Public Policy Formulation Model Based on Local Interest in Border Areas

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET) Volume 10, Issue 04, April 2019, pp. 11-22, Article ID: IJCIET_10_04_002 Available online at http://iaeme.com/Home/issue/IJCIET?Volume=10&Issue=4 ISSN Print: 0976-6308 and ISSN Online: 0976-6316

PUBLIC POLICY FORMULATION MODEL BASED ON LOCAL INTEREST IN BORDER AREAS

Muhammad Yunus Departement of Public Administration, Faculty of Social and Political Science, Hasanuddin University, Makassar, Indonesia.

Fitriani, Vinsenco R. Serano, Albertus and Y. Maturan Departement of Public Administration, Faculty of Social and Political Science, Musamus University, Merauke, Indonesia.

Hasniati Hamzah Departement of Public Administration, Faculty of Social and Political Science, Hasanuddin University, Makassar, Indonesia.

ABSTRAK. This study aims to analyze and condition the formulation or policy formulation in border areas with very strong cultural influences, especially those directly adjacent to other countries. The study focused on photographing policies that must be carried out by the government against strong suspicions of inequality and the possibility of being released from the sovereignty of the Indonesian state. This study uses a participatory approach or also called the Participatory Rural Apraisal (PRA) method. The PRA method is operated by involving people to participate in assessing, recognizing and understanding what is needed quickly and together evaluating and searching for solutions to the problems at hand. The results of the study show that the development policies of the Border Areas in Merauke Regency have not been effective, due to the absence of adequate regulations to regulate cross-border problems. Keywords: policy formulation, development, border areas Cite this Article: Muhammad Yunus, Fitriani, Vinsenco R. Serano, Albertus, Y. Maturan and Hasniati Hamzah, Public Policy Formulation Model Based on Local Interest in Border Areas. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 10(04), 2019, pp. 11-22. http://iaeme.com/Home/issue/IJCIET?Volume=10&Issue=4

\http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJCIET 11 [email protected] Discretion of Street-Level Bureaucrats in Public Services: A Case Study On Public Health In Makassar

1. INTRODUCTION Almost all of Indonesia's border areas are underdeveloped areas whose conditions are very alarming as faces outside the country. So far the border area has been managed by prioritizing a safety belt approach so that socio-economic development becomes neglected. The Central Government is aware of the seriousness of this problem, and since 28 January 2010 has formed a National Border Management Agency (BNPP) as an institution of coordination and implementation of government programs to develop border areas. The development of the border region has a very close relationship with the national development mission, especially to guarantee territorial integrity and sovereignty, national defense and security, and improve the welfare of the people in the border region. A new paradigm, the development of border areas is to change the direction of development policies that have tended to be oriented "inward looking", to be "outward looking" so that the area can be used as a gateway to economic and trade activities with neighboring countries. The current approach to developing the border region is to use the prosperity approach by not abandoning the security approach. Administratively, the land border area in Papua is in Papua Province, consisting of five districts / cities, namely: (1) Keroom Regency, (2) Jayapura City, (3) Pegunungan Bintang Regency, (4) Boven Digoel Regency, and (5 ) Merauke Regency. The land border line in Papua which borders PNG as a whole is 760 kilometers long, extending from Skouw, Jayapura to the north to the mouth of the Bensbach river, Merauke to the south. This boundary was determined by an agreement between the Government of the Netherlands and the United Kingdom on May 16, 1895. The number of pillar boundaries in the Papua border region that stretches from north in Jayapura to the southern part of the Merauke region is very limited and with very poor conditions. The number of main monuments (MM) available is only 52, while the monument is found in the amount of 1792. This area is also characterized by family and tribal attachments between the people of Indonesia and PNG which lead to the flow of people and traditional trade in goods through unofficial border doors. However, until 2007, remi / border posts were only found in Skouw, Temi District (Jayapura City) and in Sota District (Merauke Regency). The border area in Papua consists of forest areas, both conversion forests and protected forests and national parks. Physically, most of the border area of Papua consists of mountains and hills which are difficult to reach with the advice of four-wheeled and two-wheeled transportation, the only means of transportation that can be reached is by airplane or helicopter. However, when compared to PNG, the social and economic conditions of the Indonesian people in the Border region are still relatively good. Given the importance of the nagi border area of the integrity of the NKRI, a comprehensive management policy is needed, and it is expected that border area development can be carried out more planned, programmed, directed and measurable. The policy in question will certainly be credible if it goes through the right and conditional stages according to the state of the region. According to William Dunn (1998) that the policy stage consists of (1) agenda setting (agenda setting), (2) policy formulation (policy formulating), (3) policy adoption / legitimacy (policy adoption), (4) policy implementation ( policy implementation), (5) policy evaluation (policy evaluation). As we all know that before the formulation stage there was a stage of introducing an agenda which was a very strategic phase and process in the reality of public policy. Before a policy is established and implemented, policy makers need to set an agenda by including and selecting which issues will be prioritized to be discussed.

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJCIET 12 [email protected] Muhammad Yunus, Fitriani, Vinsenco R. Serano, Albertus, Y. Maturan and Hasniati Hamzah

Problems related to policies will be collected as much as possible to be selected. If an issue is successful in gaining status as a public problem, and gets priority on the public agenda, then the issue has the right to get the allocation of public resources more than any other issue. In the agenda setting is also very important to determine a public issue that will be raised in a government agenda. Policy issues (policy issues) are often referred to as policy problems (policy problems). According to William Dunn (1998), policy issues are products or functions of debates both about formulation, details, explanations and judgments on a particular problem. But not all issues can enter into a policy agenda. The preparation of the policy agenda should be based on the level of urgency and essence of the policy, as well as stakeholder involvement. A policy must not obscure the level of urgency, essence and involvement of stakeholders. Problems that have been included in the policy agenda are then discussed by policy makers. These problems are then defined to find the best problem solving. Solving these problems comes from various alternatives or existing policy options. It is the same as the struggle for a problem to be included in the policy agenda, in the stage of formulating the policies of each competing alternative to be chosen as a policy taken to solve the problem. Policy formulation as part of the public policy process is the most crucial stage because implementation and evaluation of policies can only be implemented if the policy formulation stage has been completed, besides the failure of a policy or program to achieve its objectives, mostly due to imperfections in the formulation stage (Wibawa ; 1994, 2). Policy formulation as a process according to Winarno (1989, 53), can be seen in 2 (two) types of activities, namely: 1. The first activity is to decide in general what is to be done or in other words the formulation is directed to obtain an agreement on an alternative policy chosen, a decision that approves is the result of the whole process. 2. Second Activity, directed at how policy decisions are made, in this case a policy decision includes an action by an official or institution to approve, change or reject an alternative policy chosen. The most dominant actors in the stage of policy formulation are actors whose powers and authority and interest groups are, which of course is influenced by external pressures and old habits, as well as the influence of external and personal characteristics, as well as past conditions. It becomes clear that policymakers ideally pay attention to all the effects, both positive and negative of their actions, not only for the citizens of their geopolitical units, but also for other citizens, and even future generations. Therefore, a responsible policy-making process is a process that involves interaction between groups of scientists, leaders of professional organizations, administrators and politicians. The situation in the field gives us a clear picture that border problems still have not received enough attention from the government. This is reflected in development policies that pay little attention to border areas and are more directed towards densely populated areas, easy access, and potential, while development policies for remote, isolated and disadvantaged areas such as border areas are still not prioritized. The RI-PNG border area of Sota district has considerable potential and has not been utilized optimally. Apart from the fact that there are physical and socio-economic limitations in this area, it is also due to the lack of attention of the center and local government The consequences include economic inequality, and the lagging behind development that is close to or which borders directly with foreign countries, namely Papua New Guinea. When compared with the border area of neighboring PNG, there is an economic imbalance in which the development of

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJCIET 13 [email protected] Discretion of Street-Level Bureaucrats in Public Services: A Case Study On Public Health In Makassar border areas in PNG is not as good as in Papua. In addition, the border area in PNG seems closed compared to Papua, so access to PNG is relatively limited. The characteristics of the Papua border region with PNG are different from other border areas in Indonesia such as West Kalimantan with Sarawak or Batam with Singapore. The slow pace of economic turnover and development in the border region of Indonesia - PNG, as well as considering its border region, makes the Merauke Regency Government, especially the Sota District Head, need a model to formulate policies in order to improve the welfare of local people living in the Pebatasan area in the National Wasur Park, with does not exclude security.

2. METHODOLOGY This assessment activity was carried out through a field survey approach. The analytical approach is a qualitative descriptive approach. The qualitative analysis approach is based on information obtained from the results of field surveys in the form of interviews with respondents and key informants or the results of Focus Group Discussion (FGD). The analytical method is descriptive-qualitative analysis, which is describing and analyzing secondary data, while qualitative analysis is intended for analysis of problems, potential, and challenges as well as analysis of policy formulation (Alexander et al., 2018; Elisabeth et al., 2018; Mangkoedihardjo, 2014; Philipus Betaubun and Nasra Pratama Putra, 2019; Supriyadi et al., 2019).

3. RESULTS Papua is the largest island owned by Indonesia, and has very rich natural resource potential. Papua is also known as the largest producer of gold mines in the world, as well as other natural wealth, such as oil mines, coal, forests, marine wealth, and natural scenery. But ironically, this province is still one of the poorest in Indonesia. Poverty is common in remote areas and border areas. These problems are increasingly complex considering the expanse of border areas in this province is very broad and the typology varies. Border management in Papua Province has not yet fully implemented management based on the management of "communities." This is due to the still dominant dominance of policy making in border management based on government interests. The general obstacle faced by Papua Province is the development gap with characteristics: low accessibility, limited facilities and infrastructure, relatively low population density, low quality of human resources, and not yet optimal development. Residents in border areas have low skills and lack of community income, thus impacting their aspects of life such as health, education and housing. Related to the social reality that people living in the border areas of Papua Province still have traditional and cultural unity, the values and norms of adat are usually stronger than national norms and ties. This certainly can be a problem in managing border areas. In addition, the role of civil society, academics and others has not shown maximum contribution. The problem lies in the government's inability to carry out development programs based on the interests of the community. Meanwhile programs related to increasing regional capacity and competitiveness in Papua from the central, regional and BUMN governments have not been optimal. This is due to the high sectoral ego and the weak coordination between agencies, where they run on their own so that the program's impact is barely heard. The involvement of the private sector in developing border areas is still minimal, making the development of the border area not fast and orderly. Another problem that often occurs in Papua is the transfer of boundaries, which usually occurs in the border area of Boven Digoel Regency and Merauke Regency with the state of

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJCIET 14 [email protected] Muhammad Yunus, Fitriani, Vinsenco R. Serano, Albertus, Y. Maturan and Hasniati Hamzah

Papua New Guinea. This shows the weak management of security issues in border areas. Shifts in regional boundaries usually occur due to the absence of strict data regarding the exact position of the location of the border region, so that it is easily moved. In addition, because of the similarity of tribes and identities between the two tribes of different nationalities, the borders of the state no longer matter. Papua's geographical environment is surrounded by mountains. This is very difficult for the construction of road infrastructure as access to residential settlements, especially in border areas. Meanwhile, security in the vast border region of Papua requires cooperation in defense and security among various parties. The region has been a crossing point for criminals in both the Papua Province and the state of Papua New Guinea, separatist escapades and hideouts and the entrance to the sale of marijuana. Management of state borders and the construction of border areas in the Papua Province must be carried out in a focused and systemic manner and have very high urgency. For this reason, there is a need for a grand design, master plan and action plan that will guide all sectors and regional heads involved in managing border areas in Papua. Because of geographical factors which make the level of difficulty in reaching the border areas in Papua high, a separate strategy is needed. Each relevant ministry / institution has programs and projects in overlapping border areas. Therefore, the mechanism and coordination of integration and synchronization of management of the Papua border area requires joint rules and commitments both at the central government level and at the regional government level. From the results of interviews, it was concluded that: a. The community that lives around the official entrance of the Indonesian border (Sota) wants a two-way engagement between the community and the government not only in making the agenda setting but also in the policy formulation stage, so that it can guarantee the representation of the needs of the people who implement the policy later. b. Leaders The community that houses clans around the Sota District states that so far there has been no government effort to involve Indigenous People or Community in the stage of policy formulation, and hopes that in the future they can involve them in the process, so that the government also knows and knows the value customary or cultural values in making policy choices, so that the policies chosen can at least remain in the correct paths of local cultural values. c. Religious leaders stated that they fully supported the selection of policies chosen by the government because in fact the voice of the government was the voice of the people / society that God had left. However, if it is allowed, religious leaders are also invited to attend, listen and provide input on the selection of policies to be chosen. d. Academics argue that according to the theory of public policy, in the stage of policy formulation it is only focused on how a strategic leader decides from several alternative policies that exist, so that it will open opportunities for influences and intervention from outside and inside parties. Then it takes a neutral leader attitude so that it can produce the right policy selection. Of course this must involve many parties to provide input to the leader, especially from the community who feel the direct policy that will be implemented later. e. Political actors claim that the policy decisions chosen are indeed the rights of strategic leaders in the government, by listening to input from expert staff or colleagues and / or leaders above. f. Strategic leaders argue that as leaders have tried to consider all policy choices at the stage of policy formulation, it's just that wise thinking is needed and has a capable decision-making ability while still receiving input from all parties.

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJCIET 15 [email protected] Discretion of Street-Level Bureaucrats in Public Services: A Case Study On Public Health In Makassar

g. The government has always been involved in the policy formulation stage by being invited to provide input on policies that will be the choice of the leader. Group Disscusion Forum (FGD) which brings together 7 elements to see whether the results of interviews conducted previously will be aligned or different after direct discussion. And it turned out that the FGD results stated that the majority wanted a change in the process of policy formulation stages, which involved many elements not only political stakeholders. This proves that there is a common perception between the results of previous interviews with the results of the FGD, a pattern of change is formed, especially for the actors who will be involved in the stages of policy formulation which have been very close to the possibility of influences from actors who will feel the implementation of the policy.

4. DISCUSSION Tjokroamidjojo (1991) says that policy formulation is the same as policy formation is a series of actions to choose various alternatives that are carried out continuously and never completed, in this case including decision making. Further on the state (public) policy-making process, Udoji (Wahab; 2001, 17) formulated that state policy making as "The whole process of articulating and defining problems, formulating possible solutions into political demands, channeling those demands into the political systems , seeking legitimacy of the preferred course of action, legitimacy and implementation, monitoring and review (feedback). These stages reflect ongoing activities that occur over time. Each stage is related to the next stage, and the last stage (policy assessment) is associated with the first stage (agenda setting) or the middle stage in activities that are not linear. Policy formulation as a process according to Winarno (1989, 53), can be seen in 2 (two) types of activities, namely: 1. The first activity is to decide in general what is to be done or in other words the formulation is directed to obtain an agreement on an alternative policy chosen, a decision that approves is the result of the whole process. 2. The second activity is directed at how policy decisions are made, in this case a policy decision includes an action by an official or institution to approve, change or reject an alternative policy chosen. In line with Winarno's opinion, Islamy (1991, 77) divides the policy formulation process into the formulation of policy issues, arranging government agendas, formulating policy proposals, ratifying policies, implementing policies and evaluating policies, as below: a. Formulation of policy issues. In principle, even if a particular event, situation and situation can cause one or several problems, so that it becomes a public problem depends not only on its objective dimension, but also subjectively, both by the community and decision makers, is seen as a problem which should be solved or found a way out. Therefore, a problem, to be able to turn into a common problem is not only enough to be experienced by many people as a problem that needs to be addressed immediately, but the community needs to have political will to fight for it and more importantly, the problem is responded positively by policy makers and they are willing to fight for a common problem that becomes a policy problem, put it into the government agenda and try it into public policy, then the first step that must be done by each policy maker is to identify the problem to be solved and then make the clearest formulation of the problem. This activity is an attempt to determine the identity of the policy problem by first understanding and

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJCIET 16 [email protected] Muhammad Yunus, Fitriani, Vinsenco R. Serano, Albertus, Y. Maturan and Hasniati Hamzah understanding the nature of the problem so that it will be easier to determine the nature of the policy formulation process. b. Compilation of government agendas. Because there are so many public problems identified, decision makers will choose and determine which problems should be given top priority to be taken seriously and actively, so that this government agenda usually has a characteristic that is more concrete and limited in number. Anderson (1966, 57-59) mentions several factors that can cause general problems to be included in the government agenda, namely: If there is a threat to balance between groups (equlibirium group), where the groups hold a reaction and demand government action to take the initiative to overcome this imbalance. Political leadership can also be an important factor in the preparation of the government's agenda, when political leaders are encouraged by consideration of political gain or involvement in paying attention to the public interest, so that they always pay attention to public problems, disseminate and propose solutions. Furthermore, after the public problem is put on the government agenda, the decision makers process it into phases, which Jones (ibid) divides into 4 (four) stages, namely: (1) problem definition agenda, namely things (problems) that get active and serious research and formulation from decision makers; (2) agenda proposals, namely things (problems) that have reached the proposed level, where there has been a change in the phase of formulating the problem into the problem solving phase; (3) bargaining agenda, namely the policy proposals were offered to get active and serious support; and (4) continuing the agenda, namely things (problems) that are discussed and assessed continuously. c. Formulation of policy proposals This stage is an activity of compiling and developing a series of actions that need to solve a problem, including: (1) Identification of alternatives is done for the sake of problem solving. Regarding problems that are almost the same or similar, policy alternatives that have been chosen can be used, but for new problems, policy makers are required to creatively discover and identify new policy alternatives so that each alternative is clearly characteristic, because of identification true and clear in each alternative policy will simplify the alternative formulation process. (2) Defining and formulating alternatives, aiming for each of the alternatives that have been collected by the policy maker to be clear in their understanding, because the more clearly the alternative is given understanding, the easier the policy maker will assess and consider the positive and negative aspects of each alternative that is. (3) Assessing alternatives, namely the activity of giving weights to each alternative, so that it is clear that each alternative has its own weight and weaknesses, so that by knowing the weight of each alternative, decision makers can decide which alternative is more allow to be implemented / used. To be able to properly assess various alternatives, certain criteria and relevant information are needed.

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJCIET 17 [email protected] Discretion of Street-Level Bureaucrats in Public Services: A Case Study On Public Health In Makassar

(4) Choosing satisfying alternatives. The process of choosing a satisfying alternative or the one that is most likely to be implemented can only be done after the policy maker has succeeded in evaluating alternative policies. An alternative that has been satisfactorily chosen will be a policy proposal that has been anticipated to be implemented and has a positive impact. The stage of satisfying alternative alternatives is always objective and subjective, in the sense that policy makers will assess alternative policies in accordance with the ability of the ratio they have, based on consideration of the interests of the parties who will obtain influence as a consequence of their choice. d. Ratification of policy As a collective process, endorsement of policy is a process of joint adjustment and acceptance of principles that are recognized and accepted (comforming to recognized principles or accepted standards). The main foundation for adopting is social variables such as the system of values of society, state ideology, political system and so on. The process of ratifying a policy usually begins with persuasion and bargaining activities (Andersson; 1966, 80). Persuasion is defined as "Efforts to convince others about something truth or value of one's position, so they want to accept it as their own". While Bergaining is translated as "A process in which two or more people who have the power or authority regulate / adjust at least some of the goals that they do not agree on in order to form a series of actions that can be accepted together even though that is not ideal for them". Those included in the bargaining category are agreements (negotiations), give and take and compromise. Both persuasion and bargaining, both complement each other so that the application of both activities or processes will facilitate the process of ratification of the policy. As a process, the policy formulation stage consists of several components (elements) that relate to each other so that they form a systemic pattern in the form of input - process - output - feedback. According to Wibawa (1994, 13), the components (elements) contained in the policy formulation process are: a. Action. Policy actions are intentional actions which are always carried out in an organized and repetitive manner to form certain patterns of action, so that eventually they will create norms of action for the policy system. If in the early stages of the growth of the policy system and the objectives of the system are determined in advance to determine what actions will be taken to achieve these objectives, then in the next turn, when the system is in place, the norm formed by the pattern of action will change or at least affect the objectives system. b. Actor. People or actors involved in the process of policy formulation will provide support and demands and become targets of policies produced by the policy system. The most dominant actor in the policy formulation stage with internal demands, in the sense of having the power or authority to determine the content and give legitimacy to the policy formulation, is called a policy maker. Meanwhile, actors who have other qualifications or characteristics with external demands are known as interest groups, political parties, professional elite leaders and others. To be able to continue playing in the system, they must have a commitment to the rules of the game, which was initially formulated jointly by all actors. At this level the commitment of the actors will make them obey the common rules or norms. In addition, compliance with these norms is even a necessity, because it is assumed that achieving system goals will be realized if all actors comply with common norms.

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJCIET 18 [email protected] Muhammad Yunus, Fitriani, Vinsenco R. Serano, Albertus, Y. Maturan and Hasniati Hamzah e. Value orientation. The process of policy formulation in principle relates to the process of identifying and analyzing diverse values and then determining values that are relevant to the interests of the community, so that each policy produced will have value implications, both implicitly and explicitly. Therefore, actors who play a role in policy formulation do not only function to create a balance between different interests (muddling through or balancing interests), but also must function as valuers (valuers), namely being able to create an agreed value together based on rational judgments in order to achieve maximum results. The stage of policy formulation as a process carried out by involving stakeholders (actors) to produce a series of actions in solving public problems through identification and analysis of alternatives, is inseparable from the values that influence the actions of the actors in the process. Anderson (1966), Winarno (1989, 16) and Wibawa (1994, 21) suggest that the values (measures) that influence the actions of decision makers in the process of policy formulation can be divided into several categories, namely: a. Political values, where decisions are made on the basis of political interests of political parties or certain interest groups. As generally in the critical paradigm in public policy, then in the phase of public policy formulation, the political reality surrounding the public policy making process should not be released in the focus of the study, because if we let go of the political reality from the public policy making process, the policy produced will poor aspects of the field while public policy itself has never been sterile from the political aspect. In this context, the policy formulation process is understood as a decision-making process that is largely determined by power factors, where the sources of power come from social strata, bureaucracy, academics, professionalism, and capital strength and so on. b. Organizational values, in this case decisions are made on the basis of the values adopted by the organization, such as rewards and sanctions (sanction) that can affect members of the organization to accept and implement them. At this level, the actions taken by stakeholders are more influenced and motivated by group interests and behavior, so that in turn, the resulting policy products better accommodate their organizational interests than the overall public interest. Therefore, there is a need for a systemic device that is able to eliminate this tendency. c. Personal values, where decisions are often made on the basis of personal values adopted by the decision maker to maintain the status quo, reputation, wealth and so on. The process of policy formulation in this context is better understood as a process that focuses on aspects of human emotions, personality, motivation and interpersonal relationships. The focus of this view is who gets what value, kappa he gets the value and how he actualizes the values he has embraced. d. Policy values, in this case the decision is made on the basis of the perception of policy makers about the public interest or moral policy making and can be accounted for. Included in this category are moral values, justice, independence, freedom, togetherness and others. This view sees how policy makers as personal are able to respond to stimulation from their environment. That is, here, there will be a lot to see about how a policymaker recognizes problems, how they use the information they have, how they determine choices from various alternatives, how they perceive the reality encountered, how information is processed and how information is communicated in the organization. e. Ideological values, where ideological values such as nationalism can be the basis of policy making, both domestic and foreign policies. In addition, ideology is also still a means to rationalize and legitimize policy actions carried out by the government.

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJCIET 19 [email protected] Discretion of Street-Level Bureaucrats in Public Services: A Case Study On Public Health In Makassar

Whereas according to Nigro and Nigro (Islamy; 1991, 25), the factors that influence the policy formulation process are: a. The influence of external pressures. Although there is a policy formulation approach with the name "rationale comprehensive" which means that the administrator as the decision maker must consider alternatives that will be chosen based on rational judgment, but the process and formulation of policy cannot be separated from the real world, so that external pressure influences towards the policy formulation process. b. The influence of old habits. Organizational old habits such as capital investment habits, sources and time for the activities of a particular program tend to always be followed, even though these decisions have been criticized as something wrong that needs to be changed, especially if an existing policy is considered satisfactory. c. The influence of personal traits. Various kinds of decisions made by decision makers are much influenced by his personal characteristics, such as in the process of receiving or appointing new employees, often the factors of the personal characteristics of decision makers play a huge role. d. There is influence from outside groups. The social environment of decision makers is also very influential, even often making decisions is done by considering the experience of other people who were previously outside the policy formulation process. e. The influence of past conditions. Past training experience and work experience influences decision making or even people who work in the head office often make decisions that are not in accordance with the conditions in the field, this is due to concerns that delegation of authority and responsibility to others will be misused. Value issues in the discourse of public policy analysis are metapolicy aspects because they involve substance, perspective, attitudes and behavior, both hidden and openly stated by the actors responsible for public policy formulation. The value problem is relevant to be discussed because there is one assumption that ideally the policy maker should have the wisdom as a king philosopher, who is able to make and implement his policies fairly so as to maximize public welfare without violating personal freedom. Then policy decisions inevitably must take into account multiple values. Awareness of the importance of multiple values is based on the notion of "ethical pluralism", which in the theory of decision making is often referred to as "multi objective decision making". So in this study offers a model of policy formulation especially for border areas that have the same conditions and characteristics as the Sota District of Merauke Regency, which is an innovation consideration of opinions according to Islam (1991, 77), Wibawa (1994, 13), Anderson (1966), Winarno (1989, 16) and Wibawa (1994, 21), and Nigro and Nigro (Islamy; 1991, 25), by including all elements of actors in the community to consider policy formulations that right to implement. Actors in this formulation model involved are:

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJCIET 20 [email protected] Muhammad Yunus, Fitriani, Vinsenco R. Serano, Albertus, Y. Maturan and Hasniati Hamzah

a. Strategic Leadership, is the main actor and determinant at the stage of policy formulation, which will decide which policy formulation is the right one to implement. b. Religious leaders, with the conditions of traditional culture and society that highly value religious leaders in a cultured environment, consideration is needed from religious leaders who live in border areas. c. Customary leaders, similar to religious leaders, customary leaders are more respected than the government, so much consideration is needed from local traditional leaders who juxtapose border areas, so that they can be input and receive support from indigenous / local communities in general. d. Local Communities, people who are domiciled in border areas who will feel first hand the implementation of policies that will be implemented. e. Politicians, political actors are needed as a balance between group interests and the general interests of society as a whole f. Academics, it takes elements of education and technology that understand the needs of the community, the needs of politicians, with the compatibility of theories or mechanisms or good stages. g. The government is absolutely involved because the government is the element of the actor who prepares the funds and who implements the policy in the future. h. Local Culture, all policy choices should consider the local culture and customs so that there is no violation of local cultural values. i. Non-Governmental Organizations, are neutral institutions that will be a balance when considering and implementing policies. The involvement of these actors can be done in stages by presenting all elements of the actors, namely: 1. Direct and documented interviews 2. Focus Group Discossion 3. Informal discussions The results of these activities are then documented and summarized in an official document validated by the Government / Regional Government and signed which is known to all elements of the actors involved. This official document is a matter of consideration for the strategic leadership in the selection of policy formulations especially in accordance with the conditions of the region, society and culture in the border area, in this case Sota District, Merauke Regency, Papua.

5. CONCLUSION Prospects and Progress Towards National Policy Border management is closely related to national and state sovereignty issues, community welfare, public services to border communities that are still lagging behind and neglected, and healthy environmental sustainability. Structuring the border area is closely related to the process of nation and state building (nation and state development) which can minimize the emergence of potential internal conflicts in a country and even with other countries. The handling of national borders is essentially part of the effort to realize the space of the archipelago as a unit of geography, politics, economy, socio-culture, and defense and security. The success or failure of a community development policy depends on the accuracy and accuracy of the policy. In this policy, there should be items of activities that will be

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJCIET 21 [email protected] Discretion of Street-Level Bureaucrats in Public Services: A Case Study On Public Health In Makassar implemented in the governance and development of the community. Therefore, policy formulation must depart from the root of the underlying problems in the place to be developed. The most crucial policy stage is the stage of policy formulation, so many actors need to be involved to give consideration to strategic leaders who are central actors who in the end are choosing the right policy formulation. The policy formulation model concerning the actors and elements involved in this stage in this study recommends 8 actors and 1 element, namely Strategic Leadership, Religious Leaders, Customary Figures, Local Communities, Politicians, Academics, Government, Local Culture, and Non-Governmental Organizations Society. Recommendations from various actors with the model offered are expected to be able to achieve the objectives of effective border area management, also need to have cross- ministerial, sector and government agency coordination the impact that is felt for people in the region.

REFERENCES

[1] Abdul Wahab, Solichin. 2001. Analisis Kebijakan dari Formulasi ke Implementasi Kebijakan Negara. Edisi Kedua. Jakarta : Bumi Aksara. [2] Alexander Phuk Tjilen, Fitriani, Hesty Tambayong, Albertus Yosep Maturan, Samel Watina Ririhena and Fenty Y. Manuhutu, 2018. Participation in Empowering Women and the Potential of the Local Community Economy, a Case Study in Merauke Regency, Papua Province, International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology, 9(12), pp. 167–176. [3] Anderson J.E, 1966, Cases in Public Making, New York, Preger Publisher. [4] Bintoro Tjokroamidjojo. 1991. Pengantar Administrasi Pembangunan. LP3ES. Jakarta. [5] Dina Limbong Pamuttu, Herbin F Betaubun and Ashari Jalil, 2018. Testing of Peat Soil Compressive Strength Using Mixed Materials of Calcium and Cement, International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 9(10), pp. 883–886. [6] Dunn, William N. 1998. Analisa Kebijakan Publik. Yogyakarta: Gadjah Mada University Press. [7] Elisabeth Lia Riani Kore, Funnisia Lamalewa, Ari Mulyaningsih. 2018. The Influence of Promotion, Trust, and Convenience to Online Purchase Decisions, International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology 9(10), pp. 77–83. [8] Islamy, Irfan M., 1991, Prinsip-prinsip Perumusan Kebijaksanaan Negara, Bumi Aksara Jakarta. [9] Mangkoedihardjo, S. 2014. Three Platforms for Sustainable Environmental Sanitation. Current World Environment, 9(2): 260-263. [10] Philipus Betaubun and Nasra Pratama Putra, 2019. Budget Planning Information System for Simple Housing in Merauke District,International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 10(2), pp. 783-792. [11] Supriyadi, Richard S. Waremra and Philipus Betaubun, 2019. Papua Contextual Science Curriculum Contains with Indigenous Science (Ethnopedagogy Study at Malind Tribe Merauke), International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 10(02), pp. 1994– 2000 [12] Wibawa, Samodra. Purbokusumo, Yuyun. Pramusinto, Agus. 1994. Evaluasi Kebijakan Publik. PT Raja Grafindo Persada, Jakarta. [13] Winarno B, 1989, Teori dan Proses Kebijakan Public, Yogyakarta, Medpress.

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJCIET 22 [email protected]