Published date: Oct 02 2023

Journal Title: KnE Social Sciences

Issue title: 1st Doctoral International Conference 2023

Pages: 779–787

DOI: 10.18502/kss.v8i17.14177

Zainal Arifin Paliwangzainalarifinp23@gmail.comDoctoral Program of Public Administration, Faculty of social and political Sciences, University Hasanuddin

Jamaluddin JompaDoctoral Program of Public Administration, Faculty of social and political Sciences, University Hasanuddin

Akmal IbrahimDoctoral Program of Public Administration, Faculty of social and political Sciences, University Hasanuddin

Tahir HaningDoctoral Program of Public Administration, Faculty of social and political Sciences, University Hasanuddin

Innovation policy plays a crucial role in national development, productivity enhancement, and well-being. However, the social and economic conditions of individuals residing in coastal regions bordering other areas are generally far inferior to those of their neighbors. This study aimed to evaluate the government’s introduced policy innovations to improve the socioeconomic circumstances of these coastal border communities. The methodological approach used in this study was both qualitative and explanatory. The research location was in North Kalimantan Province, precisely in the coastal area on the border of the Nunukan Regency. The findings indicate that the implementation of innovative policies for socio-economic development is not yet optimal, especially when viewed through the lens of the internal instruments required to realize policy innovation. For the effective development of the social economy in these areas, policies must be participatory and adaptive in design, capable of creating a comprehensive policy strategy to boost the well-being of society.

Keywords: policy innovation, development social economy, border area

[1] Borras S, Edquist C. Choice of innovation policy instruments. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 2013;80(8):1–10.

[2] Edquist C. ”The systems of innovation approach and innovation policy,” paper presented at DRUID Conference, Danish: Aalborg, 2001.

[3] Mohr LB. Determinants of Innovation in organizations. American Political Science Review. 1969;63(1):111–126.

[4] Utomo WT. Innovation as inevitability new in Science and Practice Administration Public in Indonesia. Jakarta: Laskar Innovation Deputy Innovation State Administration; 2016.

[5] Alvarez RG. Crespi and G. Cuevas, Public programs, firm performance and employment: Evidence from Chile. Inter-American Development Bank Technical Notes; 2012.

[6] Saribanon E, Sitanggang R, Amrizal A. Kepuasan pengguna jasa transportasi untuk meningkatkan loyalitas [ JMTRANSLOG]. Jurnal Manajemen Transportasi & Logistik. 2016;3(3):317–326.

[7] Fagerberg J. M. DC and N. RR, Oxford Handbook of Innovation. New York: Oxford University Press; 2005.

[8] Tucker R. Politics as Leadership. Columbia (MO): University of Missouri; 1995.

[9] Moore M. Creating public value strategic management in government. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 1995.

[10] Navarro FM. From government innovation to public innovation. The ICT as Key Tools. International Journal of New Technology and Research. 2016;2(6):263496.

[11] Creswell JW, Poth CN. Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage publications; 2016.

[12] Albury D. Fostering Innovation in Public Services. Public Money & Management. 2005;25:51–56.