Kampunghijau di Jakarta ini merupakan karya warga setempat berkolaborasi dengan PT Pertamina (Persero) melalui Marketing Operation Region (MOR) III. Sebagai kampung percontohan, di setiap sudut gang terdapat tempat sampah meyerupai kandang dengan ram kawat yang berisi aneka botol plastik bekas kemasan minuman, pelumas, pembersih lantai, sabun dll. DENPASAR- Pemerintah Kota Denpasar terus berinovasi untuk menciptakan Denpasar aman, nyaman, bersih, dan sejuk. Kelurahan Sesetan membuat terobosan dengan program Kampung Hijau di wilayah Sesetan, Kecamatan Denpasar Selatan. Lurah Sesetan, Ketut Sri Karyawati, mengatakan, program ini dibuat untuk menciptakan kampung bersih, sehat, dan sejuk. pembangunanfasilitas seperti jalan kayu ulin dan jembatan beton, penyediaan air bersih dan listrik, penyediaan lahan terbuka hijau, pembangunan pelayanan kesehatan dan rumah ibadah seharusnya bisa memberikan dampak perubahan perilakumasyarakat yang baik terhadap sanitasi di kampung atas air. Penelitian ini ingin mengetahui kondisi sanitasi TANGERANG | sorotdesa.com, Edih S. Sos, Lurah Gandasari Kecamatan Jatiuwung Kota Tangerang Provinsi Banten, melakukan terobosan lagi dalam menata wilayahnya dengan membangun Kampung Bersih dan Kampung Hijau Rabu, 23/01/2019. Terinspirasi dengan perkembangan teknologi tren saat ini Lurah Edih sebelumnya pernah masuk 4 besar tingkat nasional tahun 2018 atas kretifitasnya membuat Kampung Piala JAKARTA PT Perusahaan Listrik Negara dan Badan Pembangunan Internasional AS memperkuat kemitraan untuk mempercepat transformasi energi bersih dan berkelanjutan di Indonesia melalui penandatanganan nota kesepahaman (MoU). MoU tersebut ditandatangani oleh Direktur Utama PT PLN Darmawan Prasodjo dan Direktur USAID Indonesia Jeff Cohen di Jakarta, Rabu (3/8/2022), sebagaimana rilis L0oKROi. Collaborative environmental governance effort for sector of environment was practiced in Makassar city through Makassar Green and Clean MGC program. Collaborators in the MGC program are very complex. The involved parties are Government of Makassar local government, PT. Unilever Indonesia company, Media Fajar media and Yayasan Peduli Negeri non-governmental organization. The main issues of collaborative governance have occurred during implementation of program such as engagement, motivation and capacity. Action of environmental control and management done every stage of activity had characteristic. Besides that, the result of the program was dynamic. This study used qualitative method with case study approach. The main data were collected through in-depth interview. For process of data triangulation, documentation study and observation were used to complete data of research. The data are analyzed with stages data reduction, data display and conclusion. In the MGC program, collaboration was based on the memorandum of understanding. Each party has duty and obligation. The program is focus on greening of settlement and waste management. The community of Makassar was involved in some activities as facilitator and environmental cadres. Moreover, there is Forum Kampung Bersih dan Hijau FORKASIH as societal organization for environment. Progress of the core values like trustbuilding, shared understanding and internal legitimacy is good. Unfortunately, some values are dissatisfactory such as institution, commitment and leadership. In general, the collaborators are always cooperation during implementation of the program. Result of collaborative governance toward environmental condition is good for short period, but it is less good for long period. In general, the collaborative environmental governance includes the best practice, but it is still on stage of exploration. This research tries to elaborate dynamic, action and result of collaborative governance in the MGC - uploaded by Nasrulhaq NasrulhaqAuthor contentAll figure content in this area was uploaded by Nasrulhaq NasrulhaqContent may be subject to copyright. Discover the world's research25+ million members160+ million publication billion citationsJoin for free 2015 International Conference on Public Administration ICPA 11th Edited by ZHU Xiaoning and ZHAO Shurong1Collaborative Environmental Governance A Case Study From Program of Makassar Green And Clean Mgc in Makassar City Nasrulhaq Department of Public Administration, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Muhammadiyah University of Makassar, Makassar City, 90221 - Indonesia. AbstractCollaborative environmental governance effort for sector of environment was practiced in Makassar city through Makassar Green and Clean MGC program. Collaborators in the MGC program are very complex. The involved parties are Government of Makassar local government, PT. Unilever Indonesia company, Media Fajar media and Yayasan Peduli Negeri non-governmental organization. The main issues of collaborative governance have occurred during implementation of program such as engagement, motivation and capacity. Action of environmental control and management done every stage of activity had characteristic. Besides that, the result of the program was dynamic. This study used qualitative method with case study approach. The main data were collected through in-depth interview. For process of data triangulation, documentation study and observation were used to complete data of research. The data are analyzed with stages data reduction, data display and conclusion. In the MGC program, collaboration was based on the memorandum of understanding. Each party has duty and obligation. The program is focus on greening of settlement and waste management. The community of Makassar was involved in some activities as facilitator and environmental cadres. Moreover, there is Forum Kampung Bersih dan Hijau FORKASIH as societal organization for environment. Progress of the core values like trustbuilding, shared understanding and internal legitimacy is good. Unfortunately, some values are dissatisfactory such as institution, commitment and leadership. In general, the collaborators are always cooperation during implementation of the program. Result of collaborative governance toward environmental condition is good for short period, but it is less good for long period. In general, the collaborative environmental governance includes the best practice, but it is still on stage of exploration. This research tries to elaborate dynamic, action and result of collaborative governance in the MGC program. Key wordsCollaborative, governance, environment 1 Background Collaborative Governance has become a trend and a new phenomenon which interested to be researched and studied. Collaborative Governance has developed for two last decade Ansell and Gash, 2007, 543. In Indonesia, the regulation about the involving of multiparty government, private and society in environmental management and public policy implied in some government regulations. One of them is UU No. 32/2009 about the environmental protection and management. The Collaborative Governance of government initiation pattern looks to continue to grow in various regions along with the regional autonomy. This statement is based on the portrait of the environmental management and control in some big cities such as Jakarta, Surabaya, Medan and Makassar which involve the private sector and society actively in Green and Clean programs. Makassar Green and Clean MGC Program is claimed as form of Collaborative Environmental Governance because the program actively involve government and non-government sector. Moreover, it characterizes the practice of Governance. Besides that, the issues such as trust, understanding, commitment, leadership, institutional and resource appear in MGC program. It characterizes the practice of Collaborative. So, the Collaborative Governance activity is in the MGC program. The MGC program is initiated by Yayasan Peduli Negeri YPN as non-governmental organization, The Government of Makassar and PT Unilever Indonesia private organization in 2008, for further followed through the collaboration with Media Fajar media and PT Pertamina private organization. In this collaboration, some people actively involved as a facilitator and environmental cadres. Henceforth, in 2010 the Kampung Hijau dan Bersih Forum was formed as a community association. In General, the practice of Collaborative Governance in MGC program in 2008-2013 is considered 2015 International Conference on Public Administration ICPA 11th Edited by ZHU Xiaoning and ZHAO Shurong2to have an influence in environmental situation and condition in Makassar. In addition, the MGC program is also considered to be able to change the public of Makassar mindset in residential greening and waste management. In the end, the MGC program is able to push the city of Makassar to obtain an Adipura Certificate in 2010 and Adipura Cups in 2013. However, with those achievements, does not mean MGC program executed without problems. There is a dynamic situation at the MGC program results in 2008-2013 at the local level. The results of the implementation of the program in the region that became the location of the MGC is divided into two parts. There were relatively successful. There is also relatively unsuccessful. The occurrence of two phenomena in the MGC program becomes an interesting problem to be comparatively studied. The success or failure of the MGC program is determined by the collaborate parties. However, the principal charge in the MGC program is the intercorrelations of the Government of Makassar, PT Unilever Indonesia, Media Fajar, Yayasan Peduli Negeri, the Kampung Bersih dan Hijau Forum, and communities, both at the level of the relationship between institutions and between actors. Good dynamics from both of the involved parties will become the trigger for the success of Collaborative Governance. In the other hands, the bad dynamics from both of the involved parties will become the trigger for the failure of Collaborative Governance. To determine the good and bad of a relationship of the government, private and public, it can be reviewed on the issue of engagement, motivation and capacity Emmerson, Nabatchi dan Balogh 2011 of the collaborators during the MGC Program implemented. Basically collaborative environmental governance still sometimes been discussed, the substance or symbol Rodrigue, Magnan and Cho, 2012. Currently, a study related to the Collaborative Environmental Governance theme is still rare in Indonesia. In data of State of the Environment Report Indonesia Status Lingkungan Hidup Indonesia 2012 described the role of multi-party which is consists of Private, Indonesian State Owned Enterprises, Non-Governmental Organizations NGOs, Indigenous People, Media, Universities and wider community in managing the environment. Unfortunately, the SLHD report does not explain one section was about the extent of the existence of Collaborative Governance which has been and is being done. Furthermore, it is important to realize that the collaboration based action in the residential greening and waste management can impact directly and indirectly on the situation and environmental conditions. Moving on from a variety of that reasons so the researcher intends to examine the phenomenon of the MGC program as a case of Collaborative Environmental Governance in Indonesia. 2 Theoretical Basis Environmental governance is popularized by the United Nations Environment Programme UNEP in order to support sustainable development. The coverage is at all levels including international, regional, national and local. Basically, the definition of Governance in Environmental Governance still refers to common sense of governance. By the World Bank 2013, governance is defined as the way power is exercised through a country's economic, political and social institutions. By the United Nations Development Program World Bank, 2013, governance is defined as the exercise of economic, political and administrative authority to manage a country's affairs at all levels. Currently, the term governance is more focused on the change from bureaucracy to market or network. More general understood as a governance-based government, private and public. Talk about environmental governance means to discuss the roles and relationships between stakeholders. Environmental governance is interpreted as a collaborative effort between the actors including government, private and community on local, national and international levels in order to control environmental problems. Besides, it can also be said as an environmental management that emphasizes the collaborative aspects of multi-stakeholders ranging from local to global scope. In essence, environmental governance describes the process and institutions Rashce, 2010, 501. The shape is not only the participation of social groups but also the concept of the development of each party Taylor, 2011, 263. Environmental governance refers to a set of regulatory processes, mechanisms and organizations by government, communities, businesses and non-governmental organizations that influence environmental actions and their results Lemos and Agrawal, 2006, 298. Collaborative governance is a new paradigm in understanding the existence of multi-stakeholder. 2015 International Conference on Public Administration ICPA 11th Edited by ZHU Xiaoning and ZHAO Shurong3There are certain characteristics of the relationships between stakeholders, so that the study of public administration should shift towards collaborative study Silvia, 2011, 66. Study of collaborative governance has also become a common strategy in the literature of public administration according to Lee and Yoo 2012, 143. Collaborative study is supported by a decentralized system that authorizes local governments to initiate the life of environmental management. In addition, the presence of Corporate Social Responsibility and social action of Non-Governmental Organization at the environmental level also encourages the importance of collaboration in governance practices. In this theoretical basis, the context of the collaboration is defined more widely than partnerships. According to Bevir, a partnership occurs when private agents more or less replaces the role of the public while the collaboration occurs when public and private agencies perform the active functions 2009, 161. The collaboration leads to negotiation, not competition Bevir, 2009, 47. This is the difference between the patterns of collaboration with market patterns in governance. It is definitely market always leads to competition. Actually, the term collaboration is almost similar to the network term. But if the traced substance based on the academic study, it will be found the difference. Ansell & Gash and Goldsmith & Eggers in Goliday, 2010 explains that collaborative governance involves the relationship management to manipulate regulation and system, while the network governance is just talking on the implementation of civil works. However, from the existing literature, rarely found the writings that specifically distinguish the difference between a partnership, collaborative and network. All three remain interpreted the same as a new paradigm that is different from the hierarchy and the market. In this study, collaboration is considered more appropriate to describe the complexity of the New Public Governance NPG. A description of the collaborative governance is described in detail by Chris Ansell and Alison Gash. They define the Collaborative Governance as follows "A government arrangements where one or more public agencies directly engage non-state stakeholders in a formal collective decision-making process, consensus-oriented, and consultative and aims to make or implement public policy or manage public assets and programs. Ansell and Gash, 2007, 544-545.Following up on the idea of Ansell and Gash, then appears Emmerson, Natabachi and Balogh writing 2011. Their writing slightly expands and enhances previous thoughts, including the Ansell and Gash ideas. Basically the concept which is understood by Emerson, Natabachi and Balogh on collaborative governance is not much different from the previous writers. It is just the constructed framework is more integrative so that there is a new outlook on some items. Some items that emphasized are 1. The defining is not limited in formal scope and government initiation, 2. Collaborative governance is understood as multi-partner governance includes public-private partnerships, private-social partnerships, rule-based management and coordination of community-based collaboration. In short, collaborative governance is defined as the processes and structures that engage people across organizational boundaries Lee and Yoo, 2012, 143. Collaborative Governance as a new paradigm in public policy has theme and framework integrative concept. The Themes which connected to the collaboration can be seen in picture below The picture above illustrates the themes are interrelated. Framed into a single process that is not separate from each other. Obviously, the main point is varied and comprehensive. So the collaboration not only describes the structure but also the process of values internalization as shown in the picture. On that basis, the implementation of the above points is not easy. The involvement of multiple parties in a certain case will be its own difficulties compared to only control by one party. Therefore, collaborative governance is regarded as the best pattern, and then the efforts that have to do are just arrange the strategy. Solely to respond to collaborative advantage, not just respond to collaborative inertia. Each collaborative activity involving community groups Bevir, 2009 and groups of organizations Imperial, 2005 to work together to complete the goal. Collaborative activities may include operational level, decision-making and institutional Imperial, 2005, 288. The activity collaboration at this every level must be aligned with the Stephen P. Osborne theme of the practice of collaborative. For the record, the themes of collaboration may be completed at the level of decision-making but weak on operational or 2015 International Conference on Public Administration ICPA 11th Edited by ZHU Xiaoning and ZHAO Shurong4institutional level, and vice versa. For one case, the alignment collaboration at every level should not be ignored. The question of where and how the framing of a role in the process is rarely addressed so sometimes ignore the substance-universal Dewulf, 2011, 53. Figure 1 Theme in Collaboration Practice Source Osborne, 2010, 164 Collaborative governance framework summarizes the relationship of all aspects. The integrative framework for collaborative governance can be seen in the picture below Figure 2 Integrative Framework for Collaborative Governance Source Emmerson, Natabachi and Balogh 2011, 6 Emmerson, Natabachi and Balogh 2011 describe the integrative framework of collaborative governance in the three boxes that are integrated with each other. The first box represents the context of the public system. The second box represents Collaborative Governance Regime CGR. The third box represents the dynamics and collaborative action. The position of system context is affects and affected 2015 International Conference on Public Administration ICPA 11th Edited by ZHU Xiaoning and ZHAO Shurong5by the CGR. Context of the system include the influence of social, political, economic and environmental surroundings. Starting from these context systems emerge leadership, encouragement, interdependence and uncertainty, in this framework are called drivers. CGR in the framework of the above concept is positioned as the central feature. CGR box summarizes the dynamics and collaborative action. The process from dynamics to the action becomes a major item in the understanding of collaborative governance. The dynamics of collaboration includes three main interrelated components namely a principled engagement, shared motivation and capacity for action. That third component is interactively and iteratively dynamics from decision-making to action. From there, it is affecting collaborative action in achieving a CGR common goal. Henceforth, the actions taken result in impacts and adaptation, both in scope and in the context of the CGR system. 3 Research Methods The research method used, according to its scientific level, was qualitative method. The research method used, according to its approach level, was case study. This study case depend on the Makassar Green and Clean MGC program in 2008-2013. The analysis unit in this research is the Collaborative Governance practice by the parties that have involved in MGC program The Government of Makassar, Unilever Indonesia, Fajar Media, and Yayasan Peduli Negeri and the Collaborative Governance result towards the environmental sector in some urban village hamlet 3 in urban village of Karangayar, hamlet 4 in urban village of Ballaparang, hamlet 2 in urbanvillage of Pattunuang and hamlet 3 in urbanvillage of North Karuwisi. The technique used in determining the primary data sources or informants was purposive sampling through the key person with emergent sampling design. Data collection was performed with three techniques that support each other in order to sharpen the data analysis and the process of triangulation techniques. Data collection technique used was in-depth interview, participant observation, and documentation study. Data analysis was performed using qualitative analysis based on data, fact and information that have collected. The data analysis stages including data reduction, data display and conclusion. 4 Result and Discussion Makassar Green and Clean MGC Program Makassar Green and Clean MGC Program initiated in 28 June 2008 through a cooperative agreement from PT Unilever Indonesia Through Yayasan Unilever Indonesia, PT Pertamina Persero, PT Media Fajar Fajar Daily, Yayasan Peduli Negeri and the Government of Makassar. Since 2008 until 2013, all collaborating parties remain intact except PT Pertamina. In 2009, PT Pertamina out of the collaboration as the focus of the Corporate Social Responsibility CSR is diverted to other activities. MGC program is a program that is engaged in efforts to manage and control the environment. The program is oriented toward Makassar community empowerment in the environmental sector. In detail, the task and the responsibility of the collaborators in the MGC program as follows Table 1 Collaborators Task and Responsibility The Government Of Makassar Unilever Indonesia Yayasan Peduli Negeri Fajar Media 1. Support the provision of the infrastructure. 2. Create Supporting Polices 1. Provide program funding 2. Formulate activity form 1. Provides field personnel 2. Implement societal empowerment 1. Promote the program 2. Increase media publications Source Research Data Analysis Result Communities, participate in the MGC program, is divided into two categories namely as a environmental facilitator and environmental cadres. Environmental Facilitator is recruited from the head of neighbourhood RukunTetangga /RT or hamlet RukunWarga/RW or community figures in each region. There is 1 environmental facilitator in each neighbourhood. Environmental cadres is recruited from the local community. There are 20 environmental cadres in each neighbourhood. The environmental cadres is divided into 4 groups which are environmental management group, 2015 International Conference on Public Administration ICPA 11th Edited by ZHU Xiaoning and ZHAO Shurong6community awareness group, economic empowerment groups and waste recycled groups. In 2010 is formed Forum Kampung Hijau dan Bersih FORKASIH Makassar. The FORKASIH board is the former environmental facilitator. This forum was established so that the former facilitators in Makassar have a formal place to coordinate. The parties mapping that involved in the MGC program can be seen in the following picture Figure 3 Collaborative Governance Actors Mapping Source Research Data Analysis Result The position of all parties involved in the Collaborative Governance at MGC program is equal no hierarchy and their positions as a circle-shaped network. Government party is the Government of Makassar. The corporate party is PT Unilever Indonesia, The media party is Fajar Media, The non-governmental organization is the Yayasan Peduli Negeri. And the community party in the picture is the community of Makassar. All parties collaborate with each duties and responsibilities. Differences duties and responsibilities based on the assumption that between the government and non-government organizations have different orientations and organizational capacity. Impelementation of Collaborative Governance Engagement An active engagement is always showed by each collaborator. This happens because of the strong legal basis and binding as stated in the letter of agreement. The seriousness of the Government of Makassar to the MGC program is evidenced by the making of Makassar Regional Regulation No. 4 of 2011 on Waste Management. For Fajar Media, This media provides a special MGC program section in print edition and online during the implementation of the activities. As for Unilever Indonesia, this company always gives an appreciation to the neighbourhood and hamlet who excel in the management and control of the environment each year. For Yayasan Peduli Negeri, their involvement determination proved with serious implement in voluntary programs through a team motivator. The prioritization of mutual interest is always happen because there is a mutually beneficial relationship between the parties in the MGC program. Unilever Indonesia has always continued to give priority to the common interest because the company is one of the largest waste producers in Indonesia. That makes Unilever Indonesia cannot be separated from the common interest. Meanwhile, the Government of Makassar has a full responsibility for the situation and condition of the urban environment, so they always look to escort each activity. Fajar Media and Yayasan Peduli Negeri is called upon to take an action through the MGC program after observing the Makassar environmental situation is still alarming. Regarding communication between collaborators, communication goes active. Especially at the time of decision making related to the implementation of activities. After the determination of the decision when the program will be launched, the intensity of communication between one party to 2015 International Conference on Public Administration ICPA 11th Edited by ZHU Xiaoning and ZHAO Shurong7another is different. The communication in MGC program is more on the implementation of ongoing annual activity. When the implementation has been completed each year, the communication between the Government of Makassar and the Unilever Indonesia, Government of Makassar with Fajar Media, and Unilever Indonesia with Fajar Media is not too intense. It is caused by the limited capacity of the parties in terms of building communications post-awarding giving phase to the community. Communication between the parties is always done directly, most often done over the phone or handphone. In addition, communication is also done in the form of direct interaction. Direct interaction takes in formal form meetings and informal regular face to face. Communication patterns with regular face to face meetings and via phone or hand phone is often done. Motivation In principle, an explanation regarding to collaborative institutional motivation in the MGC program is closely linked to the motivation of the institutional organizations involved. MGC program itself as a form of collaborative governance exists because there is institutions motivation. Each activity has been well integrated in the institutions and individuals. Although the MGC program established in the name of the institution, the personal aspect remains as an integral part of the collaboration. Personal aspect is the people who play many roles of institutions in collaborative governance. In the MGC program, there is a small team who acted as a driver in performing each activity. Starting from them emerge the institutional motivation organization as well institutional collaborative. However, the institution motivation is difficult to separate from personal motivation that drives these institutions. Mutual trust appears on the MGC program since the good performance is shown by each party. From year to year, the Government of Makassar as the city authorities trust the parties involved. It is characterized by all the recognitions which are often uttered by government officials. The belief became stronger because YayasanPeduliNegeri always make progress reports of the program achievement to the Unilever Indonesia, Government of Makassar and Fajar Media well. From the report, it is carried out regular assessments. Accumulation of quantitative and qualitative report raises the confidence of the Government of Makassar, vice versa. With the good confidence, in the Regional Environmental Status of Makassar in 2013, MGC programs mentioned as the best program of government and partners are always referenced several other areas in eastern Indonesia. Meanwhile, the mutual understanding of the role of each party is very good. Each element understands each other relating to the capacity of the parties involved. In the MGC program, all parties understand each other. If there are those who do not understand the capacity or deliberately deny, the other party seeks to provide understanding. If there are those who come out of the employment agreement, the other party always tries to remind wisely. Furthermore, if there is an urgent and important requirement, certain parties always try to build a negotiation the other party. After there is an attempt to understand each other through negotiation, the parties always give a positive response. The values that have been emphasized is the value of sipakatau not discriminate each other, sipakainge remind each other and sipakalebbi respect others. Collaboration practices implemented during 6 years 2008-2013 indicate a strong internal legitimacy in the ranks of collaborators. Strong internal legitimacy characterized by the mobilization efforts of the members of the organization. In each launching and awarding ceremony, there is a mobilization of members which is conducted by each party. Every year the Government of Makassar called all the staff to participate in escorting the program. In addition, the officials of Unilever Indonesia that based in Jakarta are also invited. Fajar Media Parties include some of their journalists and leaders. Yayasan Peduli Negeri itself involves all managers and motivators. Moreover, the management of FORKASIH also often maximizes its activity, as well as the facilitators and environmental cadres. In the MGC program, which individually involved much in collaboration are not the boss, but the subordinate. The bosses are only involved when making strategic decisions, such as the direction of mutual understanding. Commitment in the MGC program associated with the totality of the organizations involved. Not only from the actions of individuals who represent the organization. The totality includes all those involved or interested. For the commitment items, a commitment between organizations generally been 2015 International Conference on Public Administration ICPA 11th Edited by ZHU Xiaoning and ZHAO Shurong8good, but internally there are still organizations that are not really good. A lack of commitment occurs internally in Government of Makassar. Sometimes the program is not running smoothly because the urban village head and his staff failed to give full attention. Most urban village head often handed responsibility to its citizens through the head neighbourhood or hamlet. In internal city government is still difficult to do a massive movement. To oversee 143 urban village head is not easy. The constraint of less commitment of the urban village head inhibits many activities in the community. Capacity MGC programs reach all urban village around Makassar. Involving 143 urban village head in entire Makassar become a serious problem in terms of the discussion of the capacity of collaborators. Most urban village head did not perform their role in the MGC program. Ultimately it hinders the maximum achievement of each activity in the area of their administration. The capacities of some urban village head reflect their low level of professionalism. Their positions as a bureaucrat who frequently interact with the public become its own records. All related subject with service to the community should be given the fullest. There is no reason for a urban village head for not carrying out their duties and functions. Moreover, the position of urban village head in the MGC program is very strategic. The problems that occur in the institutional arrangement of MGC program lies in the internal local government. In this case in the ranks of the Regional Working Units Satuan Kerja Perangkat Daerah/SKPD related to some urban village in Makassar and Parks and Makassar Cleanliness Department. Local authorities are not able to bring the norms that bind to the whole range of related SKPD. Institutional arrangement has been ignored by some officials. Values, norms and rules are only understood but were not done properly. Actions and mindset some ranks of related SKPD to the institutional value is not optimal yet. There is still a stiffness perspective of the activities carried out in the community. The pattern formed of leadership describes a network pattern. Although, the network shape, the presence of the leader or coordinator remains very important in maximizing the coordination function to all stakeholders. It is intended that there is a party coordinates the MGC program. Its main purpose, so that the program can be done well and on target. The irony is occurred again in local government. The government of Makassar parties tends to be less active in conducting regular coordination with other party. Lack of time and density of duty becomes a fundamental reason of why the coordination to other stakeholders is less active. Furthermore, financial resources FR and human resources HR is still a fundamental problem in the MGC program. For HR, there are still limitations on quantity and quality. During this time the quantity and quality of human resources engaged from making decisions until evaluation is limited. Very fundamental issues of HR are happened in Government of Makassar. So far, the HR of the government is still lacking a lot and less quality. For the SDK, its limitations lie in its quantity. Funds are budgeted annually by Unilever Indonesia has not quite trigger the maximum achievement. Unilever Indonesia finds it difficult to finance all the activities in all the neighbourhood and hamlet per urban village per year for 6 consecutive years. Therefore, the mechanism of MGC activities only rotates in every neighbourhood and hamlet per urban village per year. Impacts of Collaborative Governance Settlement Greening Short-term improvement in the practice of collaborative governance in MGC program from 2008 to 2013 in settlements greening is considered successful. The resulting improvement was seen in MGC 2008, MGC 2009 and MGC 2010. In those years the MGC program massively promoted the urban farming. In each year, the improvement was seen when the MGC was underway in the region for approximately six months. During that time, the greening aspects massively encouraged in all areas of the accompanied by MGC program. Unfortunately, after passing phase awarding occurs slowly setback. However, not all areas of mentoring decline. Some areas still looked green though until now is no longer a local mentoring MGC. In general, the results of efforts in settlement greening is divided into two parts which the impact of long-term and short-term impact. The program assessed as the long-term impact on a urban village 2015 International Conference on Public Administration ICPA 11th Edited by ZHU Xiaoning and ZHAO Shurong9if the greening effort continues until now 2013. Meanwhile, the program assessed as the short-term impact if greening effort only lasted when the program is implemented in one year. The things that affect the settlement greening activities are the capacity of the facilitator’s cadre and the environmental cadre, the participation of community leaders, village chief engagement, non-governmental and budgetary stimulus. Waste Management In general, waste managementMGCprogramconductedin2008 - 2013resulted in improvedcleanlinessinresidential areasforthe short term. Mostpeople are onlyactivewhen the programtook placeinits territory. After thatthe spirit ofcommunityis slowlydiminishing. MGCprogramemphasizeswaste managementwiththe 3Rprinciplesreduce, reuse andrecycle. That is, thewastemustbe reduced, reused and recycled. Once theMGCprogramwas introduced, workflowmanagement becomes morestrategic. Sincethe year 2011the garbagebank was introduced to the public. The GarbageBa 2013, the totalnumberof garbage banksinMakassaris 78locations. Unfortunately, notall ofthese locationswere veryactive. CountedOnly10locationswereveryactive, the others fluctuated. The point is thegarbagebankis sometimesactiveand sometimesinactive. The result ofwaste managementactivitiesdivided intotwocategoriesnamelyshort-termandlong-term. This is similarto theexplanationon the greening ofsettlements. Things that affectwhether theysucceedinthe short termorlong termon theMGCprogram areasisthe capacity ofa facilitatorandan environmental cadre, non-governmental, collectornetwork, the level ofinvolvement ofurban village headandsocialorgeographicalconditions ofneighbourhood and hamlet. Because the waste managementthroughgarbage bankbecamethe mainstay activities ofthe MGC program, the realkey tosuccessorfailureis dependenton themanagement oftheGarbage bank. Motivator of Yayasan Peduli Negeriwho is in charge to oversees, monitors and reports onthe progress ofthe garbage bank. 5 Conclusion The practice of collaborative governance which is conducted by the Government of Makassar, PT Unilever Indonesia, Fajar Media, Yayasan Peduli Negeri and also the Forum Kampung Bersih dan Hijau Makassar is at the exploration level. Exploration level of collaboration is a meeting held in the form of formal and informal. This means that, a practice still in the format development stage into the ideal collaborative governance. Generally, the collaborators perform their activities based on the cooperation agreement since 2008. The government of Makassar is responsible for providing infrastructure. Unilever Indonesia has a duty to provide funding. Fajar media is in charge of the news. Yayasan Peduli Negeri is responsible for providing field personnel. Forum Kampung Hijau dan Bersih is in charge of facilitation for community participation. The dynamics of engagement, motivation and capacity in Makassar Green and Clean program MGC from 2008 to 2013 ranging from agenda setting to transformation action has been running well. The related issues include the interests of collaborators, intensive communication, mutual trust, mutual understanding, internal legitimacy, commitment, institutional collaborative, leadership collaborators and resources. From nine issues that were examined in this study, four of which are rudimentary such as commitment, institutional collaborative, leadership collaborators and resources. This happens because one of the sub-components of the collaborators has not been maximally participate. The problem lies in the Government of Makassar. In this case some of the Regional Working Units SKPD officials. In the end, their actions little influence agenda setting and the transformation of the action. The practice results of collaborative governance on environmental improvement Makassar directly has successfully contributed to the improvement of green space and the cleanliness from garbage. When specifically explored, the results of collaborative governance action are divided into two the impact of long-term and short-term. The whole area of the range of the MGC program managed to provide a short-term impact on the region. However, The MGC programs were less effective in the long-term impact on the entire region of the MGC. In summary, the key of the existence and sustainability of the program depends on the support of urban village head, the seriousness of facilitators and environmental cadre, socio-economic conditions of the community and 2015 International Conference on Public Administration ICPA 11th Edited by ZHU Xiaoning and ZHAO Shurong10follow-up management of settlement greening, and waste management. References[1] Ansell, Chris, and Gash, Alison. 2007. Collaborative Governance in Theory and Practice. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 18 543-571. Accessed November 29, 2013. Retrieved from Oxford Journals JPART. [2] Bevir, Mark. 2009. Key Concepts in Governance. New Delhi Sage Publication. [3] Dewulf, Art, et al. 2011. Fragmentation and Connection of Frames in Collaborative Water Governance A Case Study of River Catchment Management in Southern Ecuador. International Review of Administrative Science 77 1 50-75. Accessed August 27, 2013. Retrieved from SAGE Publication. [4] Environmental Office of Makassar City. 2013. Local Environmental Status of Status of Makassar City 2013. Makassar. [5] Environmental Ministry of Republic of Indonesia. 2012. Environmental Status of Indonesia 2012. Jakarta. [6] Emmerson, K, Nabatchi, T dan Balogh, S. 2011. An Integrative Framework for Collaborative Governance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 22 1-29. Accessed November 29, 2013. Retrieved from Oxford Journals JPART. [7] Goliday, A. M. 2010. Identifying the Relationship Between Network Governance and Community Action Program Participation, Disertation. Departement Public Policy and Administration, Walden University. Accessed tanggal August 22, 2013. Retrieved from UMI Dissertations Publishing. [8] Imperial, Mark. T. 2005. Using Collaboration as a Governance Strategy Lessons From Six Watershed Management Programs. Administration and Society 37 3 281-317. Accessed August 27, 2013. Retrieved from SAGE Publication. [9] Lee, S. Jin, and Yoo, D. Sang. 2012. The Adoption of Collaborative Governance Institutions The EPA-States Performance Partnership Agreements PPAS, International Review of Public Administration 17 2 143-61. Accessed August 22, 2013. Retrieved from ABI/INFORM Complete. [10] Lemos, M. R, dan Agrawal, A. 2006. Environmental Governance, Annual Review Environment Resources 31 297-325. Accessed December 12, 2012. Retrieved from Annual Reviews Journals. [11] Osborne, Stephen. P. 2010. The New Public Governance ? Emerging Perspective on The Theory and Practice of Public Governance. New York Routledge. [12] Rasche, A. 2010. Collaborative Governance, Corporate Governance 10 4 500-511. Accessed August 27, 2013. Retrieved from Emerald. [13] Rodrigue, M, Magnan, M and Cho, C. H. 2012. Is Environmental Governance Substantive or Symbolic ? An Empirical Investigation, Journal Business Ethics 14 107-129. Accessed November 9, 2013. Retrieved from ABI/INFORM Complete. [14] Silvia, Chris. 2011. Collaborrative Governance Concepts for Succesful Network Leadership, State and Local Government Review 43 1 66-71. Accessed August 27, 2013. Retrieved from SAGE Publication. [15] Taylor, P. Leigh. 2011. Development, Knowledge, Partnership, and Change In Search of Collaborative Approaches to Environmental Governance, Latin American Research Review 46 1 262-288. Accessed March 16, 2013. Retrieved from ABI/INFORM Complete. [16] United Nations Environment Programme. 2009. Environmental Governance Accessed March 16, 2013. [17] World Bank. 2013. Governance and Good Governance Varying Definitionshttp//web. Accessed July 25, 2013. ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this emergence of environmental governance practices raises a fundamental question as to whether they are substantive or symbolic. Toward that end, we analyze the relationship between a firm’s environmental governance and its environmental management as reflected in its ultimate outcome, environmental performance. We posit that substantive practices would bring changes in organizations, most notably in terms of improved environmental performance, whereas symbolic practices would portray organizations as environmentally committed without making meaningful changes to their operations. Focusing on a sample of environmentally sensitive firms, results are consistent with environmental governance mechanisms being predominantly part of a symbolic approach to manage stakeholder perceptions on environmental management, having little substantial impact on organizations. Statistical analyses show mostly that there is no relation between environmental governance mechanisms and environmental performance, measured in terms of regulatory compliance, pollution prevention, and environmental capital expenditures. However, there is some indication that environmental incentives are associated with pollution prevention. Interviews with corporate directors shed further light on these results by underlining that environmental governance mechanisms are employed at the board level to protect the organization from reputational and/or regulatory harm, but are not necessarily intended to proactively improve environmental governance draws from diverse realms of practice and research in public administration. This article synthesizes and extends a suite of conceptual frameworks, research findings, and practice-based knowledge into an integrative framework for collaborative governance. The framework specifies a set of nested dimensions that encompass a larger system context, a collaborative governance regime, and its internal collaborative dynamics and actions that can generate impacts and adaptations across the systems. The framework provides a broad conceptual map for situating and exploring components of cross-boundary governance systems that range from policy or programbased intergovernmental cooperation to place-based regional collaboration with nongovernmental stakeholders to public-private partnerships. The framework integrates knowledge about individual incentives and barriers to collection action, collaborative social learning and conflict resolution processes, and institutional arrangements for cross-boundary collaboration. It is presented as a general framework that might be applied to analyses at different scales, in different policy arenas, and varying levels of complexity. The article also offers 10 propositions about the dynamic interactions among components within the framework and concludes with a discussion about the implications of the framework for theory, research, evaluation, and practice. Mark T. ImperialThis article utilizes a comparative cross-case analysis of six watershed programs to examine how collaboration is used to enhance governance of networks where problem-solving capacity is widely dispersed and few organizations accomplish their missions by acting alone. A conceptual framework that illustrates how collaboration occurs at the operational, policy-making, and institutional levels is presented. Understanding these structural relationships is important and can help public managers design effective collaborative processes. The article concludes with a discussion of the implications for future research and advice for public managers using collaboration as a strategy for enhancing network governance. Andreas RaschePurpose – This paper aims to explore how existing collaborative governance arrangements in the context of corporate responsibility the Global Reporting Initiative and Social Accountability 8000 need to collaborate more directly in order to enhance their impact. The objective of this paper is twofold primarily, to explore existing and potential linkages between multi‐stakeholder standards; but, at the same time, to explore the potential for standard convergence. Design/methodology/approach – The paper follows a conceptual approach that is supported by a variety of case examples. First, the nature and benefits as well as shortcomings of multi‐stakeholder standards are explored. Second, a categorization scheme for the availability of such standards is developed. Third, linkages between the different standard categories are explored and discussed. Last but not least, the paper outlines practical implications. Findings – A variety of linkages between existing multi‐stakeholder standards exist. These linkages need to be strengthened, as the market for corporate responsibility is unlikely to support a great variety of partly competing and overlapping initiatives. Originality/value – The paper offers a structured discussion of potential linkages between multi‐stakeholder standards and thus complements the literature where such initiatives are discussed usually without much mention of linkages. Practitioners will find the discussion useful to explore how their participation in a variety of initiatives can be better Carmen Lemos Arun AgrawalThis chapter reviews the literature relevant to environmental governance in four domains of scholarship globalization, decentralization, market and individual incentives-based governance, and cross-scale governance. It argues that in view of the complexity and multiscalar character of many of the most pressing environmental problems, conventional debates focused on pure modes of governance-where state or market actors play the leading role-fall short of the capacity needed to address them. The review highlights emerging hybrid modes of governance across the state-market-community divisions comanagement, public-private partnerships and social-private partnerships. It examines the significant promise they hold for coupled social and natural systems to recover from environmental degradation and change and explores some of the critical problems to which hybrid forms of environmental governance are also Jin LeeDong Sang YooCollaborative governance, defined as the processes and structures that engage people across the boundaries of organizations, has evolved as a common strategy in the public administration literature. There is little systematic research that examines the extent of collaborative governance, in particular, that between the Environmental Protection Agency EPA and state governments. This article examines what factors influence the adoption of Performance Partnership Agreements PPAs, considered as collaborative governance between the EPA and state governments. This study uses a logit model, applying an Institutional Analysis and Development IAD framework, which explains the outcome in the process of how rule-in-use, community interests, and physical, social, and economic characteristics affect the values of the predictors characterizing action arenas, which, in turn, lead to different outcomes. This study found that for rule-in-use, social capital as an informal institution is positively related to the adoption of PPAs. For community interests, the strength of environmental interest groups white population influences the adoption of PPAs. The empirical findings of this study are meaningful to understand collaborative governance between the EPA and state governments through an IAD framework, showing that various institutional arrangements, community interests, and physical and social variables affect the adoption of PPAs in terms of collaborative governance. Chris SilviaState and local governments across the United States have increasingly utilized collaborative, interorganizational approaches to the delivery of public services. This shift in governance structure often necessitates that public managers not only lead the agency in which they are employed, but also work within, and often lead, a network. These two different contexts in which public managers operate require different managerial and leadership approaches. This article discusses some of the differences between hierarchical leadership and network leadership, important aspects of collaborative leadership, and the leadership behaviors that are considered effective within collaborative governance structures. The article concludes with a discussion of some best practices for collaborative leadership, including the formation of joint commitment, the identification of resources, the creation of a shared understanding, the achievement of stakeholder support, and the establishment of BevirKey Concepts in Governance provides a clear introduction to the technical concepts and policies of contemporary governance through short definitional essays. Each entry features a snapshot definition of the concept, a contextualization of the concept, an overview of relevant debates, and a guide to further reading. The book also includes a substantial introductory chapter which gives an overview of governance studies as a whole, orientating and guiding the reader around the issues that the concepts address. Peter Leigh TaylorOver the past two decades, researchers and practitioners have raised profound questions about environmental governance and development in rural Latin America, about the role of scientific research, and about the place of collaboration among social actors across multiple scales in pursuit of ecologically and socially sustainable livelihoods. How and by whom should development be defined, and whom should it serve? What possibilities exist for more positive relationships between traditional Western science and traditional indigenous knowledge? What is the potential for effective collaboration among diverse social actors, and what are the challenges and trade-offs of managing the interests of development and environment? What possibilities exist for real change, given the larger political economy of established interests, practices, and ways of describing what is possible and impossible? This review essay explores the contributions of four recent books that deal, each in different ways, with development, knowledge, and partnerships as they relate to reshaping the landscape of social and environmental change in rural Latin America. In an importance sense, all four books are about environmental governance in Latin America today. Environmental governance not only refers to state regulation and enforcement of conservation laws but also includes the political, organizational, and cultural frameworks through which highly diverse social actors and interests in natural and cultural resources are coordinated and controlled. Environmental governance shapes not only which social groups participate in and control development but also how the concept of development itself may be conceived and reconceived. Carruyo's case study, Producing Knowledge, Protecting Forests, explores how women and men in La Ciénaga, a community bordering the Dominican Republic's Armando Bermúdez National Park, engage development, create knowledge, and pursue their own well-being and that of their families. The twenty-one chapters of Development with Identity present a diverse set of natural and social science studies from a five-year collaborative research project in Cotacachi, Ecuador. Partnerships in Sustainable Forest Resource Management explores, in fourteen chapters, the possibilities and problems of the growing turn toward multiactor, cross-scale partnerships in international forest management. The seven chapters of Minería, movimientos sociales y respuestas campesinas provide both a critical theoretical framework and a detailed empirical examination of the territorial transformation set into motion by large-scale mining in Peru, Ecuador, and Guatemala. In recent years, a broad range of research has highlighted widespread disillusionment with traditional approaches to development. Building on critiques of modernization theory by Andre Gunder Frank, Fernando Henrique Cardoso and Enzo Faletto, and Immanuel Wallerstein, among others, researchers have deconstructed the centralized methodology, objectives, and definition of development drawn from idealized understandings of the industrialized global North. Other researchers have analyzed the related and growing rejection of neoliberalism, privatization, and the privileging of global markets as a neutral allocator of costs and benefits. Carruyo frames her study within this critical literature. She draws especially on Gita Sen and Karen Grown's structural analysis of the gendered nature of development and on Arturo Escobar's contention that development itself is a first-world cultural construct. Following the recommendation of both of these works to turn to the local, Carruyo focuses on women so as to understand how alternative development might be identified through ethnographic analysis of local practices. Carruyo studies people who stay in the community rather than those who migrate. How do such local people, especially women, negotiate a process of development controlled and defined from above and outside? She briefly examines two development projects in La Ciénega and concludes that both were flawed. A small-scale project introduced by a nongovernmental organization NGO had built a greenhouse that was not needed or wanted locally. A larger Agency for International Development–sponsored project to take advantage of trees felled by Hurricane George in 1998 benefited mainly a few local elites. The Sustainable Agriculture and Natural Resources Management SANREM project headed by Rhoades aimed to address two concerns in international development sustainability and the self-determination of indigenous communities. Explicitly trying to incorporate the priorities of these communities into its design, implementation, and research outcomes, this ambitious project brought interdisciplinary research to bear on place-based, nature-society interactions, and it sought to... Warga Kampung Hijau Berseri membersihkan wilayah tempat tinggal mereka. - Suasana hijau terlihat di setiap rumah di Kampung Hijau Berseri RT 10 dan 11 RW 03, Kelurahan Cempaka Putih Timur. Pasalnya, mereka menanam beberapa tumbuhan di sana. Selain itu, pergola besi dengan tanaman rambat juga semakin menambah keasrian wilayah tersebut. Gubernur DKI Jakarta Anies Baswedan pun memberikan apresiasi kepada Kampung Hijau Berseri, saat merayakan Hari Peduli Sampah Nasional HPSN 2020 di wilayah tersebut. Anies berinteraksi langsung dengan warga yang mengelola sampah sendiri, sebelum sisa sampah tak terproses dibuang ke Tempat Pengelolaan Sampah Terpadu TPST. “Kami sangat mengapresiasi langkah masyarakat yang telah mengelola sampah di lingkungan masing-masing. Harus kita bangun perubahan mindset. Dalam semua kegiatan ada yang kita ambil gunakan, ada yang sisa atau residu. Mari bersama kita kurangi, pilah, olah sampah di sekitar kita" kata Anies dalam sambutannya. Kampung Hijau Berseri juga dinobatkan oleh Pemerintah Provinsi DKI Jakarta sebagai RW percontohan yang telah mengurangi sampah dari tingkat rumah tangga melalui program yang digulirkan Pemprov, yakni SAMTAMA atau Sampah Tanggung Jawab Bersama. Kampung hijau di Jakarta ini merupakan karya warga setempat berkolaborasi dengan PT Pertamina Persero melalui Marketing Operation Region MOR III. Sebagai kampung percontohan, di setiap sudut gang terdapat tempat sampah meyerupai kandang dengan ram kawat yang berisi aneka botol plastik bekas kemasan minuman, pelumas, pembersih lantai, sabun dll. Tempat tersebut merupakan penampungan sementara kegiatan shodaqoh plastik bagi warga yang telah memilah sampah plastik rumah tangga. Seminggu sekali, warga memilah botol dengan memisahkan tutup, mengelupas plastik merek kemasan, dan di tekan dengan tangan untuk selanjutnya dikumpulkan dalam karung besar kemudian diambil pengumpul limbah plastik. Menurut Dedy, Ketua RT 11, kegiatan tersebut rutin dilakukan oleh warga yang sudah beberapa tahun belakangan ini sadar memilah sampah dari rumah. “Masing-masing RT ada kelompoknya, nanti uang hasil penjualan digunakan untuk kegiatan sosial warga. Konsepnya bukan bank sampah, tetapi menyumbang atau shodaqoh sampah agar warga merasa berkontribusi untuk penghijauan dan juga pengelolaan lingkungan kampung hijau dengan sampah,” jelas Dedy. Selain sampah plastik, sampah rumah organik juga dipisahkan untuk diolah menjadi kompos menggunakan komposter. Ada juga pengolahan sampah organik menjadi kompos dengan memanfaatkan larva lalat jenis Black Soldier Fly, dikenal dengan metode maggot. Kompos digunakan untuk pupuk tanaman milik warga. “Program ini merupakan bagian dari program Bina Lingkungan Pertamina yang bekelanjutan, serta dukungan kami terhadap upaya-upaya pengelolaan sampah rumah tangga yang telah dilakukan warga. Tentunya dapat menambah asri kampung, serta yang utama sebagai sarana edukasi bagi warga lain yang mengunjungi Kampung Hijau Berseri sebagai kampung percontohan”, pungkas Dewi Sri Utami selaku Unit Manager Communication & CSR - MOR III. Pertamina berharap, dengan adanya kampanye pengelolaan sampah yang dilakukan warga melalui mural, dapat mendukung penyebaran upaya positif kelompok masyarakat yang layak diapresiasi dan dicontoh dalam mengelola sampah yang diawali dari masing-masing rumah tangga. PROMOTED CONTENT Video Pilihan

kampung bersih dan hijau