Questioning the need for rules and regulations
Questioning the need for rules and regulations
By Ignas Kleden
JAKARTA (JP): Regulation and deregulation have become key words in public discussions of the political and economic conditions of Indonesia. The debates generally focus on whether we should tolerate more regulations or deregulate existing ones.
Regulation is the other side of rule. Regulation and rule are usually taken together because both make up the two inseparable aspects of a social norm. Every social norm is established with a double function. Internally, it aims to be a guideline to lead, to give directions, to show how someone should behave or what someone should do. Externally, it aims to inhibit. It establishes what someone should not do, or sets the limits which one should not trespass.
In sociological terms, the internal function of a social norm is called rule, whereas the external one is called regulation. The problem is that in many cases there are too many regulations with too few rules. When people are only told what they should not do, social behavior becomes oriented towards avoiding mistakes, rather than striving to achieve.
To put it in theological terms: the fear of sin is greater than the initiative to do good deeds.
One way to promote creative social behavior is to turn around the situation and create clear rules while reducing vague regulations. A taxi driver, a chief editor or a multinational manager is more likely to follow clearly established rules than attempt to escape regulations which are implemented according to the opportunity principle. Living with clear rules is easier and more creative than living under the pressure of unclear regulations.
One of social indicators which differentiates a modern state from a less modern one is that the former relies on the balance between rules and regulations whereas the second relies more on regulations.
The reason is evident. Clear rules allow citizens to argue about and contribute to social order, whereas regulations only afford officials the chance to talk about social order according to their own definition.
Some years back I took a taxi from Penang airport to the city's Beach Hotel. Used to sitting in a car without fastening the seat belt as is always the case in Jakarta, I just sat in the front seat waiting for the driver to start the car. He waited patiently until I caught a strange glimpse in his eyes. I asked him to start his car since I was late for a conference. Patiently and politely he said to me, "Sir, please fasten your seat belt according to Malaysian law". I was somewhat shocked, though in hindsight it remains for me a disarmingly beautiful experience. I only wish I could hear the same thing in my home country of Indonesia.
The writer is a sociologist with the Jakarta-based SPES Foundation Research Center.