PERUMUSAN KEBIJAKAN PEMERINTAH DESA
This research aimed describe the process of pro-poor formulation of village government work plan and village budget that aligned with poor community members in 2013 in Mumbulsari village, District of Mumbulsari, Jember Regency. The research belongs to descriptive study with qualitative approach. Dat...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Academic Paper |
| Published: |
UNEJ,
2016-01-18T06:43:14Z.
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | Get Fulltext |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | This research aimed describe the process of pro-poor formulation of village government work plan and village budget that aligned with poor community members in 2013 in Mumbulsari village, District of Mumbulsari, Jember Regency. The research belongs to descriptive study with qualitative approach. Data were collected by observation, interview, documentation, and triangulation. The research informants were determined by purposive sampling involving 8 key informants who knew the situation and condition of the problem. Data verification applied observation persistence, triangulation, and peer discussion. Data analysis used interactive model of Miles and Huberman that consisted of data collection, data reduction, data presentation, and conclusion drawing.. The results showed that village government work plan and village budget formulation of Mumbulsari Village in 2013 on the alternative selection and policy estbalishment had not alined with the poor community and annual county gathering was not held. The participation of poor communities was low in the village government work plan and village budget formulation in 2013 since the participants in the formulation were selected by the village government mostly comprising the village officers and the ones having close relationship with the village head. Village government work plan and village budget 2013 of Mumbulsari Village had not fully been pro-poor community because the pro-poor village government work plan and village budget programs were respectively only 28% and 24% of the total programs |
|---|---|
| Item Description: | http://repository.unej.ac.id/handle/123456789/71593 |