Jurnal Bina Praja 8 (2) (2016): 175-185 p-ISSN: 2085-4323 | e-ISSN: 2503-3360 Jurnal Bina Praja
Journal of Home Affairs Governance Jurnal Bina Praja VOLUME 8 | ISSUE 2 | NOVEMBER 2016
e-ISSN: 2503-3360 | p-ISSN: 2085-4323
Accredita on Number: 735/AU2/P2MI-LIPI/04/2016 Valid thru: 24 April 2019
Jakarta, p-ISSN: 2085-4323 Bina Praja Vol. 8 Iss. 2 pp. 175-340 Accreditation Number November 2016 e-ISSN: 2503-3360 P : R D A M H A 735/AU2/P2MI-LIPI/04/2016 R I
http://jurnal.kemendagri.go.id/index.php/jbp/index The Effects of Social Capital for the Management of Environment Cleanliness in Adipura Programme
Ida Bagus Made Agung Dwijatenaya 1, *, Mutiara Kartika Dewi 2 1 Quality Assurance Agency (BPM) Universitas Kutai Kartanegara Jalan Gunung Kombeng No. 27 Tenggarong, Kutai Kartanegara – East Kalimantan 75512 2 Regional Research and Development Agency (Balitbangda) of Kutai Kartanegara Regency
Regent Received:Office Complex, 1 July Bappeda2016; Accepted: Building 7 4thOctober Floor, 2016; Jl. Wolter Published Monginsidi, online: Timbau 30 November Village, 2016 Tenggarong
DOI: 10.21787/jbp.08.2016.175-185
Abstract Social capital is a decisive factor in the management of environment cleanliness in Adipura Programme. Tenggarong
optimized.City in achieving This research clean city aims has to attemptedanalyse the various effects strategies,of social capital including for the by management considering theof environmental community social cleanliness. capital Thefactor. instrument Adipura Award used is for the Tenggarong questionnaire. City isThe unsustainable, sampling collection indicating technique that the uses role the of community simple random social sampling capital is method, not yet with the sample of 100 respondents. The analysis instrument used to test the hypotheses is Product Statistics and Service Solution (SPSS) Program version 13.0 for windows. The research result shows that community social capital positively
theand managementsignificantly affectsof environment the management cleanliness. of environmental It is recommended cleanliness. to Kutai Trust Kertanegara element positively Government and significantlyto always optimize affects the management of environment cleanliness. Cooperation and social norm elements positively but not significantly affect
the active role of community. Community Social Capital should be used optimally. Keywords: social capital, environment cleanliness, Adipura programme.
I. Introduction welfare. Managing environmental cleanliness is determined by various factors. One that determines adage that has been understood by the community. the successful management of environmental A healthyCleanliness community is the is base one ofof health,the indicators so is theof cleanliness is a factor of community social capital. people’s welfare. To that end, the management of urban environmental cleanliness becomes one contribute to the management of environmental Community social capital has been shown to of the government programs that continue to be cleanliness, as the research result of Yuanjaya encouraged. The issues of a city are indeed very (2015). As explained by the Regulation of the issue. The government, through the Ministry of Ministry of Environment Number 6 of 2014 on the Environment,complex, including is always the attempting environmental to improve cleanliness the 2 that Adipura Programme aims to build active Guidelines of Adipura Programme, Chapter II Article performance of urban environmental management, community participation. known as Adipura Programme. Adipura will succeed The fact shows that Adipura Award obtained depends on community participation. by Tenggarong City is unsustainable. Adipura Award Tenggarong City is one of the cities that once Adipuraobtained Awardby Tenggarong in 2016 City,was namelynot met. in To1994, realize 1995, a 1996, and 2014. The expectation of obtaining citywon isan clean, Adipura comfortable, Award. Tenggarong and at ease City which community in the clean city for Adipura Programme, various strategies endis expecting able to thepush award for the to achievement be sustainable, of sopublic the have been pursued, including by considering the
* Corresponding Author © 2016 Ida Bagus Made Agung Dwijatenaya, Phone : +62 813 5032 1841 Mutiara Kartika Dewi Email : [email protected] This work is licensed under the Creative 175 Commons Attribution-NonCommercial- ShareAlike 4.0 International License. factor of community social capital. cleanliness of the environment. Hygienic behaviour The issues of social capital that include an can be manifested if public awareness towards the element of trust, cooperation, and social norms environment grows and develops. Environmental have a very big role in managing environmental awareness according to Zen in Neolaka (2008) is cleanliness. Mutual assistance, which is a routine an attempt to involve every citizen in growing and fostering awareness to preserve the environment to diminish. Based on the objective circumstance, based on the value, that is the value of the activity of Tenggarong City community, has begun environment itself with the philosophy of living in and cleanliness norm as the elements of social peace with the natural environment. The awareness capitalit appears have thatbeen confidencereduced. To (trust),that end, cooperation, community to manage environmental cleanliness cannot be social capital to carry out various environmental activities needs to be developed. Based on the management is not solely carried out by the janitor alone.separated However, from to good optimize waste the management. social capital owned Waste the effect of social capital on the management of by Tenggarong community will be able to encourage above explanation, needed an in-depth study on the preservation of sustainable environmental cleanliness. environmental cleanliness in Tenggarong City. andFurthermore, norms) for the the research management questions of environmental are (1) how associated with prosperity or poverty, agribusiness is the influence of social capital (trust, cooperation, developmentVarious studies productivity, have shown and performance. that social capital Social is the management of environmental cleanliness? cleanliness? (2) how is the influence of trust in the welfare of the community as the results of capital affects positively and significantly towards (3) how is the influence of cooperation on the (2012); and Rohmani, et al. (2015). Meanwhile, environmentalmanagement of cleanliness? environmental cleanliness? and (4) theresearch research by Suandi result (2007);of Pramono Cahyono (2012) and stated Adhiatma that how is the influence of norms on the management of of socialSocial organization capital according such toas Putnamtrust, norms, in Winarni and (2011)that social shows capital that does social not significantlycapital linkages affect with the (2011) is defined to refer to the characteristics household poverty. Research result of Winarni community by facilitating coordinated actions. To putnetworks it simply, that it can can be improve stated that the social efficiency capital of is a (Sedana,productivity 2013). are Accordinglow. Social tocapital research has aby significant Andrews characteristic of a social organization that facilitates (2011),influence the on social the developmentcapital of communities of agribusiness and organizations positively affects the performance of the government. Realizing the positive impact of capitalcoordination depicts and the cooperation value of forsocial mutual relationships, benefit. social capital, it is advisable to make use of social trust,Furthermore, and norms of according mutual reciprocity to Coleman, between social capital in community and organization. the individual and society. Social relation is an In addition to physical capital and skill or important element in the social capital and is a intelligence capital (human capital), the social resource (Kitchen, et al., 2012). capital of the community will be able to encourage the community to manage the cleanliness of the et al. (2103) Social capital is the resources that environment on an ongoing basis. As the study are accessedAccording by to individuals Fujiwara and and Kawachi groups inin Thobias, a social structure, which facilitates cooperation, collective role that is no less important to physical, skill or action, and maintenance of norms. finding of Widodo (2014) that social capital has a According to Hasbullah as quoted by Syafril thatintelligence is able to(human encourage capital) people capitals. to always Furthermore, keep the lies in how the community ability in a group to work commitmentthe finding stated and consistency that social to capital the sustainability has a power togetherHadi (2014) to build that a the network point ofto socialachieve capital a common study of waste management, which has been running. the goal. The cooperation is characterized by a pattern result of Trajuningsih study (2015) showed that the change of social capital consisting of elements and built on trust, supported by positive and strong of trust, norms, and networks has an impact on the of the interrelation of reciprocity and mutual benefit waste management system. (2011) describes the elements of social capital are Active involvement of all elements of the (1)norms the andsocial social fabric, values. (2) trust,Furthermore, (3) social Arsyad, reciprocity, et al. community (stakeholders) in the management
Positive behaviour norm as one of the elements plays a very important role in Adipura Programme. of(4) social behaviour capital norm, that are and owned (5) of collectiveby the community action. of Inof environmentaladdition to the cleanlinessactive role inof Tenggarongthe community, City policy makers should consider the social capital order to encourage local communities to manage the of Tenggarong community which has long grown Tenggarong needs to be explored and developed in
Jurnal Bina Praja 8 (2) (2016): 175-185 176 and developed. The study result by Daluarti (2015) showed that neighbourhood parks and village able to resolve urban problems, including affecting parks, district parks, city parks, and non-physical thestudy management influence the of success environmental of a development cleanliness. and areTo components of public space affect the development reinforce the conceptual framework of this study of social capital. Social capital has a very important role in Based on the conceptual framework, then environmental management. The result of the formulatedcan be seen aas hypothesis Figure 1. as follows. empirical study shows that social capital has a role H1 Social capital (trust, cooperation, and norms) as forest management, to preserve the customs, and environmental cleanliness. soand forth. influence The results in environmental of research management,on social capital such in significantly influence the management of community related to environmental management of environmental cleanliness. H2 Trust has a significant effect on the management stated that elements of social capital such as management of environmental cleanliness. traditionalas the research values, finding norms, of beliefs, Rijal andand participation Noer (2013) H3 Cooperation has a significant effect on the forms a bond in the indigenous community that is management of environmental cleanliness. willing to cooperate proactively in order to maintain H4 TheNorms purpose have of a this significant study is effect to obtain on the a comprehensive picture of community social capital the formtradition of social and norms,local value. beliefs, The and research the network finding is manage the cleanliness of the environment so that relatedof Widjanarko to forest (2016) conservation. stated thatGood social environmental capital in thein TenggarongAdipura Award City thatcan be serves achieved as a sustainably. strategy to management will produce a clean and healthy In more detail, the purpose of this study is (1) environment. In addition, social capital will also affect sustainable development, so that the Adipura cooperation, and norms) towards the management to analyse the influence of social capital (trust, be achieved in a sustainable manner. The research Award expectedet al. by the people of Tenggarong can also managementof environmental of environmental cleanliness in cleanliness, Tenggarong (3) City, to (2) to analyse the effect of confidence towards the consistsby Fotovvat, of three elements (2014), ofwho cooperation, conducted trust, research and management of environmental cleanliness, and in Salmas City, Iran stated that the social capital that analyse the influence of cooperation towards the towards sustainable development. management of environmental cleanliness. socialThis cohesion study, affectsbesides positively having similarity and significantly with the (4) to analyse the influence of norms towards the also have differences. As for the difference, this II. Method This study uses a quantitative research design studyprevious focuses study, on whichthe management examines the of environmental social capital, and the method used is survey method. The study cleanliness for Adipura Programme, with the Regency that includes Timbau, Loa Ipuh, Jahab, was conducted in Tenggarong City, Kutai Kertanegara locus in Tenggarong City, Kutai Kertanegara, Blue Hill, Panji, New, Malay, Mangkurawang and detailedEast Kalimantan. in the discussion. Furthermore, similarities and population over the age of twenty-one years old differencesSocial capital of the based studies on empirical will be explained and theoretical more orSukarame married. Villages.The number The of study the study population population is the is 82,821 people. The number of samples taken by the
Independent Variable Slovin formula (Sedarmayanti and Hidayat, 2002) with the level of sampling error (e) of 10 percent in order to obtain 100 respondents. The sampling Social Capital Dependent Variable collection of respondents is conducted by simple H2 random sampling method. Trust (X1) The testing of the instrument validity and reliability was carried out through SPSS 13.0 H1 Environmental computer program, showed that the questions are Cleanliness Cooperation (X2) Management (Y) H3 of the questions is above 0.3. Similarly, instrument reliabilityvalid, in which tests were the conducted correlation using coefficient 30 respondents of each Norms (X3)
H4 intoas a thepre-survey, formula obtainedSpearman the Brown correlation (Sugiyono, coefficient 2012), Figure 1. of 0.858. The correlation coefficient, after being put Concept Framework of Independent Variable Effect on Detpendent Variable obtained results of 0.924. Thus, the reliability of research instrument was 0.924 and it was concluded The Effects of Social Capital for the Management of Environment Cleanliness in Adipura Programme 177 Ida Bagus Made Agung Dwijatenaya, Mutiara Kartika Dewi that the instrument can be stated as reliable. The data used in this study are primary and Penajam Paser Regency, and in the west is adjacent secondary data. Primary data was collected by the south is adjacent to Balikpapan City and North the researcher and assisted by enumerators. Data has a total land area of 27,263.10 km2, while the processing was aided by a computer based on a to West Kutai Regency. Kutai Kertanegara2. Administratively, Regency model of analysis using SPSS 13.0. The data analysis Kutai Kertanegara Regency consists of 18 districts technique was based on the principles of descriptive waterand 227 territorial villages and is urban 4,097 villages. km statistics and inferential statistical approach. Model analysis used to test the proposed hypothesis is capital of Kutai Kertanegara Regency. Tenggarong the model of Multiple Regression Linear, which is Tenggarong City is a district that became the to determine the effect of independent variable, which consists of trust (X1), cooperation (X2), northernDistrict with district an area bordering of 398 km² is Sebuluis located District, between in and norms (X3) on dependent variable, which is the116°47’E-117°04’E south bordering is andLoa Kulu 0°21’S-0°34’S. District, in the east The the management of environmental cleanliness (Y) is bordering with Tenggarong Seberang District, (Supranto, 2001). In testing the hypothesis, used an and in the west is bordering with Sebulu District. has a simultaneous effect on the dependent variable. F test to prove whether the independent variable In 2014, Tenggarong District had a population of independent variable on the dependent variable, about 94,890 people, made up of 47,122 men and theFurthermore, t test was used. to test the significance of each 47,768 women (BPS of Kutai Kertanegara, 2015). With the existence of development and regional Bukitexpansion, Biru, rightTimbau, now TenggarongMelayu, Loa District Ipuh, Maluhu, consists III. Result and Discussion of 14 villages and urban villages covering Jahab, Rapak Lambur, Loa Ipuh Army, Bendang Kingdom. A. General Description of the Region of the AsPanji, for Sukarame,the point Baru,of Adipura Mangkurawang, assessment Loa includes Cane, Study the villages of Timbau, Loa Ipuh, Jahab, Bukit Biru, Panji, Baru, Mangkurawang, Melayu, and Sukarame. Kertanegara Regency. Kutai Kertanegara Regency Tenggarong City is one of the districts in Kutai is geographically located between 115°26’28”E B. Description of the Study Variable Human is the main actor to produce a clean Kutai Kertanegara Regency is adjacent to Bulungan and healthy environment. However, the attempt to to 117°36’43”E and 1°28’21”N up to 1°08’06”S. create a clean and healthy environment has not fully of the north, in the east with Makassar Strait, in materialized. It is also realized that environmental Regency, East Kutai, and Bontang City on the side
Table 1.
Descriptive Statistics of Environmental Cleanliness Variable (Y), 2016 Score Statement 1 2 3 4 5 6 Total
F 0 0 5 4 60 31 100 Y1: Family has been keeping the environment well % 0 0 5 4 60 31 100
F 2 5 17 14 47 15 100 Y2: Community has been keeping the environment % 2 5 17 14 47 15 100
F 3 1 26 19 33 18 100 Y3: There has been coherence between institutions % 3 1 26 19 33 18 100
Y4: Environmental/Health NGOs have a great F 2 2 27 17 32 20 100 influence % 2 2 27 17 32 20 100
Y5: Rules that exist in the community have been F 0 3 24 21 40 12 100 supportive % 0 3 24 21 40 12 100
F 0 4 22 23 41 10 100 Y6: The speed and the accuracy of information % 0 4 22 23 41 10 100
Source: Result of Primary Data Processing by Researchers.
Jurnal Bina Praja 8 (2) (2016): 175-185 178 Table 2.
1), 2016
Descriptive Statistics of Trust Variable (X Score Statement 1 2 3 4 5 6 Total
F 1 0 2 3 56 38 100
X11: Building trust among citizens is crucial % 1 0 2 3 56 38 100
F 3 9 32 13 35 8 100
X12: The legal system (local regulation) can be trusted % 3 9 32 13 35 8 100
F 1 0 3 11 57 28 100
X13: Head of Neighborhood can be trusted % 1 0 3 11 57 28 100
F 1 1 9 12 56 21 100
X14: Head of Urban-Villages and staffs can be trusted % 1 1 9 12 56 21 100
F 0 2 11 14 47 26 100
X15: Government (BLHD) can be trusted % 0 2 11 14 47 26 100
F 1 3 17 5 37 37 100
X16: Adipura can be maintained sustainably % 1 3 17 5 37 37 100
Source: Result of Primary Data Processing by Researchers quality has declined. the decline of environmental environmental cleanliness management is shown by quality will threaten the survival of mankind itself trust, both the levels of family and community have and other creatures. Kutai Kertanegara Regency, been keeping the environment clean. In addition, which is part of the lungs of the world, is also cooperation between institutions associated with the maintenance of a clean and healthy environment degradation and less wise mining activities have in a sustainable manner also showed a positive somefaced contribution with environmental to the problem. issues. ForestAs described quality trend. Another factor is the role of Environment Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) and Health and management of the environment Article 65 NGO, supported by the legislation, both in the form paragraphin Law No (1) 32 that of 2009 everyone concerning is entitled the protectionto a good of laws or local regulations (Perda) along with the and healthy environment as part of human rights. sanctions to encourage the community to always To that end, various environmental conservation keep the environment clean. programs have been conducted, one of which is The elements of community social capital Adipura Programme. that affect environmental cleanliness management Adipura aims to encourage the government of districts/cities and build active community cooperation, and norms. The result shows that participation for the creation of a good environment publicin Tenggarong trust tends City to be for positive. Adipura As shown covers in Table trust, and the improvement of people’s welfare 2. Building trust between people in managing (Regulation of the Minister of Environment Article environmental cleanliness is very important, which is supported by their local regulations on in community social capital to manage the clean environmental cleanliness accompanied by the and2 No healthy 6 of 2014). environment, Active participation for the sake isof reflectedAdipura Programme. The measurements of each variable using andclear theapplication government, of sanctions. in this The case, existence the Regional of trust Likert scale are (1) disagree, (2) do not agree, Environmentalin Head of Neighbourhood, Agency (BLHD), Head ofencourages Urban-Village, the strongly agree. Based on the data obtained from management of environmental cleanliness, which the(3) undecided,respondents’ (4) answers, quite agree, it indicates (5) agree, that and the (6) ultimatelycommunity materialized of Tenggarong the success City to of improve sustainable the Adipura Programme. to be positive, the majority answered agree and Table 3 shows the result of respondents’ stronglysocial capital agree of that Tenggarong social capital City community is crucial intends the answers about community cooperation in managing management of clean environment for Adipura Programme. The tendency of a positive answer to Respondents’ response tends to be clustered in environmental cleanliness in Tenggarong City.
The Effects of Social Capital for the Management of Environment Cleanliness in Adipura Programme Ida Bagus Made Agung Dwijatenaya, Mutiara Kartika Dewi 179 Table 3.
2), 2016
Descriptive Statistics of Cooperation Variable (X Score Statement 1 2 3 4 5 6 Total
F 0 2 1 3 39 57 100 X21: Jointly maintain the cleanliness of the environment % 0 2 1 3 39 57 100
F 0 1 0 4 42 52 100
X22: Mutual cooperation is conducted % 0 1 0 4 42 52 100
F 0 4 2 8 60 26 100 X23: Mutual cooperation is conducted for Adipura Programme % 0 4 2 8 60 26 100
F 2 3 11 11 49 24 100 X24: There is technical assistance from the Government % 2 3 11 11 49 24 100
F 3 4 31 17 32 13 100
X25: Collaborate with environmental NGOs % 3 4 31 17 32 13 100
F 0 0 1 4 51 44 100 X26: There are mutual benefits from mutual cooperation % 0 0 1 4 51 44 100
Source: Result of Primary Data Processing by Researchers a positive answer. The tendency of the positive response shown by their togetherness in maintaining partnership produces sustainable management of the cleanliness of the environment. Maintaining environmentalin the field ofcleanliness. environment and health. The The respondents’ response to norms is Adipura Programme is done with the cooperation betweenenvironmental citizens cleanliness through in mutual Tenggarong cooperation. City for Similarly, cooperation is done by NGOs working inclustered managing in bothenvironmental categories, cleanliness as shown inhave Table been 4. The norms that exist in Tenggarong City community
Table 4.
3), 2016 Descriptive Statistics of Norms Variable (X Score Statement 1 2 3 4 5 6 Total
F 3 4 3 9 51 30 100
X31: Deliberation is conducted % 3 4 3 9 51 30 100
F 0 8 20 28 32 12 100 X32: The frequency of deliberation for mutual cooperation is often conducted % 0 8 20 28 32 12 100
F 0 1 21 16 43 19 100 X33: There is local regulation/regulation related to environmental cleanliness % 0 1 21 16 43 19 100
F 0 2 10 15 43 30 100
X34: There is a custom to maintain cleanliness % 0 2 10 15 43 30 100
F 2 0 1 5 37 55 100 X35: Knowing there is religious guidance that teaches cleanliness % 2 0 1 5 37 55 100
F 0 0 5 9 47 39 100 X36: Implementing the religious guidance about environmental cleanliness % 0 0 5 9 47 39 100
Source: Result of Primary Data Processing by Researchers
Jurnal Bina Praja 8 (2) (2016): 175-185 180 realized since before. The norm is the custom for Table 5. deliberation before conducting mutual cooperation Summary of Multiple Linear Regression Analysis Result of activity. The frequency of deliberation, especially Management, 2016 for mutual cooperation, is relatively frequent. In the Effect of Social Capital on Environmental Cleanliness complied with government regulations and religious Variable Coefficient t Value Sig. community.addition, Tenggarong The religious City community community is has shown always by Trust 0.27 2.58 0.01 the harmony among fellow adherents of religions (X1) (rounded off) (rounded off) and beliefs, as well as between religions and beliefs Cooperation 0.19 1.83 0.07 so that through the teachings of their respective (X2) (rounded off) (rounded off) religions, people always manage the cleanliness of the environment. Norms 0.19 1.69 0.10 (X3) (rounded off) (rounded off) Constants = C. The Effect of Social Capital to R = 0.268 F = 11.74 3.58 2 hit Sig. = 0.00 t = 1.98 F = 2.72 Environmental Cleanliness R = 0.518 tabel tabel Management To analyse the effect of social capital on Source: Result of Primary Data Processing by Researchers the management of environmental cleanliness, conducted quantitative analysis and inferential statistical approach. Statistical analysis begins environmentalBased on the cleanliness statistical intest Tenggarong result, obtained City the for with the classic econometrics test requirement, to resultAdipura that Programme R value of of 0.518 0.19 (Tableunits. 5) which implies obtain multiple linear regression models that are that social capital is measured through the variables appropriate and meets the standards, including tests of trust, cooperation, and norms have a mediocre for normality, autocorrelation, multicollinearity, relationship on the management of environmental and heteroscedasticity test. The test result shows that the classical assumption of multiple regression square (R2) of 0.268 (Table 5) which implies that models has been met. cleanliness in Tenggarong City. the value of R Hypothesis testing and analysis model used to test the hypothesis is multiple linear regression cleanlinesssocial capital for isAdipura able to Programme explain its is effect only by on 26.8 the percent,management included of in Tenggarong low category City (Sugiyono, environmental 2012), resultmodels as of summarized 95 percent in confidence Table 5. level (α = 0.05). With the assistance of SPSS version 13.0, obtained a factors not included in the model. while the rest of 73.2 percent is explained by other
F test results as presented in Table 5. The 1 2 3 significant level is 0.00 less than the significant Y = 3.58 + 0.27X + 0.19X + 0.19X standard of 0.05 (α = 0.05). Furthermore, of F hypothesiscount is obtained (H1), in the which result social of 11.74capital larger consisting than ofF table.elements Based of trust, on these cooperation, data, it indicates and norms that affect the presented in Table 5, the regression equation is as follows.Furthermore, with reference to the result forpositively Adipura and Programme significantly is accepted. to the managementKeeping the Based on the regression equation, few things environmentof Tenggarong clean City is the environmental mirror of one’s cleanliness behavior can be understood, namely (a) a constant value of 3.58 states that if there is no community social becomes the living purpose of the community soand that community the goal groups. of achieving Clean and prosperity healthy behaviour can be environmental cleanliness for Adipura Programme capital, the management of Tenggarong City’s trust variable (X1) of 0.27 states that any additions realized. The study’s finding that social capital byis ofone 3.58 activity units, related (b) the to regressionpublic trust coefficient will improve for inpositively line with and Thobias, significantly et al. affects(2013) the that management the role of the management of environmental cleanliness socialof environmental capital in economic cleanliness development in Tenggarong is not City less is important than another economic infrastructure. Management of environmental cleanliness in perby 0.27activity units, related (c) to the cooperation regression will coefficients improve the for cooperation variable of 0.19 states that each change Tenggarong City cannot be separated from the management of environmental cleanliness of 0.19 waste management, then it will affect the sustainable environmentalimprovement ofcleanliness. waste management. To that end, Withcommunity better relatedunits, and to norms(d) the will regression improve coefficients the management for norm of variable of 0.19 states that each change per activity
The Effects of Social Capital for the Management of Environment Cleanliness in Adipura Programme 181 Ida Bagus Made Agung Dwijatenaya, Mutiara Kartika Dewi governing the management of environmental social capital significantly affects the management cleanlinessexistence of has legislation to be includingbelieved localby the regulations public. thatof cleanliness is able to encourage is in line withpeople the to researchalways keep finding the This is shown by the public awareness that has commitmentof Widodo (2014) and consistency that social to capital the sustainability has a power of grown to dispose of waste in the space provided. waste management that has been running. Similarly, of Neighborhood, towards the village chief and the research by Trajuningsih (2015), which shows that governmentTenggarong Cityhas communitygrown and trust evolved towards since the before, head the changefinding ofof social this study capital agrees consisting with ofthe elements results of making it easier to direct people to manage the trust, norms, and networks have an impact on the waste management system. study is consistent with that proposed by Arsyad, etcleanliness al. (2011) of thatthe environment.social capital Theis a finding phenomenon of this is an integral part of the development of Kutai that grows from the bottom based on the principles KertanegaraTenggarong Regency City’s as set cleanliness out in the management King’s Gate of mutual trust and the spirit of togetherness
addition, public trust in local regulations and other II Grand Strategy. For that, the research finding legislationreflected by on the environmental culture of mutual cleanliness cooperation. following In threeis in line elements, with the namely research cooperation, finding by Fotovvat,trust, and et al.. (2014) that social capital, which consists of the implementation of Adipura Programme sanctions applied in Tenggarong City will facilitate social cohesion, positively and significantly affect managing environmental cleanliness, Tenggarong andsustainable Trajuningsih development. (2015) The that finding changes of this in study social is sustainably. The existence of trust shows that in capital,also in line consisting with research of trust, finding norms by Widodoand networks (2014) among citizens. This is in line with the opinion of elements, has an impact on the waste management PutnamCity has in become Lubis (2011) a condition which ofstated mutual a trust support is a form of a desire to take an action in social relations based on the feeling of assurance that others will do system. The study’s finding also concurs with the relatesfinding to of theenvironmental study by Daluarti management (2015); and Yuanjaya forest conservation.(2015); and Widjanarko (2016) that social capital something as expected. will Highincrease and public significant participation mutual in trust managing among D. The Effect of Trust on Environmental environmentalcitizens and public cleanliness, confidence especially in the in overcoming institutions Cleanliness Management the problem of waste in Tenggarong City. The study’s the trust variable partially on environmental finding concurs with the study result of Lusiyana, et cleanlinessFurthermore, management to testvariable, the used significance t test, which of community affect Adipura Programme the most in al. (2014) which states that the government and the means comparing the value of t count to t table at study agree with Sidik (2011) which states that the Bandar Lampung City. Similarly, the findings of this a degree of trust (dk) by n-k (sample size - number role of the community is a very important element ofsignificant variable). level Based of 0.05 on or the at a results95 percent of truststatistical with in the management of urban solid waste. calculation for variables obtained t count equal trust E. The Effect of Cooperation on the summary results of the analysis of Table 5. If t Environmental Cleanliness countof 2.58 is and consulted a significance with t table level shows of 0.01, that as tshown count inis Management greater than t table (t count> t table). The data that The result of statistical calculations for cooperation variable is obtained t counted of 1.83 management of environmental cleanliness (second hypothesis)implies Trust is positively acceptable. and significantly affects the and a significance level of 0.07 (Table 5). This implies cooperationthat there are and significant the management and positive of environmental relationship, Based on the study’s findings that social cleanliness.but not significant Most researchers between of social the variablescapital claim of oncapital the elementmanagement of trust of (Trust)environmental Tenggarong hygiene City that social capital has a positive impact on the incommunity order Adipura, in a positive can further and significantdiscuss some impact of welfare of society and sustainable development. the following. Trusting fellow citizens, especially The formation of social capital is able to solve urban on the activities of mutual assistance in order to manage the cleanliness of the environment is a communityissues. Cooperation to cooperate is a component in solving theof social problems capital of togetherness and mutual trust their fellow citizens environmentalthat can be defined cleanliness, as the ability especially of Tenggarong the issues City of ishallmark a phenomenon Tenggarong that City grows community. from the Thebottom. spirit The of waste, together. The awareness on the importance
Jurnal Bina Praja 8 (2) (2016): 175-185 182 of cooperation will encourage the growth and teachings. development of cooperation efforts. However, when The fourth hypothesis testing in this study awareness on the importance of cooperation does shows that the effect of norms on the management cooperation. not exist, it will be difficult for the occurrence of of environmental cleanliness is not significant at cooperation on the management of environmental community,0.05 significance on the level one hand, (the fourthis able hypothesisto encourage is The study’s finding is that the influence of therejected). community Norms to developedmanage the in cleanliness Tenggarong of Citythe testing of the third hypothesis is rejected at the environment to be better. However, on the other cleanliness is not significant, which means the hand, it will hinder in managing environmental study is rejected, which can be interpreted that the cooperation0.05 significant in managing level. The environmental third hypothesis cleanliness of this that the social structure has various acts and rules together in the form of mutual cooperation, technical cleanliness. As stated by Coleman in Suandi (2007) assistance provided by the government, and the fabric of the agreement made with environmental normsthat can that be can exploited inhibit byand individuals encourage andthe society,human NGOs which have been running at this time does namely obligation and expectation, information, and environmental cleanliness for Adipura Programme valuesbehaviour. and Thenorms study’s can supportfinding doesthe preservationnot agree with of not have a significant impact on the management of resourcesthe study’s asfinding a sustainable by Pontoh business(2010) that capital. the actual The togetherness in mutual assistance provides common in Tenggarong City. Although it is understood that Putri and Hidayat (2011) that there are norms of the produce a healthy and comfortable environment groupstudy’s and finding it is running also does properly. not concur with those by thatbenefits. ultimately If the environmentlet people work is clean, quietly then so it that will prosperity will be realized. However, the awareness IV. Conclusion managing environmental cleanliness. The study’s is not yet able to give a significant influence in The finding of this study is that social Putri and Hidayat (2011) that there is cooperation capital positively and significantly affects the betweenfinding is thenot groupconsistent members with the and research the collaboration finding of cleanliness for Adipura Programme. Trust management of Tenggarong City environmental went so well that the integrity of the group can be maintained. Similarly, this research is not in line of environmental cleanliness in Tenggarong positively and significantly affects the management that through cooperation between the Government with research finding of Cahyani (2014) which states environmentalCity. Cooperation cleanliness. and social norms positively, but not significantly affect the management of management for Adipura Programme. (BLHD), Companies and NGOs will improve waste role in addressing the problem of cleanliness in the city.Community To that socialend, Kutai capital Kertanegara plays an important Regency F. The Effect of Norms on Environmental government, through the Regional Environmental Cleanliness Management Agency, should always be able to optimize the active The results of statistical calculations for role of the community with the increase of clean norm element is obtained t count of 1.69 and a theFriday rules intensity that apply. and optimally utilize community significance level of 0.10 (Table 5). This implies trust in Neighbourhood, Village, government, and environmentalthat there is a significantcleanliness and positivemanagement relationship, in but not significant between norm variable and Acknowledgement The concept of social capital is an important componentTenggarong Cityin addressing for Adipura urban Programme. issues, including environmental cleanliness issue. One of the the HeadThe author of LPPM would Unikarta like to expressTenggarong his gratitude for the components of social capital according to Putnam permission.to the Dean The of author the Faculty also would of Agriculturelike to thank andthe in Thobias, et al. (2013) is norms. Norms determine Head of Research and Development Agency of Kutai what is good and what is bad. Social norms
Kartanegara Regency for the support in finishing developed in the community of Tenggarong City, forthis perfecting research. Thethis paper.gratitude is also expressed to the thereamong will others, be a mutual are (1) cooperation the existence on of environmental deliberations reviewers/examiners who have provided their time cleanliness,in any decision-making, (2) a habit to for cooperate example, deliberationshas been there if a long time, (3) local regulation on environmental cleanliness, and (4) the norms outlined by religious The Effects of Social Capital for the Management of Environment Cleanliness in Adipura Programme 183 Ida Bagus Made Agung Dwijatenaya, Mutiara Kartika Dewi V. References Regulation of Minister of Environment No 6 of 2014 on the MinistryGuidelines of Environment,. of Adipura Programme (2014). . Ministry of Andrews, R. (2010). Exploring the Impact of Environment. EvidenceCommunity from and England. Organizational Political Research Social Neolaka, A. (2008). Kesadaran Lingkungan. Jakarta: Quarterly,Capital on64 Government Performance: Pontoh, O. (2010). Identifikasi dan Analisis (4), 938-949. http://dx.doi. ModalRineka Cipta.Sosial dalam Rangka Pemberdayaan (2011).org/10.1177/1065912910381649 Strategi Pembangunan Perdesaan Masyarakat Nelayan Desa Gangga Dua Arsyad,Berbasis L., Satriawan, Lokal. Yogyakarta: E., Mulyo, UPP J., STIM & Fitrady, YKPN. A. Kabupaten Minahasa Utara. Jurnal Perikanan Dan Kelautan Tropis, 6(3), 125-133. Retrieved dalam Mencapai Penghargaan Adipura Tahun Cahyani, F. (2015).Ejournal Strategi Ilmu Pemerintahan, Pemerintah Kota 3 Bontang JPKT/article/view/156/122 1210. Retrieved from http://ejournal.ip.fisip- Pramono,from S. http://ejournal.unsrat.ac.id/index.php/ (2012). PNPM Mandiri Perkotaan 2014. (2), 1197- Kabupaten Kendal. JEJAK (Jurnal Ekonomi Dan Kebijakan), 5 Sosialunmul.ac.id/site/?p=1354 dalam Peningkatan Kesejahteraan Cahyono,Masyarakat B. & Adhiatma, Petani Tembakau A. (2012). di Peran Kabupaten Modal (2), 117-229. Retrieved from http://journal.unnes.ac.id/nju/index.php/ Conference In Business, Accounting, Putri, I. & Hidayat, H. (2011). Analisis Persepsi jejak/article/view/3903/3545 And Management (CBAM), 1 RetrievedWonosobo. from http://jurnal.unissula.ac.id/ dengan Eksistensi Kelompok Tani (Kasus pada (1), 131-144. Modal Sosial (Social Capital) dan Hubungannya Daluarti, M. (2015). Peranan Ruang Publik Perkotaan Junrejo, Kecamatan Junrejo, Kota Batu). Jurnal Kelompok Tani Wanita “Sri Sejati2”, Desa terhadapindex.php/cbam/article/view/128/104 Pengembangan Modal Sosial dan Wacana, 14(1), 11-17. Retrieved from http:// Peredam Patologi Sosial (Survey pada Siswa SMA di Kota Bandung) (Doctorate). Indonesia view/235/205 University of Education (UPI). Rijal,wacana.ub.ac.id/index.php/wacana/article/ M. & Noer, S. (2013). Peran Modal Sosial dalam Pelestarian Hutan. Jurnal Kebijakan Dan Administrasi Publik, 17(2), 20-36. Retrieved Fotovvat, S., Safari, K., Zayyari, K., & Boostani, S. from https://journal.ugm.ac.id/jkap/article/ Management(2014). A Study Science on Letters, Relationship 4 Between RetrievedSocial Capital from and http://growingscience.com/ Sustainable Development. Rohmani, S. (2015). Dampak Modal Sosial dalam beta/msl/1713-a-study-on-relationship-(9), 2117-2120. Pengelolaanview/6852/5359 Irigasi terhadap Kesejahteraan between-social-capital-and-sustainable- Petani di Kabupaten Sukoharjo Jawa Tengah. development.html Informatika Pertanian, 24 from http://ejurnal.litbang.pertanian.go.id/ Partisipasi Peternak pada Pengembangan Sapi (1), 67-90. Retrieved Hadi,Potong S. (2014). di Kabupaten Profil Modal Tebo Sosial Propinsi dan TingkatJambi. Secretariat of State of the Republic of Indonesia,. index.php/IP/article/view/2509. Kanal, 2(2), 107-122. Retrieved from http:// Law of the Republic of Indonesia No 32 of 2009 on the Protection and Environmental Management(2009). . Jakarta: Secretariat of State of journal.umsida.ac.id/page.php?p=abs&id=393 the Republic of Indonesia. Kitchen,Social P., Indicators Williams, Research, A., & Simone, 108(2), D. 215-238. (2012). Sedana, G. (2013). Modal Sosial dalam Pengembangan Measuring Social Capital in Hamilton, Ontario. Agribisnis Petani pada Sistem Subak di Bali 0063-3. (Doctorate). Universitas Udayana. Lubis,http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11205-012- R. (2011). Kajian Teoritis Modal Sosial Sedarmayanti, & Hidayat, S. (2002). Metodologi dalam Pengembangan Klaster. http:// Penelitian repository.uksw.edu Sidik, M. (2011). Peran Adipura pada Pelaksanaan 2016, from http://repository.uksw.edu/ Sistem Pengelolaan. Bandung: CV.Sampah Mandar diMaju. Indonesia. . Retrieved 26 February J. Tek. Ling, 12 BAB%20II.pdf http://www.kelair.bppt.go.id/Jtl/2011/vol12- bitstream/123456789/726/3/D_902005007_ 3/11adipura.pdf(3), 319-331. Retrieved from Kajian Efektivitas Program Adipura Sebagai Lusiyana,Upaya N., Setiawan,Mendukung A., & Pembenahan Buchari, H. (2014).Tata Regency,. (2015). Kecamatan Tenggarong Statistic Center Agency of Kutai Kartanegara Lingkungan Kota Bandar Lampung. Jurnal dalam Angka 2015. Tenggarong: Statistic Sains Dan Pendidikan, 1 Suandi,. (2007). Modal Sosial dan Kesejahteraan php/jsp/article/view/18/16.(2), 29-37. Retrieved EkonomiCenter Agency Keluarga of Kutai di Kartanegara Daerah Regency.Perdesaan from http://journal.pasca.unila.ac.id/index.
Jurnal Bina Praja 8 (2) (2016): 175-185
184 Provinsi Jambi (Doctorate). Bogor Agricultural Muria di Kabupaten Kudus. Jurnal Masyarakat University. dan Budaya, 18 Sugiyono,. (2012). Metode Penelitian Kombinasi (Mixed Methods). Bandung: Alfabeta. (1), 109-120. Retrieved from Thobias, E. (2013). Pengaruh Modal Sosial Terhadap http://jmb-lipi.or.id/index.php/jmb/article/Modal Sosial dalam Pengelolaan Perilaku Kewirausahaan (Suatu Studi pada Bankview/344. Sampah (Master Thesis). Universitas Pelaku Usaha Mikro Kecil Menengah di Widodo,Gadjah A. (2016). Mada. Kecamatan Kabaruan Kabupaten Kepulauan Keterkaitan Antara Modal Sosial Talaud). Jurnal Acta Diurna, 2(2). Retrieved Dengan Produktifitas pada Sentra Bawang Winarni,Merah I. (2011). di Kecamatan Pengalengan Kabupaten Bandung (Master Thesis). Universitas Trajuningsih,from http://ejournal.unsrat.ac.id/index.php/ T. (2015). Perubahan Sistem Indonesia. Pengelolaanactadiurna/article/view/1412. Sampah sebagai Dampak Yuanjaya, P. (2015). Modal Sosial dalam Gerakan Perubahan Modal Sosial (Studi Kasus Kampung Lingkungan: Studi Kasus di Kampung Gambiran Badran RW 11 Kelurahan Bumijo, Kecamatan dan Gondolayu Lor, Kota Yogyakarta. Natapraja Jetis Yogyakarta) (Undergraduate Theses). - Jurnal Kajian Ilmu Administrasi Negara, 3(1). Universitas Sebelas Maret. php/natapraja/article/view/10161. Desa Rahtawu: Studi Kasus Pelestarian Hutan Retrieved from http://journal.uny.ac.id/index. Widjanarko, M. (2016). Modal Sosial Masyarakat
The Effects of Social Capital for the Management of Environment Cleanliness in Adipura Programme 185 Ida Bagus Made Agung Dwijatenaya, Mutiara Kartika Dewi