Canberra’s Shine Dome, the venue for the first Australia Indonesia Science Symposium, is a wonderful location to reflect on what has occurred in November, and where KSI is going. It is hard not to agree that the building is itself a statement of innovation, understanding of time, and is befitting of its surroundings and environment. Similarly much of what has occurred in November hopefully also signify that KSI is on track in supporting innovations and key relationships, and in building an understanding of the context and prioritization of issues to be addressed. Key activities include the high level dialogue at the Vice President’s office on Bureaucratic Reform, the visit of a delegation from Bangladesh, cross-learning between our partner Policy Research Institutions, and the commencement of the Australia-Indonesia Science Symposium (AISS) opened by Indonesia’s Minister for Development Planning, Prof. Bambang Brodjonegoro, and Australia’s Minister for International Development and the Pacific, the Hon. Concetta Fierravanti-Wells. That #AISS during its opening day was in the top ten of most trending Twitter topics in Australia is a good sign the science and knowledge remain important in our everyday conversation. We hope you will enjoy this update and look forward to your comments and input. 

 

After many months of planning, the Australia-Indonesia Science Symposium was held between 28 November and 1 December to great acclaim. The high-level event was opened by Indonesia’s Minister of National Development Planning, Bambang Brodjonegoro, and Australia’s Minister for International Development and the Pacific, Concetta Fierravanti-Wells, together with the presidents of the Indonesian and Australian scientific academies as the co-hosts of the symposium. The Indonesian delegation included senior officials from Bappenas and the Ministry of Research, Technology and Higher Education who, in addition to attending the symposium, held talks with the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, the Australian Productivity Commission, CSIRO, and universities.  

At a public event on 28 November, leading Indonesian and Australian researchers presented the results of their work on some of our region’s most pressing issues, including combatting dengue and malaria, preserving our marine environment, improving agricultural productivity, and harnessing the potential of big data and new technologies. Following this, 60 established and early- and mid-career scientists and researchers from Indonesia met with their Australian counterparts in parallel two-day workshops. Organised around the symposium’s themes of health, marine science and climate change, agriculture, and big data and disruptive technologies, the workshops showcased the work of researchers from both countries around a range of common challenges. On the final day, the symposium was again open to the public and participants discussed the perks and pitfalls of building a scientific career, opportunities for funding and bilateral scientific collaboration, and the challenges of communicating and using research to inform public policy.

Website: https://www.ksi-indonesia.org/aiss/home Twitter: #AISS

 

As part of a visit by the Australian Public Service Commission (APSC) to Indonesia, KSI, in collaboration with the Vice President’s Office (Setwapres), the Indonesian Public Service Commission (KASN), DFAT’s Government Partnership Fund (GPF) and the Australian Embassy organised a knowledge-sharing event on public service reform in Indonesia. The event was held on 16 November at the Office of the Vice President. Vice President Jusuf Kalla received John Lloyd, the APSC commissioner; Paul Grigson, Australian Ambassador to Indonesia; Asman Abnur, Minister of Administrative and Bureaucracy Reform (MenPAN-RB); Professor Sofian Effendi, Chairman of KASN; and Professor Eko Prasojo, Chairman of the Independent Team for National Bureaucratic Reform (TI-RBN) for a dialogue on civil service reforms and how to deepen collaboration between the two countries.

After the meeting, a high-level seminar on public service reform was opened by Minister Asman Abnur and Mr Justin Lee, the Deputy Australian Ambassador to Indonesia. The panel discussion was chaired by Dewi Fortuna Anwar, Deputy Minister at the Office of the Vice President, and featured Mr John Lloyd, Professor Sofian Effendi and Professor Eko Prasojo. It focussed on Australian experiences with the implementation of the bureaucratic reform agenda, and Indonesian progress in the national civil service agenda. Issues included the dynamics of the open selection process, variations in competence of the selection panel, and the lack of reliable data on civil servant performance. The event was attended by more than 200 high-ranking government officials from national ministries and sub-national governments, and was hopefully the first in a series of high-level knowledge sharing events on bureaucratic reform.

 

Since June 2016, KSI has supported Bappenas to integrate various planning systems into a single ‘e-Planning Application’. Aimed to make planning data more accessible, reduce processing time, and support more substantial analysis in the national planning and budgeting process, the e-Planning Team has compiled and considered various technical aspects, processes and inter-organisational dynamics that influence the new application. On 21-22 November 2016, the current state of the application was piloted at a simulation workshop. Mr Roni Dwi Susanto (Bappenas’ Deputy Minister for Development Monitoring, Evaluation and Management) was satisfied with the exercise and will inform the Bappenas Minister, Mr Bambang Brodjonegoro, of plans to use the e-Planning Application for the 2018 Government Work Plan (RKP). In order to gather more input on the application, in mid-December 2016, the e-Planning team plans to conduct an e-Planning simulation workshop that involves all Bappenas directorates and selected government ministries. The e-Planning Application is expected to be launched by the President during the National Musrenbang convention in April 2017. 

 

As part of the capacity building of policy analysts, KSI supported the National Institute of Public Administration or Lembaga Administrasi Negara (LAN) to attend a short course on policy analysis in Bangkok, Thailand on 28-30 November 2016. The course was attended by six government officials from LAN and the Indonesian Policy Analyst Association (AAKI). Thai government officials from five agencies presented their experience on the role and function of policy analysts and the development of a policy analyst association. LAN will use the findings and experiences from the visit to finalise the training module for mid-career level policy analysts. The Government of Indonesia expects by 2019 to have recruited and trained up to 6,000 new policy analysts in ministries and sub-national governments.

 

Strengthening gender and social inclusion in research and higher education will improve the quality of research and analysis. The program design of KSI seeks to mainstream gender into its overall work by integrating gender analysis into the production and use of research by the public sector, policy research institutes and civil society organisations. On 8 November, KSI held a full-day round-table discussion at the Grandhika Hotel, Jakarta. The theme was Women’s Research Centres in universities, and this was the first time in a long time that gender studies specialists could come together to share their experiences.

Renowned gender expert Lies Marcoes moderated the discussion and presenters included Professor Saparinah Sadli, the founder of the Women’s Studies Program at the University of Indonesia in the 1980s; Ms Bianti Djiwandonow who while at Ford Foundation from 1985 to 1998 funded many of the early research centres; Dr Mia Siscawati from the University of Indonesia’s Centre for Gender Studies; and Dr Kristi Poerwandari who in 2011 led the KSI diagnostic Study of Knowledge Needs and Supply Constraints for Gender Research in Indonesia’s Knowledge Sector. 

Also attending were 25 experts in gender studies representing universities, the Indonesian Association of Women’s Studies Centres, the Ministry of Research, Technology and Higher Education, the Central Bureau of Statistics, the Indonesian Institute of Sciences, the Indonesian Academy of Young Scientists, NGOs, the media and KSI partners. 

The participants exchanged information on knowledge producers (women’s research centres), knowledge intermediaries and knowledge users related to higher education and the knowledge sector. The facilitator framed the discussion in the context of Knowledge to Policy and included knowledge production, communications, networking and policies to support gender strengthening. It became clear during the discussions that women’s studies centres/gender studies have not made much progress during the last 20 years, despite international conventions and an increasingly diverse higher education sector. Reasons for this include weak regulatory support from the Ministry of Education and Ministry of Research, Technology and Higher Education, increasing competition over university funds in which mono-disciplinary study is prioritised, and a lack of regeneration in the study centres. 

The workshop was seen as an important first event, but more background information and knowledge sharing is needed. KSI is therefore collaborating with policy research institute partner Sajogyo Institute to do an assessment of the state of women’s research in Indonesia, including regulatory issues around the enabling environment. A second round-table discussion will be held in December 2016.

 

Bappenas’ newly established Centre for Policy Analysis or Pusat Analisis Kebijakan (PAK) has started to build networks with policy research institutes and think tanks at regional and national levels. The aim is to socialise PAK, learn lessons from existing think tanks and identify potential collaborations. After conducting knowledge sharing events with 16 KSI policy research institutes, 10 local think tanks from Western Indonesia and 15 from Eastern Indonesia as reported here, on 16 November PAK conducted a workshop with 11 national think tanks, including the Indonesian Institute of Sciences (LIPI), the Ministry of Finance’s Fiscal Policy Agency (BKF), the Centre for Policy Harmonisation and Analysis (PUSHAKA), the Policy Analysis Team at the House of Representatives (DRP), the Research Unit at the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK), the Indonesian Academy for Young Scientists (ALMI), and research and development agencies (Balitbang) at a number of line ministries. These national think tanks and policy units shared their experiences and challenges in managing their institutes and producing policy-relevant research and analysis. This initial meeting was very much appreciated, and participants expressed their interest in continuing with concrete collaborations, such as through sharing data, information, knowledge and expertise. “I am interested to participate and support the initiative to build networks among government think tanks. I hope that we can build joint platforms, such as through websites to share data, expertise and even conduct joint analysis for cross-cutting strategic policy issues,” said Dr Leroy Samy Uguy, Head of Research and Development of the Ministry of Village, Disadvantaged Regions and Transmigration. 

 

As part of SMERU’s on-going organisational change agenda, all SMERU staff spent three days in Yogyakarta in mid-November 2016 for a strategic planning event. One of the agenda items was visiting six research institutes in Yogyakarta to learn how best to manage sustainable organisational development. A main lesson coming out of the exchange was the importance of involving senior managers in strategic planning processes as an effective way to improve organisational cohesiveness. The visit was part of a new promising horizontal and cross-learning system facilitated by the Alliance for Research Excellence (link), focussing on collective action and collaboration through relationship-building, clarifying organisational goals, development of shared understanding, and bridging differences in approach, culture and perceptions.

 

Building on existing research and networks, KSI partners strengthened their policy influence and advocacy efforts through the establishment of the Forum Kajian Desa (Village Research Forum). The first knowledge exchange was held on 23 November with eight KSI partners and the newly appointed Director for Village, Disadvantaged Regions and Transmigration at Bappenas, Mr Sumedi Andono Mulyo. Bappenas is currently collecting evidence for a long-term vision of ‘Transformasi Desa’ (village transformation) and requested input, ideas and comments from the FKD members. Each policy research institute briefly showcased their research on issues related to the implementation of the Village Law. At the national level, it was noted that there is yet to be a common understanding between all stakeholders on village issues – different stakeholders (government, village communities and civil society) have a different understanding and interpretation of the Village Law. At the community level, village governments are burdened with administrative matters rather than doing community development. The Director of Bappenas hopes the discussion/knowledge sharing on village issues can become regular. The workshop was attended by the newly appointed head of the Centre for Policy Analysis (PAK), Mr Onny Noyorono, who appreciated the discussion forum and would like to expand collaboration with KSI policy research institutes for policy analysis and strengthening knowledge exchange between researchers and policy makers.

 

On 9 November 2016, PPIM (the Research Centre for Islam and Society) at the Syarif  Hidayatullah Islamic University met with the Minister for Religious Affairs, Drs H Lukman Saifuddin, to deliver a policy brief on religious education in public schools. As part of KSI’s core grant funding, the research was disseminated on 29 September 2016 through the well-published seminar on “Understanding Exclusivism and Radicalism in Schools: Revisited Country Policy and Politics of Islamic Education”, which the Minister of Education and Culture also attended. The policy brief was well received by both ministers, so much so that the Minister for Religious Affairs tweeted the event and showed his appreciation for PPIM’s research. He said that it was “good and very relevant” for further action. PPIM’s research is very timely and contextual in responding to current conditions by promoting inclusiveness and de-radicalisation in Islamic education. To date, Islamic text books can be freely published and used, and during the past years, PPIM research shows that many textbooks have become increasingly radical. PPIM recommended that the government needs actively to review the publication of Islamic text books in school through a transparent and credible in process, and that the Ministry of Religious Affairs – which is a moderating force – should  play an active role in improvement of the quality of Islamic text books and its curriculum for schools.

 

 

 

Bangladesh is one of 11 countries where the UK’s Department for International Development (DFID) is funding Building Capacity to Use Research Evidence (BCURE) programs. As the name suggests, the aim is to focus on the various countries and on different ways of building capacity to make evidence-informed decisions. The underlying assumption, similar to KSI, is that the effective use of research and evidence can play a crucial role in making policy more effective.

In the first week of November, a delegation of 20 colleagues representing the Cabinet Division of the Government of the People's Republic of Bangladesh, the Ministry of Commerce, the Planning Commission, and the Ministry of Finance travelled from Dhaka to Jakarta to meet various government organisations and see development programs active in the Indonesian knowledge sector. They also shared experiences on the demand and use of evidence and the Indonesian policy cycle. The delegation was led by H.E. Mohammad Shafiul Alam, the head of the Cabinet Division and the most senior civil servant in the country.

The KSI team provided support to arrange meetings and made introductions to various government agencies, including the National Institute of Public Administration (LAN) and Bappenas. During the week in Jakarta, the delegation met The Asia Foundation, the Commission for Environmental Impact Analysis, the Ministry of Trade and the Ministry of Finance. During a debriefing on 4 November, the delegation shared observations about policy making and the use of evidence in policy making from the various meetings they had had during the week. The delegation was impressed with meetings they had with government representatives and the discussion they had on policy making and use of evidence. Some key takeaways for the Bangladeshi delegation were:

•    The importance of a single agency (Bappenas) as a system integrator for planning and budgeting;

•    The close working relationship between policy research institutes and government agencies, for instance in the Bappenas’ Centre for Policy Analysis (PAK);

•    The overall importance of having an independent bureaucracy as a professional backbone for public sector reforms.

 

As reported here, the first research competition held by DIPI (Dana Ilmu Pengetahuan Indonesia, the Indonesian Science Fund) closed on 31 July 2016 with more than 450 proposals submitted in two focus areas: (i) identity, diversity and culture; and (ii) life, health and nutrition. DIPI is committed to using the highest international standards in its management, including independent reviews of proposals. In mid-November, renowned scientists from Indonesia, Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States were part of a one-week panel review in Jakarta in which shortlisted proposals were evaluated and ranked. The announcement of recipients for the first call is on schedule and should be known by the end of the year.

 

As reported here, the Ministry of Finance (MoF) in collaboration with the Ministry of Research, Technology and Higher Education (MoRTHE) issued a MoF regulation for output-based reporting that will simplify the rigid and time-consuming research reporting system presently burdening researchers. As a follow-up, MoRTHE regulation 69/2016 was issued in October 2016, providing technical guidelines to government units on the establishment of assessment committees and reviewers under the new reporting system. These regulations are complex to implement as they will need coordination between several national agencies, including MoF, MoRTHE, the State Audit Agency (BPK) and the National Procurement Policy Agency (LKPP). During October and November, KSI and partners facilitated discussions with 12 state universities responding to these new regulations and discussing how this will be implemented in the universities to ensure that all necessary agencies provide support. 

 

 

 

Ahmad Erani Yustika became the youngest Director General in the Joko Widodo administration through his position as the Director General of the Development and Empowerment of Village People of the Ministry of Village, Development of Disadvantaged Regions, and Transmigration of the Republic of Indonesia. Born in Ponorogo in 1973, he received the title of professor at the age of 37 and has published more than 500 articles in various mass media and national and international journals. Erani hopes that by being a bureaucrat, he will be able to realise his ideas about villages.

You became a professor at a very young age. What was your reason for leaving the academic world and entering the bureaucracy?

I did not leave the academic world. I am still conducting research with a different intensity: reviewing research, writing books and conveying ideas in seminars. As for the reason for entering bureaucracy, I felt that executing ideas required a more authoritative instrument. Therefore, fully aware of my choice, I temporarily entered this world without straying too far from the academic world that I have always been involved in. It is true that while being an academic, I could influence policy. However, there are myriad variables in influencing policy. Academics with multiple colours, entrepreneurs and strategic groups all have their own interests. Thus, not all of what is being said by academics can be accommodated. It is different with the position as Director General, where I have the authority to design regulations. 

What is the influence of the epistemic community on you?

Significantly large. In the campus world, I work with non-governmental organisations and civil society organisations, in addition to interacting with policy makers at the legislative and executive level, as it relates to my position as an economic expert. This is a huge foundation for supporting activities in this Directorate General, first in drafting regulations, second in designing and executing programs, and third in overseeing and evaluating programs. We consider the epistemic community a part of all the resources we have. 

What is the position of epistemic communities within the bureaucratic structure?

Some are integrated within the internal structure, some are outside. We maintain intensive communication with external epistemic communities, for example in the shape of forums and memoranda of understanding with non-governmental organisations or universities. We also use research to select village mentors, conduct training for village mentors and oversee programs. By doing these, we can oversee these significantly large and strategic programs together.

How do you translate evidence-based policy into making regulations?

I tend to take an open lane to making concepts and regulations. The process is through dissemination. We invite all parties relevant to the object of the regulation to provide inputs. The technocratic basis must be given a deserving portion in policy formulation. That is our way to ensure that regulations are really tailored to the needs on the ground, making them executable. Thankfully, of all the regulations we have made to date, there are almost no problems in the field and people can accept them. However, we feel that revision or improvement of regulations must be done on an ongoing basis, because changes in the field and aspirations for progress occur all the time.

What is knowledge management like in your place of work?

We conduct knowledge management in two ways. First, internally, we hold routine discussions by inviting experts who can provide knowledge related to our duties. We have always wanted to build an academic atmosphere in bureaucracy, not only for the administrative routine, but also for the ideas. This needs to be the main part. Making regulations does not only concern aspects related to technocratic and political issues, but also substantive aspects. The latter can only be achieved when our friends at the bureaucratic level have that academic substance. This is why we always try to develop an academic atmosphere in bureaucracy. Second, we try to involve external organisations and institutions with good reputations by asking them to review our studies. We are also involved in activities with groups serving as sources of knowledge, for example with groups working in food sovereignty, mainstreaming gender, fiscal strengthening for poor village people, and so on. We embrace these experts through various activities.

How does your experience on campus influence your leadership style?

One of the things that I want to demonstrate is that we at the bureaucratic level have public responsibility. I still write, although not as intensively as before, as my main job is no longer conveying ideas in the public space. However, I still write to make the public understand. I think it is part of the bureaucratic responsibility to disseminate regulations, though not many echelons do this. From this public communication we can absorb many critical ideas to improve regulations. I think my academic background is very influential because it can allow other people to see things in an objective way. 

From my own view, evidence-based policy is a part of our main task, for example through the development of the village data centre. One of the first things we did was to make the Village Development Index to objectively and technocratically map the quality of development in every village in Indonesia – which consists of more than 74,000 villages. We used an academic approach. Our goal is not only that the policy be accepted by most parties, but that it is also academically supplied with sufficient supporting knowledge and data. We keep encouraging this to become a tradition when making regulations, developing programs and conducting advocacy for all of our activities implemented in the field.

How do you place the village people in the context of development?

We are strongly committed to the Village Law making its way to the field. Village people are not just constituents who are given information on choices they must take, but they are living subjects free to design and decide their own future. We have repeatedly mentioned to village people that discussions in various forms and intensity must become the basis for decision making in the village, and village people must have full sovereignty to make decisions. We hope they participate in village movements and development initiatives in a broader sense, that they do not just stop at designing and making decisions for development program options, but they are active participants from the beginning to the end. This is what we keep encouraging. We regard them as individuals or citizens with many excellent qualities. All this time we have viewed village people as communities lacking in many dimensions, but we want to ensure that they are communities with many positive sides. These positive aspects must be promoted; this potential must be mobilised and revitalised in the village so that we can achieve dreams in the field. 

We do not want to dictate because we want village people to live their lives based on their own aspirations and thought frameworks. We do not feel that we are more knowledgeable than them, thus every regulation must be supported by adequate forums so that they can provide inputs for aspects that should guide their lives. This is so that we do not repeat past ‘mistakes’ that considered bureaucrats, academics, or anyone outside of the village more knowledgeable on what should be done in the field. Village people understand more. They can speak up and convey their aspirations. We have to position ourselves as the listener. 

 

During November, CSIS published a KSI-supported study on the readiness to implement a merit-based system for senior civil servants. This was mandated by the 2014 Civil Service Law, using case studies from the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Civil Service Agency (BKN) and the West Java Provincial Government. The study was commissioned to be used as a main reference for: (i) a draft Ministerial Decree on the implementation of a merit-based system for government bodies at national and sub-national level; and (ii) a KASN Regulation on the measurement of the implementation of the merit system. Main findings and recommendations from the study include: 

•    Most government institutions have challenges assessing external candidates – of the four case studies, only BKN shortlisted external candidates. The study identifies a need to develop skills, competency and/or capacity to work cross-sectorally, such as diplomacy, financial systems, strategic planning, etc.

•    The role of the selection panel is critical in shortlisting the top three candidates. The study identified existing problems of the selection panel, including a lack of mechanism or guidelines for establishing the selection panel team. There is also a general lack of competence and track record of selection panel members. The study recommends different ways in which the quality of selection panel members can be improved, including training, certification and improved budget allocations.

 

In November, prolific blogger and KSI staffer Arnaldo Pellini, Helen Tilley and Fred Carden published a blog in the online magazine “The Conversation”. It talks about the knowledge sector in Indonesia and has already had more than 3,000 hits. Click here to learn why it is so popular.  

 

In October and November 2016, KSI consortium member ODI RAPID published three papers in collaboration with South Africa’s Department of Environmental Affairs which reveal key questions and good practices on the use of evidence in policy making:

•    “Understanding the Organisational Context for Evidence-Informed Policy-Making” 

•    “Evidence and Policy in South Africa’s Department of Environmental Affairs”  

•    “Guidelines and Good Practices for Evidence-informed Policy-making in a Government Department” 

 

•    https://www.australiaplus.com/indonesian/studi-nad-inovasi/kerjsama-sains-indonesia-australia/8062896

•    https://global.liputan6.com/read/2663932/peneliti-indonesia-dan-australia-bertukar-ilmu-di-simposium-sains

•    https://news.detik.com/australia-plus-abc/d-3356373/kerjasama-sains-australia---indonesia-meningkat

•    https://health.liputan6.com/read/2664318/semangat-peneliti-indonesia-lakukan-riset

•    https://tekno.tempo.co/read/news/2016/11/28/061823675/467-peneliti-ajukan-proposal-dana-riset-kepada-dipi

•    https://m.tribunnews.com/australia-plus/2016/11/28/kerjasama-sains-australia-indonesia-meningkat

•    https://m.news.viva.co.id/abc/read/8062896-kerjasama-sains-australia-indonesia-kian-meningkat