[vc_empty_space][vc_empty_space]
Infrastructure development under the jokowi administration progress, challenges and policies
Salim W.a, Negara S.D.b
a Department of Regional and City Planning, School of Architecture, Planning and Policy Development, Bandung Institute of Technology, Gedung Labtek IX-A, Bandung, 40132, Indonesia
b Regional Economic Studies Programme, Indonesia Studies Programme at, ISEAS – Yusof Ishak Institute, Singapore, 119614, Singapore
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner][vc_separator css=”.vc_custom_1624529070653{padding-top: 30px !important;padding-bottom: 30px !important;}”][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_row_inner layout=”boxed”][vc_column_inner width=”3/4″ css=”.vc_custom_1624695412187{border-right-width: 1px !important;border-right-color: #dddddd !important;border-right-style: solid !important;border-radius: 1px !important;}”][vc_empty_space][megatron_heading title=”Abstract” size=”size-sm” text_align=”text-left”][vc_column_text]© 2018 ISEAS – Yusof Ishak InstituteIn any emerging nation, efficient infrastructure holds the key to economic and social development. In the case of Indonesia, however, decades of under-investment and poor asset management have left the country with a significant infrastructure deficit. This paper explores the key problems facing infrastructure development in Indonesia since the Yudhoyono era. The current administration aims to tackle this challenge and improve the competitiveness of the Indonesian economy. Compared to the previous administration, the incumbent government has taken a more pragmatic approach to achieve its goals. One major policy has been to shift budget allocations away from fuel subsidies and towards infrastructure development. This has also been accompanied by continued efforts to reform regulatory and institutional frameworks. Despite these measures, the overall progress of Jokowi’s infrastructure development has not been as smooth as expected. Limited resources and capacity mean that the administration needs to re-evaluate the number of national strategic initiatives and be more selective in prioritizing infrastructure projects. Moreover, the national strategic projects must be linked to larger development plans with longer time-frame, such as the National Spatial Plan and sectoral master plans in order to achieve integrated regional development.[/vc_column_text][vc_empty_space][vc_separator css=”.vc_custom_1624528584150{padding-top: 25px !important;padding-bottom: 25px !important;}”][vc_empty_space][megatron_heading title=”Author keywords” size=”size-sm” text_align=”text-left”][vc_column_text][/vc_column_text][vc_empty_space][vc_separator css=”.vc_custom_1624528584150{padding-top: 25px !important;padding-bottom: 25px !important;}”][vc_empty_space][megatron_heading title=”Indexed keywords” size=”size-sm” text_align=”text-left”][vc_column_text]Development,Financing,Indonesia,Infrastructure,Land acquisition,PPP,SOE[/vc_column_text][vc_empty_space][vc_separator css=”.vc_custom_1624528584150{padding-top: 25px !important;padding-bottom: 25px !important;}”][vc_empty_space][megatron_heading title=”Funding details” size=”size-sm” text_align=”text-left”][vc_column_text][/vc_column_text][vc_empty_space][vc_separator css=”.vc_custom_1624528584150{padding-top: 25px !important;padding-bottom: 25px !important;}”][vc_empty_space][megatron_heading title=”DOI” size=”size-sm” text_align=”text-left”][vc_column_text]https://doi.org/10.1355/ae35-3e[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/4″][vc_column_text]Widget Plumx[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_separator css=”.vc_custom_1624528584150{padding-top: 25px !important;padding-bottom: 25px !important;}”][/vc_column][/vc_row]