Dual development policy

State Minister of National Development Planning/Chairman of the National Development Planning Board Ginandjar Kartasasmita has of late been promoting the main components of what he sees as the ideal development paradigm for Indonesia. The ideas he expounded in various public speeches have made front-page news, but not because of their novelty or originality.

Many of the development programs the government has implemented over the past two decades have by and large actually been based on two different strategies suggested by Ginandjar.

What is intriguing about his observations is that many see his addresses as deliberations about the government and endorsement of the points of views so often expressed by government detractors.

Even though his addresses have not always reflected the government's views, the ideas he set out are still refreshing, especially when they contradict the practices of the present government. For a member of the cabinet to venture such postulations at a time when the government's tolerance of different opinions remains very low is by itself a newsworthy event.

Last April, Ginandjar listed the main requirements for a good and effective governance in a speech after he received an honorary doctorate degree in public administration from the Gadjah University, Yogyakarta. Many of the traits he mentioned cannot yet be found in the present governance.

Again late last month, when he was installed as a professor of public administration at the state Brawidjaya University in Malang, East Java, he talked of the need for different, yet inter-related and complementary strategies for the modern and traditional sectors.

The space of this column does not allow for elaboration on the definitions of modern and traditional sectors. It may suffice, for the sake of discussion, to define the traditional sector as the subsistence farming community in the rural areas and the modern one as the society who depends mainly on manufacturing, agro-industry and services.

Ginandjar suggested that the government minimize direct intervention in the modern sector and instead focus its attention on helping the modern sector stimulate, not suppress, the development of the traditional sector. The government has increasingly retreated from the modern sector through a series of deregulation measures. But the unleashing of the market forces on to the economy has not been supported by the establishment of game rules to guarantee fair, open competition and to prevent the abuse of market power.

The consequence, therefore, is that many sectors of the economy have become far more liberal than those in industrialized countries. Even more damaging is the prevalence of various forms of oligopolistic practices in many business areas with their stultifying effect on small and medium-scale businesses.

While the economy has increasingly been subject to market forces, several elements of statehood remain "strongly guided" by a paternalistic governance to maintain national stability and unity.

Ginandjar called for the empowering of the people in the traditional sector through a special strategy designed to protect them from being trampled by the modern sector, and to increase their ability to benefit from the opportunities provided by the government. But empowering, he said, does not mean making the people more dependent on government assistance.

In the past the government has implemented numerous programs targeted especially at poor people in both rural and urban areas, including the latest program launched last year to alleviate poverty in particular areas. But the way the programs were carried out tended to strengthen the feelings of submission and obedience among the people, rather than feelings of independence and self reliance. In fact, the dominant message in official information campaigns so far has been "no one can succeed without government assistance."

We might look too optimistic if we read too much into all the ideals postulated by Ginandjar, including on what he thinks would be the most effective governance in supporting the dual development strategies. We hope nevertheless that Ginandjar, as the chief development planner, will do his best to initiate the implementation of all those good things in his jurisdiction.