The government’s policy directing 58 percent of village funds toward the development program of Red and White Village Cooperatives has drawn criticism from academics. One of them, Professor of Anthropology at Universitas Gadjah Mada, Professor Bambang Hudayana, assessed that the policy has the potential to weaken the spirit of village autonomy that has long been fought for.
According to Professor Bambang, the enactment of Law No. 6 of 2014 on Villages marked an important milestone in restoring village independence, which had been diminished under the centralized governance of the New Order era.
“The Village Law was born from a long struggle of rural communities, activists, and local governments to ensure that villages are recognized as autonomous entities capable of managing their own affairs,” he said on Tuesday (Mar. 31).
He explained that village autonomy includes the authority to determine development priorities based on local needs. Village funds, which can now reach billions of rupiah per village, should be used flexibly to address the specific challenges of each area. However, Professor Bambang argued that the uniform allocation of village funds for cooperative programs contradicts this principle.
“Village funds are the right of the villages, not merely assistance from the central government. When they are redirected for specific programs, especially those imposed top-down, it is unfair,” he stressed.
Furthermore, Professor Bambang also highlighted the concept of Red and White Cooperatives, which he considers ambiguous. He emphasized that cooperatives are essentially member-based economic movements, not institutions established or owned by village governments.
“Cooperatives belong to the people, not the village. If a village establishes a business entity, it should fall under Village-Owned Enterprises (BUMDes), not cooperatives,” he explained.
He expressed concern that forcing the establishment of cooperatives with predetermined schemes and funding allocations would be ineffective. According to him, the economic needs of villages are highly diverse and cannot be standardized.
“Some villages need warehouses, others need market access, and some require production land. Not all of them need cooperative buildings,” he added.
Professor Bambang also warned that a top-down development approach risks repeating past failures. Programs that are not based on the real needs of communities tend to become mere projects without a sustainable impact.
“Many development programs end up as budget-spending projects rather than genuine community empowerment. This is what must be avoided,” he said.
As a solution, Professor Bambang emphasized the importance of the government applying good governance principles in formulating village policies. He mentioned several key principles, including participation, transparency, accountability, and effectiveness.
“Policies must involve village communities, be transparent, and align with real needs. In addition, the government must learn from historical experience to avoid repeating the same mistakes,” he said.
He also underscored the importance of space for criticism in public policy.
“The government must be open to criticism. Criticism is not meant to undermine but to improve policies so they are more targeted,” he concluded.
Author: Jelita Agustine
Editor: Gusti Grehenson
Post-editor: Jasmine Ferdian
Photo: BPS Documentation