has been running for 4 years. To evaluate this policy, the thesis that forms the basis of this paper evaluates the provision of RPTRA in two regions, namely the Alfa Dahlia RPTRA and the Nias Nias III RPTRA, using the concept of co-production. With this concept, the RPTRA's 'production' process will be understood, the benefits and prospects for its sustainability after the role of regional governments is increasingly limited. This research uses a qualitative approach. Data is mainly collected and analyzed through field observations, interviews, and observations of artifacts, as well as secondary data studies. The research findings show that, despite having different degrees of co-production, the two RPTRA have the prospect of surviving and developing in the future.

 

Abstrak

Ruang publik memiliki peran penting bagi perkembangan warga kota. Manusia memerlukan tempat berkumpul dan berinteraksi dengan sesama. Di DKI Jakarta, berkurangnya luas dan kualitas ruang publik, khususnya ruang terbuka hijau, memberikan kesulitan tersendiri untuk mewujudkan ruang publik yang memadai bagi berbagai kelompok umur dan kelas sosial masyarakat. Salah satu langkah untuk menyiasati kesulitan ini adalah dengan merevitalisasi fungsi taman menjadi taman komunitas interaktif ragam fungsi yang disebut dengan Ruang Publik Terpadu Ramah Anak (RPTRA). Program ini telah berjalan 4 tahun. Untuk mengevaluasi kebijakan ini, tesis yang menjadi dasar makalah ini mengevaluasi penyediaan RPTRA di dua kawasan, yakni RPTRA Alur Dahlia dan RPTRA Kelapa Nias III, menggunakan konsep co-production. Dengan konsep tersebut, hendak dipahami bagaimana proses ‘produksi’ RPTRA tersebut, kemanfaatan dan prospek keberlanjutannya setelah peran pemerintah daerah semakin terbatas.  Penelitian ini menggunakan pendekatan kualitatif. Data terutama dikumpulkan dan dianalisis melalui observasi lapangan, wawancara, dan pengamatan artefak, serta kajian data sekunder. Temuan penelitian menunjukkan bahwa, meskipun memiliki derajat ko-produksi yang berbeda, kedua RPTRA memiliki prospek untuk tetap hidup dan berkembang di masa mendatang.

Keywords

Alur Dahlia dan Kelapa Nias III; Co-Production; Ruang Publik Terpadu Ramah Anak (RPTRA)

Full Text:

PDF

References

Alford, J. (2014). The Multiple Facets of Co-Production: Building on the work of Elinor Ostrom. Public Management Review , 16 (3), pp. 299-316

Bovaird, T.,Van Ryzin, G. G., Loeffler, E., & Parrado, S. (2015). Activating Citizens to Participate in Collective Co-Production of Public Services. Journal of Social Policy, 44 (01), pp. 01-23.

Creswell, John W. (2013). Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches. Third Edition. Los Angeles: Sage

McKean, Margaret A. (2000). Common Property: What Is It, What Is It Good For, and What Makes It Work? Dalam Clark C Gibson, et.al.(ed.). People and Forest: Communities, Institutions, and Governance. Cambridge: The MIT Press.

Mungkasa, O M. (2017). “Ruang Publik Terpadu Ramah Anak / RPTRA: Konsep, Implementasi dan Pembelajaran”. Presentasi dalam FGD Penyediaan Ruang Terbuka Hijau (RTH) yang Responsif Gender dan Ramah Anak. DKI Jakarta.

Osborne, S., Z. Radnor, and K. Strokosch. (2016). “Co-Production and Co-Creation of Value in Public Services: A Suitable Case for Treatment?” Public Management Review 18 (5): 639–653.

Ostrom E, Parks, Whitaker G and Percy S. (1978). “The Public Service Production Process: A Framework For Analyzing Police Services.” Policy Studies Journal 7: 381-389

Ostrom, E. (1996). “Crossing the Great Divide: Coproduction, Synergy, and Development”. Dalam Michael D. McGinnis (ed). 1999. Polycentric Governance and Development. Ann Arbor: The Univ. of Micigan Press. Pp 346-374

Ostrom, E. (2010). “Beyond Markets and States: Polycentric Governance of Complex Economic Systems”. American Economic Review 100, 641-672.

Pestoff, V. (2014). Collective Action and The Sustainability of Co-Production. Public Management Review, pp. 383-401.

Radjawali, I. (2004). Pemahaman Terhadap Pola Aktifitas Ekonomi Untuk Mengidentifikasi dan Melakukan manajemen Konflik pada Ruang Terbuka Publik. Simposium Nasional Managing Conflicts in Public Spaces Through Urban Design, (pp. 83-91).

Sacchetti, S., & Campbell, C. (2015, Februari 24). Creating Space for Communities: Social Enterprise and the Bright Side of Social Capital., 03 (02), pp. 32-48.

Savitri, A. W. (2015). Mengenal Lebih Jauh RPTRA, Taman Multifungsi di Sudut-sudut Ibu Kota. Jakarta, DKI Jakarta.

Stake, Robert E. (1994). “Case Studies”. Dalam Norman K Denzin dan Yvonna S. Lincoln (Eds.). Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publication. Pp 236 – 247.

Think Local Act Personal. (2011). Co-production in Commissioning. London, United Kingdom, England.

Van Eijk, C., & Steen, T. (2016). Why Engage in Co-Production of Public Services? Mixing Theory and Empirical Evidence. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 82 (01), pp. 28-46.

Wikipedia. (2017, Oktober 29). Ruang Publik Terpadu Ramah Anak. Retrieved Juni 13, 2018, from Wikipedia: https://id.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruang_Publik_-Terpadu_Ramah_Anak

Copyright (c) 2020 Jurnal Muara Sains, Teknologi, Kedokteran dan Ilmu Kesehatan
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.