Fridays now hold new significance. For some civil servants (ASN),\nFriday is no longer just the end of the workweek, but a day to work from\nhome. The government describes this policy as part of the national work\nculture transformation, more efficient, more digital, and, most\nintriguingly, more energy-saving.<\/p>\n
In everyday conversations, Friday even feels like a new version of\n\u201cTGIF\u201d\u2014Thank God It\u2019s Friday. No longer just because the weekend is\nnear, but because there is a break from the usually hectic office\nroutine. The question is: is this policy truly about efficiency, or also\na reflection of the need for a more flexible work pattern?<\/p>\n
The government claims potential savings of Rp 6.2 trillion from the\nstate budget and Rp 59 trillion from public fuel expenditure. Figures\nthat, honestly, sound enticing. But, like all big numbers in public\npolicy, a simple question always follows: where does the saving come\nfrom, and who really changes their behaviour?<\/p>\n
It is reasonable that this claim draws attention. However, to\nunderstand if this approach is effective, it is interesting to see how\nother countries respond to similar challenges.<\/p>\n
Looking at practices in other countries, especially after the global\nenergy price surge, WFH is indeed used as one tool to control energy\nconsumption. However, almost no country relies on it as the main\ninstrument.<\/p>\n
Conversely, in ASEAN, the approaches also differ. Malaysia opts to\ntighten fuel subsidies through quota restrictions, Thailand adjusts\nsubsidy schemes, while the Philippines prepares aid packages to cushion\nthe impact of rising energy prices. This means that in many countries,\nenergy savings are pursued through pricing policies, subsidies, or\nmarket regulations, not solely through work behaviour changes like\nWFH.<\/p>\n
In the global context, this policy arises in a very specific\nsituation. The escalation of conflict in the Middle East has driven up\nworld oil prices and prompted many countries to seek quick ways to curb\nenergy consumption. In such situations, WFH is more appropriately seen\nas a quick response, easy to implement, requiring no major structural\nchanges, and able to immediately reduce daily mobility.<\/p>\n
However, in many countries, such approaches are clearly positioned as\nshort-term solutions. Once the pressure eases, the policy is evaluated\nor even discontinued. The issue in Indonesia is that the narrative does\nnot stop there. WFH is not only framed as a crisis response, but also as\npart of the \u201cnational work culture transformation\u201d.<\/p>\n
This means there is a possibility that this policy is not just an\nemergency brake, but an entry point towards more permanent change.<\/p>\n
This is where the issue becomes more concrete. WFH does not\nautomatically mean staying at home. People might still go out, to malls,\ncafes, or even travel. If that happens, the expected fuel savings could\nbe much smaller than imagined.<\/p>\n
From a behavioural perspective, this phenomenon is not too\nsurprising. It can be explained through the Theory of Planned Behavior\n(Ajzen), which views that behaviour is not only determined by rules, but\nalso by intentions, habits, and individual perceptions of what is\nconsidered normal. The WFH policy may change work rules, but it does not\nnecessarily immediately alter daily mobility preferences.<\/p>\n
In other words, without changes in incentives and daily habits, the\nreduction in commutes to the office could simply be replaced by other\nactivities. In this context, energy savings do not happen automatically;\nthey depend on whether behaviour truly changes, or merely shifts in a\nsubtler form.<\/p>\n
Furthermore, there is one question that is rarely touched upon: what\nabout the private sector?<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/wfh-for-civil-servants-and-the-old-question-of-energy-efficiency-1775008281", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }