COMMUNITY ORGANIZING FOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT:

The Case of Micro-Hydro Projects in D.I. Yogyakarta

Thesis summaryUntuk memenuhi sebagian persyaratan

Mencapai derajat sarjana S-2

Program StudiMagister Perencanaan Kota dan Daerah

diajukan olehDewi Rahmawaty

diajukan oleh:Dewi Rahmawaty

11/327674/PTK/08023

KepadaPROGRAM PASCASARJANA

FAKULTAS TEKNIKUNIVERSITAS GADJAH MADA

YOGYAKARTA2013

i

THESIS SUMMARY

COMMUNITY ORGANIZING FOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT:

The Case of Micro-Hydro Projects in D.I. Yogyakarta

Submitted by:Dewi Rahmawaty

11/327674/PTK/08023

Approved by:

Supervisor

Prof. Ir. Bakti Setiawan, M.A., Ph.D Date, Desember 2013NIP. 19590628 198503 1 006

CONTENTS

CONTENTS..............................................................................................................................iii

II. INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................1

1.1 Background of Research................................................................................................1

1.2 Research Questions........................................................................................................1

1.3 Research Purpose...........................................................................................................1

II. THEORETICAL CONCEPTS.............................................................................................2

2.1 Community Organizing..................................................................................................2

2.2 Modification...................................................................................................................3

III. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY..........................................................................................4

3.1 Research Approach........................................................................................................4

3.2 Object of Research and Data..........................................................................................4

3.3 Research Dimensions.....................................................................................................4

IV. STUDY AREA.....................................................................................................................5

4.1 Singosaren......................................................................................................................5

4.2 Bendo.............................................................................................................................5

4.3 Minggir...........................................................................................................................6

V. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS.......................................................................................7

5.1 Findings..........................................................................................................................7

5.2 Discussions.....................................................................................................................8

VI. CONCLUSION AND POLICY RECOMMENDATION..................................................10

6.1 Conclusion...................................................................................................................10

6.2 Policy Recommendation..............................................................................................10

REFERENCES..........................................................................................................................11

iii

CHAPTER 1 : INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of Research

In developing countries, it is important to understand and rethink community

organizing, now that rural development has progressed. Community organizing is a process to

build or rebuild the capacity of local communities where the entire community’s members are

involved in the development process (Mattessich as cited in Ford, 2009). Studies in

Philippines, Thailand, Vietnam, Bangladesh, and India (Oakley, 1995) show the role of

community organizing in encouraging rural development with community capability,

participation, social capital, leadership, and networking becomes the key elements.

In contrast, there have been few studies which explore community organizing in

Indonesia. Increasing demand for electric power force the Indonesian government to sought

renewable power source such as micro-hydro system, particularly for developing rural area. In

D.I. Yogyakarta, from 31 micro-hydro projects, only 6 micro-hydro projects are running

successfully. Why are so many cases not working? what is the key to maintaining the micro-

hydro project for rural development? These questions are why micro-hydro project is choosen

in order to understand and rethink community organizing for rural development in our own

time.

1.2 Research Questions

In light of these conditions, it is important to understand and rethink community

organizing in D.I. Yogyakarta by answering the question:

“What kind of community organizing characteristics that can encourage rural

development?”

1.3 Research Purpose

This study will focuses to search what kind of community organizing characteristics

that can encourage rural development. From previous studies on common characteristics in

community organizing, it is understood that the three elements of leadership, participation and

social capital are most important. Thus, how much three elements above give influence

toward good community organizing will be analyzes.

1

The goal of this research is to formulate important characteristic needed by

community organizing to encourage rural development and what government can give to

support community organizing.

CHAPTER 2: THEORETICAL CONCEPTS

2.1 Community Organizing

Community organizing as Mattessich explains (as cited in Ford, 2009), covers activity

that builds up the community’s capacity, and all the community members are involved in the

development process and equipped with tools for it. Neighborhood association, as community

organizing, plays an important role in the development process (Koschmann & Laster, 2011).

Some variables that widely discussed as basic characteristic of community organizing are

leadership, participation and social capital.

2.1.1 Leadership

Hess (1999) outlines that leadership is important for controlling an organization,

inviting more people to participate, collaborating with non-formal leaders (described below)

to understand and analyze social problems and bring their interest to the wider community,

and harmony with other organizations. In rural community there are two types of leaders who

mostly work together. Tjondronegoro (1984) calls these non-formal leaders and formal

leaders. The former includes people in the first-layer structure, mostly prestigious people and

the community deems prestigious. The later, arise through neighborhood election or

appointment by higher level in bureaucracy. Non-formal leaders play a much more important

role in their neighborhood sodalities, not in administrative but in a moral and spiritual sense.

2.1.2 Participation

Oakley (1995) analyzes participation as contribution, organization and empowerment.

He sees participation as direct involvement from a citizen member toward achieving the goal.

Contribution can occur in the begining of activity or in its operation and maintenance, but

most often covers both; it can take the form of idea, money, power, or facility. Organization is

the community’s effort to provide better access to citizen and institutions, as shown in its

2

model, structure, component, and function. Empowerment, which helps community members

raise their skill and ability to better manage the community, and to deal with the existing

system, can be indicated by community members’ role, action, motivation, and responsibility.

2.1.3 Social capital

Hess (1999) argues that building social capital among members and bridging relations

across interest groups is important to organizing. Putnam (1994) describes social capital as

connection among individuals in a social network, and the norms of reciprocity and

trustworthiness that arise from them. Coleman (1990) focuses on social structure closeness,

which can encourage effective norms and trust and at the same time yield such benefits as the

feeling of solidarity in the community. Bourdieu (1992) notices the importance of social

interaction: without participatory attitude, there will be no relationship.

2.2 Modification

Hess (1999) outlines the characteristic of community organizing as local democratic

control, power being based on participation of mass constituency, leadership development

being central, permanence and growth of the organization being paramount, and contestation

at the institutional level; nevertheless I see a greater accent on leadership, participation and

social capital. Local democratic control and power being based on participation of mass

constituency show the importance of participation. The importance of leadership is more

clearly present in leadership development. Social capital is essential for organization’s

permanence and growth.

In conclusion, though Hess (1999) outline five characteristics of community

organizing, such variable as leadership, participation and social capital become the base of

those characteristics. Characteristics of a successful leader have been outlined by Twelvetrees

(1996). In Javanese community, however, Tjondronegoro (1984) has shown the importance of

non-formal leaders. Participation, according to what Oakley (1995) claims, can be measured

in the form of participation as contribution, as organization, and as empowerment. The last

variable is social capital, for which Putnam (1994) gives three variables: trust, norms of

reciprocity and network. Coleman (1990) defines two characteristics, which is social structure

and facilitation. Bourdieu (1992) notes the importance of social interaction beginning with a

participatory attitude.

3

CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Research Approach

This research is a sequential Sequential mixed methods. It is starts with qualitative

data with survey, interviews and observation then transform the survey into quantitative data

with likert scale.

3.2 Object of Research and Data

Three sites have been selected as case studies: Singosaren, Bendo, and Minggir.

Primary data were collected through a survey with 75 respondents and through interviews

with three community leaders and government officers. Secondary data obtained from

government statistical data were also used for the analysis.

3.3 Research Dimensions

This study will focus to measure participation, social capital, and leadership. The

dimensions and indicators used in this study are illustrated in Table 1.

Table 1. Indicators and variablesNo Research Questions Dimensions Indicators Variables

1

How much participation, social capital, and leadership influence communiity organizing

Participation

Contribution

IdeaMoneyManpowerFacilitating

Organization

OpenessCompositionCohesionFunction

Empowerment

RoleActionWillingnessResponsibility

Social Capital Social Capital

BenefitTrustVolunteeringMutual AssistanceSocial EngagementTolarenceSupport

Leadership Leadership

Local democratic controlPowerLeadership developmentOrganization’s permanenceOrganization’s growth

Source: Study literature (2012)

4

CHAPTER 4: STUDY AREA

D.I. Yogyakarta has 31 micro-hydro sites chosen from 38 potential micro-hydro sites.

These were built in the years 2003–2011 by the local government, university, and community.

The maintenance is carried out by the local communities. Micro-hydro units are installed in

irrigation channels with a propeller turbine or undershoot turbine. Unfortunately, only 6

survive with proper installation. Since all the technical things seem to work well, then the

problem of the micro-hydro units not working may be due to maintenance (or lack there of)

from the communities that use them. Three sites are used for this study, which is Singosaren,

Bendo, and Minggir.

4.1 Singosaren

Neighborhood association number 5 (RT 5) is a micro-hydro community in

Singosaren. It is located 13 km south of Yogyakarta city and passed by a left-sindet irrigation

channel, where a micro-hydro system is installed. The activities in this neighborhood

association are initiated mainly by men. Every night these men gather in the gardu (a place

that used to guard environment). In this gathering, they also discuss RT development

informally, usually as brought forth by the RT head and the non-formal leaders. Current issues

will be discussed formally in the monthly gathering.

The micro-hydro community inisiated by Mr. Mutohar, he discussed micro-hydro plan

in a gardu gathering. His idea was welcomed by everyone. Soon, Mr. Junaidi as head of RT,

with the help of a non-formal leader, had begun gathering people and material to build a

micro-hydro system. After two failures, with the gotong-royong spirit, the micro-hydro

machine was able to produce electricity in 2007. The electricity is for street lighting (11 lamps

in the north and 25 lamps in the south, where each lamp is 8 W and covers 3 alleys) and

welding for crafts.

4.2 Bendo

Neighborhood association number 7 (RT 7) has become a micro-hydro community in

Singosaren. It is located 13 km to the south of Yogyakarta city and passed by a left-canden

irrigation channel, where a micro-hydro system is installed. The activities in this

neighborhood association are initiated mainly by the leader and the non-formal leaders. The

5

leader and non-formal leaders are keys to development activities. Development matters are to

be discussed in monthly gatherings.

The micro-hydro project began in the 2009, Mr. Slamet, a Master’s student from

UGM, used Bendo’s micro-hydro system as his thesis and made the system produce 2.33 KW

of electricity. He and RT 7 citizen set street lights (15 lamps) and connected the electricity to

the fish-farming pump and soybean-shelling machine and taught Mr. Paimin, head of RT 7,

micro-hydro maintenance. Unfortunately, the farmers suspect micro-hydro system causes

water degradation. Since this misunderstanding has bred conflict, the micro-hydro machine

has stopped operating.

4.3 Minggir

Unlike Singosaren and Bendo, the Minggir community is on the village level. It is

located in Sendangrejo village, 9.2 km to the north of Yogyakarta city and passed by a Vander

Wijk irrigation channel, where a micro-hydro system is installed. The activities in this village

are based on a medium-term development plan and a yearly village development work plan.

These plan are presented in a village meeting. The chief of hamlet, chief of RW and RT,

village organization leader, non-formal leaders, and other important persons attend this

meeting.

The micro-hydro community began when Sleman regency, together with Public

Works, Housing, Energy and Mineral Resource (Pekerjaan Umum, Perumahan Energi dan

Sumber Daya Mineral/PUP-ESDM), had a micro-hydro program in Sleman regency. In a

regency meeting, the chief of the village proposed that village irrigation channel be fit with a

micro-hydro system. Upon the approval of the PUP-ESDM agency and the water resource

agency, it wasi nstalled in 2007 with a projected value of 220 million rupiahs. It produces 10

KW of electricity. At first, it was connected to shops in front of the village hall. Since the

voltage is unstable, however, shops have refused to use it again. Now, it used only for the

village hall, the mushala, and the shrimp farm pump. This micro-hydro system has a yearly

budget for maintenance from the government.

6

CHAPTER 5: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS

5.1 Findings

5.1.1 Participation

Comparison of community participation levels shows the Singosaren community

having the most higher community participation, followed by Bendo and Minggir.

Community participation, consisting incontribution, organization, and empowerment, is

citizen movement toward achieving goals (Oakley, 1995). Manpower, cohesion, and

willingness have become the main elements of community participation (table 2).

Table 2. Community participationscale: person times weighting

VariableBendo Singosaren Minggir

AgreementScr Level

AgreementScr Level

AgreementScr Level

1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5Contribution:

Idea 0 1039

28 0 77 Quite active 010

2416

40 90 Quite active 4 18 30 8 0 60 Not quite active

Money 0 1236

28 0 76 Quite active 014

36 4 25 79 Quite active 7 18 27 0 0 52 Not quite active

Manpower 0 1036

32 0 78 Quite active 010

1520

55 100 Active 3 16 33 12 0 64 Not quite active

Facilitating 0 1630

28 0 74 Quite active 0 2 3924

25 90 Quite active 4 16 30 8 5 63 Not quite active

Organization:

Openess 0 1245

16 0 73 Quite active 012

2416

35 87 Quite active 0 12 45 16 0 73 Not quite active

Composition 0 1042

24 0 76 Quite active 010

3016

30 86 Quite active 0 12 39 24 0 75 Quite active

Cohesion 0 236

48 0 86 Quite active 0 0 1524

70 109 Active 0 10 39 28 0 77 Quite active

Function 0 636

40 0 82 Quite active 0 0 1548

40 103 Active 0 12 33 32 0 77 Quite active

Empowerment:

Role 0 1236

28 0 76 Quite active 010

1520

50 95 Quite active 2 12 45 4 5 68 Not quite active

Action 0 1630

28 0 74 Quite active 012

1836

20 86 Quite active 3 20 30 8 0 61 Not quite active

Willingness 0 018

72 5 95 Quite active 0 0 948

50 107 Active 0 2 48 16 20 86 Quite active

Responsibility 0 1030

40 0 80 Quite active 0 2 2120

60 103 Active 2 16 30 16 5 69 Not quite active

Averg. Score 78.9 94.58 68.8Source: Primary data questionnaire (2012)Note:The agreement (1: Strongly disagree; 2: disagree; 3: neutral; 4: agree; 5: strongly agree) score here reflect questionnaireresult multiplies by weighting. The scr here reflect total value of the score in level of agreement, which range from 25 to 125.

5.1.2 Social capital

7

The comparison of social capital

shows that the Singosaren community has

the highest social capital followed by

Bendo and Minggir. Tolerance, social

engagement, and mutual assistance become

three dominant characteristics of social

capital.

Table 4. Social capital

VariableAverage

Bendo

Singosaren

Minggir

Benefit 3.60 3.76 3.48Trust 3.52 3.84 3.40Volunteering 3.92 3.68 3.64Mutual Assistance

4.08 4.64 3.96

Social Engagement

4.12 4.56 3.92

Tolerance 4.12 4.80 3.96Support 3.68 4.80 3.40

Source: Primary data questionnaire (2012)

5.1.3 Leadership

In the Singosaren and Bendo communities, with support from non formal leader,

gathering becomes an opportunity for the leader to gather information and persuade people to

join activities, discuss problems and solutions, and strengthens the bond between leaders and

community members. Water becomes an easy reason for conflict with the farmers, so leader

role to understand and analyze social issues, getting their interest to a wider community, and

increasing harmony with other organizations becomes vital. But, Bendo community leader

unable to plays these roles. Instead searching fair solution, he asking the farmers evidence and

prove they are wrong. The result is the farmers become angry and come again with hoes,

axes, and other farm equipment to bring down the micro-hydro. In the Minggir community,

micro-hydro project is maintained in village level and supported by water resource agency, at

the district and province level. Village staff have higher positions in village citizen, thus

complaint are minimized.

5.1.4 The roles of non formal leader and government toward citizen opinions

In rural area, non formal leader have important position in citizen. They come from

first-layer structure in citizen, deems prestigious by the citizen and often giving guidance in

moral and spiritual matter to the citizen (Tjondronegoro, 1984). This happen in three site

study, where almost there is no decisions are made by the leader are not known by non formal

leader. If non formal leader agree or support the decision, they will persuade citizen to support

the decision. In Bendo and Singosaren, the role of non formal leader clearly seen in citizen

opinion about community have influenced citizen in managing micro-hydro and decision

making involvement, meanwhile the role of government in this matter can be seen in Minggir.

8

5.2 Discussions

5.2.1 Higher community participation and social capital does not guarantee better community

organizing

The purpose of this study is to assess the characteristics of community organizing

through the micro-hydro community. Theoretically, participation and social capital can

strengthen community organization and promote to better community organizing (Hes, 1999;

Oakley, 1995; Tjondronegoro, 1984; Christens, B., Jones, D.L., and Speer, P.W., 2008;

Putnam, 1994; Coleman, 1990; Bourdieu, 1992). This is in line with the Singosaren

communitycase. However, this study found that although community participation and social

capital is high, this does not guarantee the success of community organizing. The Bendo

community has higher participation and social capital than the Minggir community, but they

are unable to manage micro-hydro.

Leadership becomes variable that differentiate the communities. The Bendo

community is neighborhood level (RT) where the powers of the leader only reach within his

neighborhood. With only this kind of power, it is difficult to settle the conflicts with other

neighborhoods. In contrast, the Minggir community is focused on the village level where the

power of leaders cover the whole village and has a broader network. In line with Hess (1999),

this study finds that leadership is important to control the organization, invite more people to

participate, together with non-formal leaders to understand and analyze social problems, get

their interest to the wider community, and promote solidarity with other organizations. The

Bendo community is unable to understand and analyze social problems and is unable to get

their interests to the wider community; the leader is also unable to cultivate solidarity with the

farmers.

5.2.2 Important roles of non formal leader and government toward citizen opinions

Another finding from this study is important roles of non formal leader and government

toward citizen opinions. From this study, Their presence is strong enough to maneuver citizen

opinions toward community influence and decision making involvement. Moreover, in the

Minggir community, leaders reinforced the government power. This will move the citizen

together with community members to maintain micro-hydro.

In javanesse study, the non-formal leaders are prestigious people who play important

role in their neighborhood sodalities, not in administrative but in a moral and spiritual sense

9

(Tjondronegoro, 1984). They also have knowledge and closesness toward people

(Selosoemardjan, 1962) and this make people respect to them. The roles of formal leaders in

Bendo and Singosaren are help the community to smoothen complain inside the citizen, to

persuade citizen to join community activity, become bridge between citizen and community,

and making agreement with citizen. Meanwhile in Minggir, government power makes village

order becomes obligation for sub village, village officer have more prestige value in citizen,

and village staff authority in their job makes no one said something about it.

CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSION AND POLICY RECOMMENDATION

6.1 Conclusion

Participation and social capital has been proven able to strengthen community

organization and lead to better community organizing in Singosaren community.

Interestingly, though the Bendo community has higher community participation and social

capital rather than the Minggir community, they unable to maintain the micro-hydro system.

One reason for this is leadership. Important characteristics of a leader is control the

organization, invite more people to participate, together with non-formal leaders to

understand and analyze social problems, get their interest to the wider community, and

promote solidarity with other organizations. In this case, the leader in Bendo community

unable to play these roles.

Another finding from this study is important roles of non formal leader and government

toward citizen opinions. Non formal leaders have roles to smoothen complain inside the

citizen, to persuade citizen to join community activity, become bridge between citizen and

community, and making agreement with citizen. While government power makes village

order becomes obligation for sub village, village officer have more prestige value in citizen,

and village staff authority in their job makes no one said something about it.

10

6.2 Policy Recommendation

Considering that there are various types of community, characteristics of community

organizing may also vary. Participation, social capital, and leadership are vital characteristics,

especially leadership. However, due to the variance of community type, these characteristics

might have different features. Thus, making the best combination with adjustments to

community organizing characteristics will lead to better community organizing.

The last element is government support, since communities play a vital role in

development; government should at least support them to grow. This support can be in the

form of funds, technology, knowledge, access, and facilitation. For this, government should

know what kind of communities are exist in their area, what their problems are, and should

give solutions.

11

REFERENCES

Bourdieu, P.,& Wacquant, L. J. D. (1992). An invitation to reflexive sociology. Chicago: University Of Chicago Press.

Christens, B., Jones, D. L.,& Speer, P. W. (2007). Power, conflict, and spirituality: A qualitative study of faith-based community organizing. Forum Qualitative Sozial for schung/Forum Qualitative Social Research, 9(1), Art. 21. http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/330/722

Coleman, J. S. (1990). Foundations of social theory. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Duthy, S., & Duthy, B.B. (2003).Empowering people’s organizations in community based forest management in the philippines: The community organizing role of NGOs. Annals of Tropical Research, 25(2), 13-27. http://espace.library.uq.edu.au/eserv/UQ:8171/n9._empowering_p.pdf

Ford, R. (2009). Design and empowerment: Learning from community organizing (Unpublished master’s thesis). University Of Cincinnati: United State.

Gittel, R.& Vidal, A. (1998). Community organizing: Building social capital as a development strategy. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Hess, D. R. (1999). Community organizing, building and developing: Their relationship to comprehensive community initiatives. Paper presented on COMM-ORG: The On-Line Conference on Community organizing and Development. Retrieved May 15, 2013, from http://comm-org.wisc.edu/papers99/hess.htm.

Kartohadikoesoemo, S. (1965). Desa. Bandung: Sumur Bandung.

Koentjaraningrat (1967). Villages in Indonesia. New York: Cornell University Press.

Koschmann, M., & Laster, N.M. (2011). Communicative tensions of community organizing: The case of a local neighborhood association. Western Journal of Communication, 75(1), 28–51. http://koschmann.webstarts.com/uploads/Koschmann___Laster__2011__comm_tensions_of_community_organizing.pdf.

Martin, D. G. (2008). “Place-Framing” as Place-Making: Constituting a Neighborhood for Organizing and Activism. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 93(3), 730-750. https://140.232.1.53/departments/geography/pdfs/Deb%20Martin/placeframingasplacemaking.2003.pdf.

Mazaheri, N., Al-Dahdah, E., Poundrik, S., & Chodavarapu, S. (2013). Leadership and institutional change in the public provision of transportation infrastructure: An analysis of india's bihar, The Journal of Development Studies, 49(1), 19-35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080 /00220388.2012. 740016.

Oakley, P. (1995). People’s participation in development projects: A critical review of current theory and practice. Oxford: Intrac. http://www.intrac.org/data/files/resources/128/OPS-7-Peoples-Participation-in-Development-Projects.pdf

12

Putnam, R. D. (1994). Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy (5thed.). New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

Selosoemardjan. (1962). Social changes in Yogyakarta. New York: Cornell University Press.

Shaw, R. (2006). Community-based climate change adaptation in Vietnam: Inter-linkages of environment, disaster, and human security. S. Sonak (eds.), Multiple dimension of global environmental changes (pp. 521 – 547). New Delhi: Teri Publication. http://unfccc.int/files/adaptation/application/pdf/nwpexpert_shaw_2006.pdf

Shigetomi, S. (2006, February). Organizational capability of local societies in rural development: A comparative study of microfinance organizations in thailand and the Philippines (IDE discussion paper no. 47). Retrieved June 26, 2013, from https://ir.ide.go.jp/dspace/bitstream/2344/159/3/ARRIDE_Discussion_No.47_shigetomi.pdf

Shigetomi, S. (1992). From “Loosely” to “Tightly” structured social organization: The changing aspects of cooperation and village community in rural Thailand. The Developing Economies, 30(2), 154 – 178. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1746-1049.1992.tb00010.x/pdf

Statistic Of The Special Region Of Yogyakarta. Statistics of Indonesia.(2010).The Special Region Of Yogyakarta In Figures, 2010. The Special Region Of Yogyakarta: Statistic Of The Special Region Of Yogyakarta.

Traynor, B. (2002). Reflections on community organizing and resident engagement: In the rebuilding communities initiative. Retrived May 20, 2013, from http://www.instituteccd.org/uploads/iccd/documents/reflections.pdf.

Tjondronegoro, S. M.P. (1984). Social organization and planned development in rural java. Singapore: Oxford University Press.

Twelvetrees, A. C. (1996). Organizing for neighborhood development: A comparative study of community based development organizations (2nded.). Brookfield: Ashgate.

13

8