Peran Kearifan Lokal Dalam Tata Kelola Kebijakan Publik Desa: Studi Fenomenologis Di Desa Moncongloe
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.36312/rj.v5i2.3656Keywords:
Kearifan Lokal, Kebijakan Publik, Tata Kelola Desa, Institutional Bricolage, Legitimasi KultutalAbstract
Penelitian ini bertujuan mengkaji pola integrasi kearifan lokal dalam penyelenggaraan pemerintahan desa dengan menitikberatkan pada praktik Tudang Sipulung dan sistem nilai Siri’ na Pacce. Kedua unsur tersebut diposisikan sebagai landasan budaya dalam proses musyawarah dan pengambilan keputusan bersama. Penelitian menggunakan pendekatan deskriptif kualitatif dengan melibatkan 25 informan yang ditentukan melalui teknik purposive sampling. Pengumpulan data dilakukan melalui wawancara mendalam, observasi partisipatif terbatas, serta analisis dokumen kebijakan desa.Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa Tudang Sipulung berperan sebagai ruang deliberasi yang menjembatani nilai-nilai adat dengan mekanisme pemerintahan formal, sekaligus meningkatkan ruang partisipasi masyarakat dalam menyampaikan aspirasi. Nilai Siri’ na Pacce berfungsi sebagai pedoman etis yang menekankan martabat, empati, dan tanggung jawab sosial, sehingga mendorong aparatur desa menjalankan tugas secara berintegritas sesuai norma adat dan hukum formal. Integrasi tersebut menghadapi tantangan berupa potensi konflik kewenangan akibat adanya legitimasi kultural dan legal-formal yang berjalan bersamaan. Praktik Tudang Sipulung umumnya dimanfaatkan sebagai tahapan awal sebelum Musyawarah Desa formal, meskipun tingkat partisipasi aktif masyarakat masih terbatas. Selain itu, efektivitas tata kelola sangat dipengaruhi oleh kemampuan elit lokal dalam mengelola perbedaan kepentingan. Temuan lain menunjukkan rendahnya pemahaman generasi muda terhadap nilai adat, meskipun mereka lebih melek teknologi. Berdasarkan temuan tersebut, penelitian ini merekomendasikan penerapan model institutional bricolage untuk memperkuat integrasi kearifan lokal dan pemerintahan formal secara berkelanjutan.
The Role of Local Wisdom in Village Public Policy Governance: A Phenomenological Study in Moncongloe Village
This study examines the integration of local wisdom into village governance by focusing on the practices of Tudang Sipulung and the value system of Siri’ na Pacce. Both concepts function as cultural foundations for deliberation and collective decision-making processes. A descriptive qualitative approach was employed, involving 25 informants selected through purposive sampling. Data were collected through in-depth interviews, limited participatory observation, and analysis of village policy documents.The findings indicate that Tudang Sipulung serves as a deliberative forum that bridges local cultural values with formal governance mechanisms, while also expanding opportunities for community members to express collective aspirations. Meanwhile, Siri’ na Pacce operates as an ethical framework that emphasizes personal dignity, empathy, and collective responsibility, encouraging village leaders to perform their duties with high integrity in accordance with customary norms and formal legal standards. However, the integration process faces several challenges, particularly tensions arising from dual legitimacy cultural and legal-formal which may lead to authority conflicts. In practice, Tudang Sipulung is often positioned as a preliminary stage prior to the formal Village Assembly to build initial consensus, although levels of active community participation remain uneven. Governance effectiveness is also influenced by the capacity of local elites to mediate diverse interests. Additionally, the study reveals that younger generations, despite higher digital literacy, demonstrate lower understanding of traditional values. Based on these findings, the study recommends the adoption of an institutional bricolage model to strengthen the sustainable integration of local wisdom within formal village governance systems.
References
Acciaioli, G. (2021). Indigenous governance and state recognition in contemporary Sulawesi. The Asia Pacific Journal of Anthropology, 22(2–3), 178–195. https://doi.org/10.1080/14442213.2021.1891035
Agrawal, A. (2002). Common resources and institutional sustainability. In E. Ostrom, T. Dietz, N. Dolšak, P. C. Stern, S. Stonich, & E. U. Weber (Eds.), The Drama of the Commons (pp. 41–85). National Academy Press.
Agrawal, A., & Gibson, C. C. (1999). Enchantment and disenchantment: The role of community in natural resource conservation. World Development, 27(4), 629–649. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-750X(98)00161-2
Andersson, K. P., & Ostrom, E. (2008). Analyzing decentralized resource regimes from a polycentric perspective. Policy Sciences, 41(1), 71–93. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-007-9055-6
Arnstein, S. R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35(4), 216–224. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944366908977225
Aspinall, E., & Berenschot, W. (2019). Democracy for Sale: Elections, Clientelism, and the State in Indonesia. Cornell University Press.
Berkes, F. (2009). Indigenous ways of knowing and the study of environmental change. Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand, 39(4), 151–156. https://doi.org/10.1080/03036758.2009.9523463
Boone, C. (2003). Political Topographies of the African State: Territorial Authority and Institutional Choice. Cambridge University Press.
Cleaver, F. (2012). Development Through Bricolage: Rethinking Institutions for Natural Resource Management. Routledge.
Cornwall, A. (2003). Whose voices? Whose choices? Reflections on gender and participatory development. World Development, 31(8), 1325–1342. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-750X(03)00086-X
Cox, M., Arnold, G., & Villamayor Tomás, S. (2010). A review of design principles for community-based natural resource management. Ecology and Society, 15(4), 38. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-03704-150438
Cox, M., Villamayor-Tomas, S., & Ban, N. C. (2021). Synthesizing theories of natural resource management and governance. Global Environmental Change, 69, 102303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2021.102303
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Denzin, N. K. (1978). The Research Act: A Theoretical Introduction to Sociological Methods. McGraw-Hill.
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2018). The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Ece, J., Murombedzi, J., & Ribot, J. (2020). Disempowering democracy: Local representation in community and carbon forestry in Mozambique and Tanzania. Conservation and Society, 18(3), 205–218. https://doi.org/10.4103/cs.cs_19_113
Galvan, D. C. (2020). The State Must Be Our Master of Fire: How Peasants Craft Culturally Sustainable Development in Senegal. University of California Press.
Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X05279903
Harkes, I. H. T., & Novaczek, I. (2019). Presence, performance, and institutional resilience of Sasi, a traditional management institution in Central Maluku, Indonesia. Ocean & Coastal Management, 136, 50–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2016.11.004
Hasbullah, M. (2012). Kearifan lokal dalam pembentukan kebijakan publik di daerah. Jurnal Ilmu Pemerintahan, 4(2), 115–132.
Hsu, C. L., & Lin, J. C. C. (2022). Digital democracy and civic tech: Lessons from Taiwan's participatory governance. Government Information Quarterly, 39(2), 101669. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2022.101669
Junaidi, A., Prasetyani, D., & Setiawan, B. (2018). Revitalisasi kearifan lokal dalam tata kelola pemerintahan desa di era otonomi daerah. Jurnal Kebijakan dan Administrasi Publik, 22(1), 45–62.
Kleine, D., & Unwin, T. (2009). Technological revolution, evolution and new dependencies: What's new about ICT4D? Third World Quarterly, 30(5), 1045–1067. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436590902959339
Kusumastuti, A. (2018). Modal sosial dan pengelolaan sumber daya alam: Studi kasus di masyarakat pesisir. Jurnal Sosiologi Pedesaan, 6(3), 201–218.
Li, T. M. (2007). The Will to Improve: Governmentality, Development, and the Practice of Politics. Duke University Press.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. SAGE Publications.
Mahoney, J., & Thelen, K. (2010). Explaining Institutional Change: Ambiguity, Agency, and Power. Cambridge University Press.
Mansuri, G., & Rao, V. (2013). Localizing Development: Does Participation Work? World Bank Publications.
Mapara, J. (2009). Indigenous knowledge systems in Zimbabwe: Juxtaposing postcolonial theory. The Journal of Pan African Studies, 3(1), 139–155.
Mattulada. (1995). Latoa: Suatu Lukisan Analitis terhadap Antropologi Politik Orang Bugis. Hasanuddin University Press.
Merry, S. E. (1988). Legal pluralism. Law & Society Review, 22(5), 869–896. https://doi.org/10.2307/3053638
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative Data Analysis: A Methods Sourcebook (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Nyong, A., Adesina, F., & Osman Elasha, B. (2007). The value of indigenous knowledge in climate change mitigation and adaptation strategies in the African Sahel. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 12(5), 787–797. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-007-9099-0
Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge University Press.
Ostrom, E. (2005). Understanding Institutional Diversity. Princeton University Press.
Ostrom, E. (2021). Polycentricity: The structural basis of self-governing systems. Journal of Bioeconomics, 23(1), 15–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10818-020-09301-2
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Platteau, J. P. (2004). Monitoring elite capture in community?driven development. Development and Change, 35(2), 223–246. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7660.2004.00350.x
Prasojo, E. (2017). Reformasi pemerintahan desa: Implementasi Undang-Undang Nomor 6 Tahun 2014 tentang Desa. Jurnal Administrasi Publik, 13(2), 89–106.
Ragin, C. C. (2008). Redesigning Social Inquiry: Fuzzy Sets and Beyond. University of Chicago Press.
Reason, P., & Bradbury, H. (2008). The SAGE Handbook of Action Research: Participative Inquiry and Practice (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Ribot, J. C., Agrawal, A., & Larson, A. M. (2006). Recentralizing while decentralizing: How national governments reappropriate forest resources. World Development, 34(11), 1864–1886. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2005.11.020
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Swidler, A., & Watkins, S. C. (2017). A Fraught Embrace: The Romance and Reality of AIDS Altruism in Africa. Princeton University Press.
Thamrin, H. (2019). Kearifan lokal dalam mitigasi konflik agraria di pedesaan. Jurnal Resolusi Konflik, 7(1), 67–84.
Tsing, A. L. (2005). Friction: An Ethnography of Global Connection. Princeton University Press.
UNDP. (1997). Governance for Sustainable Human Development. United Nations Development Programme.
Von Benda-Beckmann, F., von Benda-Beckmann, K., & Griffiths, A. (2009). Space and legal pluralism: An introduction. In F. von Benda-Beckmann, K. von Benda-Beckmann, & A. Griffiths (Eds.), Spatializing Law: An Anthropological Geography of Law in Society (pp. 1–29). Ashgate.
Yin, R. K. (2018). Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 M. Darwis Nur Tinri
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
