More than two decades have passed since Indonesia\u2019s Waqf Law came\ninto force. During that time, enthusiasm for developing waqf has grown,\nwith seminars, conferences, training, nazhir certification, programme\nlaunches and various productive waqf innovations continuing to\nemerge.<\/p>\n
Waqf is discussed more often, introduced more widely and involves an\nincreasing number of professionals. Yet amid this development, which\ndeserves recognition, a fundamental question needs to be asked: has the\ngrowing activity in the waqf movement been accompanied by greater\nbenefits that people actually experience?<\/p>\n
This question is not intended to belittle the hard work of those\nadvancing waqf. Many organisations and individuals have devoted their\nenergy and ideas, and even made personal sacrifices, to its\ndevelopment.<\/p>\n
But recognising these efforts must not prevent us from having the\ncourage to evaluate their results. In managing a social trust, good\nintentions, busy activity and administrative success do not in\nthemselves prove that the public good has been achieved.<\/p>\n
Law No.\u00a041 of 2004 provides clear direction. Article 5 states that\nwaqf serves to realise the potential and economic benefits of waqf\nproperty for religious purposes and public welfare.<\/p>\n
Meanwhile, Article 43(2) explicitly mandates the productive\nmanagement and development of waqf property. More than two decades on,\ntherefore, the challenge should no longer be limited to promoting waqf\u2019s\neconomic potential. Greater emphasis should be placed on demonstrating\nhow that potential is converted into tangible and sustainable\nbenefits.<\/p>\n
Institutional development has indeed advanced. According to a\npublication by the Indonesian Waqf Board (BWI), the 2024 National Waqf\nIndex (IWN) score rose to 0.316 from 0.301 in 2023. However, the same\npublication identified process and outcome as areas requiring further\nstrengthening, particularly in recording surpluses from productive waqf\nmanagement and the distribution of benefits.<\/p>\n
These findings are a reminder that institutional progress does not by\nitself prove that waqf\u2019s economic and social benefits for the public\nhave been optimised.<\/p>\n
This points to a more fundamental concern: we must not become\nincreasingly adept at expanding waqf activities without becoming equally\nadept at demonstrating the added value they create.<\/p>\n
A seminar may be declared successful because it attracts hundreds of\nparticipants, features prominent speakers, produces recommendations and\nreceives extensive coverage. Administratively, all the event\u2019s\nindicators may have been met. But the economic questions remain\nunanswered.<\/p>\n
What changes after participants return to their organisations? Have\nany waqf assets become more productive? Has nazhir governance improved?\nHave communities received additional benefits?<\/p>\n
The problem is not the seminar itself, but the assumption that\nsuccess in holding an event is equivalent to success in achieving its\nobjectives.<\/p>\n
In organisational theory, this phenomenon is known as goal\ndisplacement, in which the means gradually replace the ends. An activity\noriginally intended to improve waqf management risks becoming a measure\nof success in its own right.<\/p>\n
The same issue should be considered in nazhir certification.\nImproving competence is a genuine need and should not be treated as a\nmatter of dispute. However, individual competence is different from\norganisational capacity. A nazhir may understand risk management, asset\ndevelopment and waqf accounting, yet still lack the authority, systems\nsupport or resources to put that knowledge into practice.<\/p>\n
Therefore, the number of certified participants is not enough as a\nfinal measure of professionalisation.<\/p>\n
Evaluation should examine changes in practice six months or a year\nlater. Certification should be part of an institutional transformation\nprocess, not merely an administrative achievement that ends when a\ncertificate is issued.<\/p>\n
From an economic perspective, this issue is directly related to the\nefficient allocation of resources. Every rupiah spent on seminars,\ntraining or institutional development has an opportunity cost. The money\nand staff time devoted to one activity cannot simultaneously be used for\nalternatives such as supporting nazhir, resolving asset-ownership\ndocumentation, strengthening accounting or building the capacity of waqf\nenterprises.<\/p>\n
Of course, an expensive activity is not automatically wasteful. A\nlarge-scale forum may generate strategic partnerships and policy changes\nwhose benefits far exceed its costs. Conversely, even a modest activity\nmay be inefficient if it does not address real problems. The appropriate\nmeasure is not the venue\u2019s prestige or the size of the audience, but\nwhether the costs are reasonable in relation to the expected and\nverifiable benefits.<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/waqf-busy-or-making-an-impact-1792738385", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }