The Destruction of Social Capital In Indonesia
DOI:
10.46729/ijstm.v2i2.169Published:
2021-02-09Downloads
Abstract
Business failure in the economic system causes various economic
actors to potentially become rent-seekers in an imperfect political system. Sugar is
an agricultural commodity that, thus far, is a public good that needs government
regulation. This study aims to determine the social capital of Indonesia's sugar
interest groups and to determine the dominant variable in Indonesia's sugar
industry. Materials and Methods: This research uses a type of explanatory research
that has a high relationship level because it not only has independent and
comparative values but also serves to explain and predict the relationship with a
qualitative approach between variables. Relationship analysis using Decision
Explorer version 3.3 software. Results: analysis of the relationship of and variable
in the sugar industry, the more variables involved in the loop, the most important
relationship between variables in the loop, the most important loop is loop 4
consisting of economic rent, the refined sugar market, entrepreneurs in food and
beverage, lobbying, government. Conclusion: It is concluded from the findings of
this study that the social capital of Indonesia's sugar interest groups consists of 9
loops, Almost every variable has a weak strength to social capital and leads to
damage.
Keywords:
Market Failure, Community Social Capital, Sugar Industry.References
[2] J. E. Stiglitz, Government failure vs. market failure: Principles of regulation, no. May. 2009.
[3] M. Singarimbun, Metode Penelitian Survai.pdf. 1989.
[4] R. D. Putnam, “Bowling Alone: America’s Declining Social Capital,” J. Democr., 1995, doi: 10.1353/jod.1995.0002.
[5] Y. Inaba, Y. Wada, Y. Ichida, and M. Nishikawa, “Which part of community social capital is related to life satisfaction and self-rated health? A multilevel analysis based on a nationwide mail survey in Japan,” Soc. Sci. Med., 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2015.08.007.
[6] N. Uphoff, “Understanding social capital: learning from the analysis and experience of participation,” Soc. Cap. A multifaceted Perspect., 2000.
[7] R. Inglehart, Human values and social change?: findings from the values surveys. 2003.
[8] P. Bourdieu, “Le capital social: note provisoires,” Actes la Rech. en Sci. Soc., 1980.
[9] A. E. Yustika, “The Transaction Cost of Sugarcane Farmers?: An Explorative,” J. Ekon. dan Bisnis Indones., vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 283–301, 2008, doi: https://doi.org/10.22146/jieb.6340.
[10] O. E. Williamson, “Transaction Cost Economics and Public Administration,” in Public Priority Setting: Rules and Costs, 1997.
[11] Z. Y., “Economics of transaction costs saving forestry,” Ecol. Econ., vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 197–204, 2001, doi: 10.1016/S0921-8009(00)00228-7.
Downloads
How to Cite
