THE SHIFTING PARADIGM ON THE VILLAGE
DEVELOPMENT IN INDONESIA
Anwar Sanusi
General Secretary of Ministry of Village, Development of Disadvantaged Areas and Transmigration
The Village in National
Development Context
MAP OF VILLAGES IN EACH PROVINCE
(According to Permendagri No.39/2015)
Aceh
6474
Sumut
5389
Kepri
275
Gorontalo
657
Kalbar
1908
Malut
1064
PaBar
1628
Papua
5090
Kaltim
833
Kalteng
1434
Jambi
1398
Babel
309
Bengkulu
1341
Kalsel
1864
Sulbar
576
Sulsel
2253
Sumsel
2817
Sultra
1820
Lampung
2435
Banten
1238
Sulut
1491
Sulteng
1838
Riau
1592
Sumbar
880
Kaltara
447
Jabar
5319
Jateng
7809
DIY
392
Jatim
7723
Bali
634
NTB
995
NTT
2931
Maluku
1191
Number of Villages
74.093
CONDITIONS OF
VILLAGES IN EACH PROVINCE #2
NO PROVINCE DISADVANTAGED DEVELOPING DEVELOPED
VILLAGES
VILLAGES
VILLAGES
NO PROVINCE DISADVANTAGED
VILLAGES
1 ACEH
1.997
4.391
86
18 NTT
2 SUMUT
2.002
3.299
88
56
739
4 RIAU
281
5 JAMBI
DEVELOPING
VILLAGES
DEVELOPED
VILLAGES
1.546
1.402
2
19 KALBAR
965
920
23
85
20 KALTENG
586
838
10
1.271
40
21 KALSEL
390
1.457
17
191
1.176
31
22 KALTIM
193
619
21
6 SUMSEL
656
2.134
27
23 KALUT
318
126
3
7 BENGKULU
344
992
5
24 SULUT
275
1.203
12
8 LAMPUNG
348
2.010
77
25 SULTENG
500
1.330
9
9 KEP.BABEL
12
288
9
26 SULSEL
285
1.936
32
95
176
4
27 SULTRA
685
1.133
2
97
4.621
601
103
545
9
123
7.021
665
28 GORONTAL
O
29 SULBAR
215
359
2
266
126
30 MALUKU
736
441
14
207
6.823
693
630
429
4
158
1.021
59
1.441
186
1
16 BALI
6
530
100
4.698
415
5
17 NTB
36
917
42
20.175
51.014
2.904
3 SUMBAR
10 KEP. RIAU
11 JAWA
BARAT
12 JAWA
TENGAH
13 D.I.Y
14 JAWA
TIMUR
15 BANTEN
31 MALUKU
UTARA
32 PAPUA
BARAT
33 P A P U A
NASIONAL
MAP OF VILLAGES’ CONDITIONS
ACCORDING TO VILLAGE DEVELOPING INDEX (IPD)
IN THE YEAR OF 2014 #3
Developed Rural Areas
Developing Rural Areas
Disadvantaged Rural Areas
Provincial Boundary
Region of KALIMANTAN:
Disadvantaged Villages:
37,80%
Developing Villages: 61,05%
Developed Villages: 1,15%
Region of SULAWESI:
Disadvantaged Villages:
23,89%
Developing Villages: 75,34%
Developed Villages: 0,77%
Total:
•Disadvantaged: 20.175
(27,23%)
•Developing: 51.014(68,85%)
•Developed: 2.904 (3,92%)
Region of PAPUA:
Disadvantaged Villages:
91.00%
Developing Villages: 8.91%
Developed Villages: 0.09%
Region of SUMATERA:
Disadvantaged Villages:
26,11%
Developing Villages: 71,92%
Developed Villages: 1,97%
Region of JAWA-BALI:
Disadvantaged Villages:
2,56%
Developing Villages: 87,74%
Developed Villages: 9,70%
Region of NUSA TENGGARA:
Disadvantaged Villages:
40,10%
Developing Villages: 58,78%
Developed Villages: 1,12%
Region of MALUKU:
Disadvantaged Villages: 60,60%
Developing Villages: 38,60%
Developed Villages: 0.80%
Sources: Potensi Desa in 2014 (processed) &
Permendagri 39/2014 (number of villages)
Strategic Issue of Developing Villages
1. High isolation of rural areas;
2. Limited supply of public services and minimum basic services in rural
areas;
3. Low supply of supporting infrastructure for rural productivity;
4. Poverty, high rate of unemployment, and economic vulnerability of
rural communities;
5. Development Village Index (IPD) classifies the type of Villages into
three, i.e. Disadvantaged Villages, Developing Villages, and
Developed Villages. Nationally, the Distribution Pattern of Villages
are:
◦ Disadvantaged Villages which are 19.944 villages (26,92%);
◦ Developing Villages which are 51.127 (69%) villages; and
◦ Developed Villages which are 3.022 villages (4,08%)
9. By total of 74 093 villages in accordance with Permendagri 39/2014
Target to achieve in 2019 are a reduction of 5000 Disadvantaged
Villages and an increase in the amount of 5000 Developed Villages.
THE HUMAN RESOURCES CAPACITY IN THE
VILLAGE
Human Resources (HR) in the village can be seen from the Education, gender
and age of the village administrators.
1. The highest education level achieved by the Village Chief
Uneducated
829
Not completed Primary school
primary school/ graduated/
equivalent
equivalent
979
Secondary
School
graduated/
equivalent
High School
graduated/
equivalent
Associate
Degree
Bachelor Degree
Master
Degree
Doctoral
Degree
11240
45137
2320
14488
1634
16
2093
2. Gender and the average age of the Village Chief
Gender of the Village Chief
Male
74,251.00
Female
4,485.00
The average age of the Village Administrators
The average age of the
The average age of the Village Chief
Village Secretary
(years of age)
(years of age)
44.79
43.00
The essence of the New Law on
Village (UU No 6/2014)
1. Governance system with New Law on Village
(recognition to the indigenous tradition and
values)
2. Planning Develompent Mechanism
3. The Village Budget
4. The Responsible Ministries on Village Affairs and
Funds
GOVERNANCE SYSTEM ON VILLAGES
Village Meetings
(Musdes)
(Clause 54)
Governance Principles
•
•
•
Check and balances between the Head of
Village and the Village Consultative Institution
Democracy of Representative + Consultative
The process of participatory democracy
through village meetings (Musdes)
Head of Village
(Clause 25 – 53)
•
•
•
•
Village Institutions
(Services)
The Committee
(Ad-hoc)
Rural Community
Affairs (BUMDes)
Indigenous
Affairs
Direct
Election
•
•
•
•
Rural Medium
Term Plan
Rural Assets
Strategic Affairs
Village Medium Term
Development Plan (RPJM)
and Village Government
Work Plan (RKP)
Villagel Budget
Village Regulation
Government Performance
Cooperation
Rural Society
Community of Special
Interest
Representatives of
Regional Area
Village Consultative
Institution (BPD) (Clause
55 -65)
Democratic
Election
Village meetings: Digging the
indigenous values and customs
Pulakek adalah salah satu jorong di Solok Selatan. Di
sana Terkenal dengan 1000 Rumah Gadang dan
banyak wisata alam yang indah. Jum’at Malam
adalah hari pertemuan warga Pulakek di mana
melibatkan pemerintah nagari,
(Musdes pembagian air pada kelompok
tani di Desa Mandirancan Kec. Kebasen –
Banyumas)
The Village Development Planning
Mechanism
The
Ministrial/Non
are incorporated
to RPJM Desa
Village
Government
Activities
Village
Community
/Societies
VILLAGE MEETINGS
Village Consultative
Bodies (BPD)
Central Government
(Ministries/Non
Ministrial Agencies)
Village Medium
Term Dev. Plan
(RPJMDes)
Village
Government
Work Plan (RKP
Desa)
Financing
Activities
Village
Budget
Accompa
niment
Program/Acti
vities
THE VILLAGE BUDGET
Village Decree No.6
Tahun 2014
implication
Village has a greater authority in planning, budgeting, and implementation
of rural development based on the principle of Recognition and Subsidiary
National Budget Allocation
Clause 79 (6)
Program
of the
Institution
Programs of the Central
Government and / or the Local
Government which its
implementation is coordinated
and / or delegated to village
Program
of the
Institution
PROVINCE
(2) Village funds from the state
budget (10% of the gradual
transfer of funds Regions) is
transferred through Regional
Budget
Financial Support from the
Provincial Budget
Part of the
Fund Balance
Clause 72 (1 e)
DISTRICT/ CITY
Clause 72 (1 b)
(5) Financial
Support from the
Regional Budget
(4) Minimal 10% Balance Fund
after deducting the Special
Allocation Fund (DAK)
Clause 72 (1 d)
Clause 72 (1 e)
Village Funding
(6) Grants and
donations are not
binding
Clause 72 (1 f)
(1) Net income, assets, selfhelp and participation,
mutual aid, and other
income of the village
Clause 72 (1 a)
(7) Other legal
incomes
Clause 72 (1 g)
Rural RPJM & Rural Budget
Development of Village
(3) Minimal 10
% of the local
taxes and
retributions
Clause 72 (1 c)
Transferrable
Funds
Clause 81 (5):
Sectoral program is
informed to the
Village Government
to be integrated
within
The Village Revenues (UU 6/2014)
Allocation Sources
Calculation
APBN Allocation (Art 72:1b), that coming
from National spending by effecting all
the programs based on villages equaly
and fair. Village Funding (Dana Desa, Art.
72:2)
10% of Local Transfer Fund that
will be transfer gradually.
Village Funding Allocation (ADD), apart of
the balance fund that received by the local
government (Art 72:1d)
10% of the balance fund of local
government – Special Allocation
Fund (DAK)
Apart of Local and Retributiobn Tax
At least 10 % of the total tax and
retribution on Local Budget
Other sources could be from village revenues (PADes), Grant from District
and municipalities, and unbinding donations
Village Revenues Plan 2015
(Perpres N0 36/2015)
No.
A.
B.
Allocation Sources
Calculation
State Budget (APBN)
• Transfer Funding
• Village Fund
643,8 T
20,7 T
Local Budget (APBD)
• Balance Fund – DAK
• Village Fund Allocation
462,9 T
46,3 T
C
Apart from Local Tax and distribution
D
Grant from District/Municipal
Total A and B
At least 10 %
66.9 T
Village Funding Disbursment Progress
from APBN (July 8, 2015)
Total Village Funding
(Rp)
APBN 9,006 T
8,1 T
APBN-P 20,766 T
434 Kab/Kota
From 8, 31 T First Phase
Disbursment
97.44 %
434 Kab/Kota
Disbursement Plan: 40 % (1), 40%
(2), and 20% (3)
Division of Authority in the
Management of Village Funds
MINISTRY OF VILLAGE,
DISADVANTAGED AREA AND
TRANSMIGRATION
MINISTRY OF HOME
AFFAIRS
MINISTRY OF FINANCE

Alocate Village Fund
on the National
Budget

Facilitate on the
regulation on the
distribution of Village
fund


Determine the amount 
of funding allocation
for each district/city
Strengthen the
capacity of village
officials (aparat desa)


Disburse the funds in
each district/city
Facilitate on the
management of
Village Fund



Establish the general
guidelines and priorities
for the use of the Village
Fund (prioritas
penggunaan dana desa)
Village Fund assistance
at the district, sub-district
and local region of
village
Enhance the assistance
capacity
ARRANGEMENT OF THE POLICIES TO VILLAGE FUND IMPLEMENTATION
 MONITORING, REPORTING AND EVALUATION
VILLAGE AS THE FUTURE OF INDONESIA:
Future Paradigm of Village
Development
1.
Limited infrastructure of basic
services (education, health and
economy);
2.
Limited livelihood, mostly
Agriculture;
3.
Fillers Urbanization-the Big City;
Disadvantaged compared to the
City;
4.
Lack of human resource capacity;
5.
Requires support from the higher
authority;
6.
Limited fund to develop the
village, through Budget 2013: 1,600 T
Budget, the village only received
2.6% with the details of the total
state budget for 72 944 village = 42
T, indirectly to the village = 32 T,
and direct to the village = 10 T
through PNPM;.
Future Construction
of Village
Being advanced,
developed, and
prosperous
without losing
their identity
THE PURPOSE OF VILLAGE
DEVELOPMENT
Compliance of Basic Needs
Improve the
QUALITY OF LIFE
Improve Rural Community
WELFARE
Development of
POVERTY REDUCTION
Village’s Facilities
through
Development of
Village’s Infrastructure
RURAL DEVELOPMENT
(Clause 78 UU Desa)
STRONG, ADVANCED,
DEVELOPED, AND
DEMOCRATIC VILLAGE
Phases:
•Plan
•Implementation
•Supervision
Emphasizes togetherness, Kinship,
mutual cooperation in order to
realize Mainstreaming of Peace &
Social Justice
Development of Potential
Local Economy
Utilization of Natural
Resources and Sustainable
Environment
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT OF VILLAGE
SUPPORTING THE NATIONAL PROGRAM OF
DEVELOPING VILLAGE
(by Kemendesa according to RPJMN Tahun 2015-2019)
1.
Launch the “SELF-DEVELOPED VILLAGE MOVEMENT” on 3.500 villages in
2015;
2.
MENTORING and STRENGTHENING the capacity of institutions and
apparatus of the 3.500 villages in 2015;
3.
ESTABLISH and develop the 5,000 Village Enterprises (BUMDes);
4.
REVITALIZE rural market in 5.000 villages/rural areas;
5.
DEVELOP the infrastructure of village and rural roads to support rural
priority commodities in 3.500 self-develop villages;
6.
PREPARE the implementation of incremental allocation of village funds
of the maximum of Rp. 1.4 billion per village;
7.
DELIVER capital assistance for cooperatives in 5.000 villages;
8.
Pilot Project on public services system by online network on 3.500
villages
9.
”save villages” in the border and outer islands area.
Integration Scheme of Central-Regional-and Village Government
in terms of Public Service
Lack of
monitoring,
evaluation,
reward and
punishment
Operational
guidelines and
technical
guidelines of
the institution
can not be
applied in the
area
Central
Government
Competence
Financial
management and
funding by local
governments are
still low
Related regulations
have not been
aligned with the
planning and
budgeting SPM in the
area
SPM in Village
RPJM and
Village Budget
Financial
management and
funding by local
governments are
still low
lack of socialization
and regulations
concerning
Management Control
System (SPM)
SPM has not
been integrated
in the local
development
plan (Village
RPJM, RKP,
strategic plan)
Hardware
Software
Infrastructure
and Facilities
Local Government
Capacity:
Institutional,
Financial, and
Officlal
Regional
Government
Competence
The capacity of local
government officials
are still low
Village
Government
Competence
The capacity of local
government officials
are still low
Low
commitment to
the region in
implementing
SPM
Low
commitment to
the region in
implementing
SPM
DESIGN OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT
TO BE A SUSTAINED VILLAGE AND ABLE TO FORM A
NEW URBAN AREA
Sustainable Village
Resillient Village
Vulnerable
Village
•Able to only
survive for its own
region
•Vulnerable to
Social-Economy
and Environment
Shock
Economically have the
resilience and resistance
mechanisms that are
built to survive the
economic crisis, social
and living environment
for all residents of the
village.
High Self Resilient
Village
• Socio-economic
resilience and
mechanisms to survive
for themselves and the
people in the
surrounding villages.
• Developed in
everything: food,
energy, water,
electricity, etc.
Pengembangan Desa Secara Sosial, Ekonomi Dan Ekologi
New Urban Area
Advanced Sustainable
Village
• Able to drive the economy for
the area / surrounding regions
• If it has urban function  it
can be a new urban area
The Current observation on Village
Fund Disbursement
Most of the villages that has been received the Village Fund on
Phase I, by condition:
a) The head of village has not use yet the village funds due to
inavailability of the technical guidance that shuld be
provided by the local government;
b) Some head of villages that has disbursed and used the
village fund without follow the mechanism as stated on
Village Law
Why still very Low?
1.
Multi interpretation on some ministerial regulation;
2.
The document for disbursement consider too administrative
and complicated;
3.
Duplication in the village fund accountability report
(Permendagri dan PMK);
4.
Unavailability on the procurement for the good and services
in villages;
5.
The limitation for the village companion (currently 1 village
companion serves 3 villages).
Thank You
Desa Membangun Indonesia
25