Published date: May 20 2022

Journal Title: KnE Social Sciences

Issue title: The 3rd International Conference on Governance, Public Administration, and Social Science (ICoGPASS)

Pages: 1183–1226

DOI: 10.18502/kss.v7i9.11011

Bambang Giyantobambang_giyanto07@yahoo.comNIPA School of Administration Jakarta

Tintin Sri MurtinahNIPA School of Administration Jakarta

Nuh HabibiNIPA School of Administration Jakarta

This research examined village change rejection using the case study of Banyumas and Tangerang villages. A qualitative approach was used. The findings were as follows: a) Institutional aspects – in villages that reject changes, it is feared that the village community will lose the rights of the village that had previously existed; b) Human resources aspects – all villages rejected when there was a change of status to village because the villagers would not have the opportunity to become a village device, and it is a source of pride for the village community if it becomes a village device; c) Local wisdom aspects – all of the studied villages rejected the conversion into a village, because the village has full autonomy in terms of budget control; d) Public services aspects – the village community is more comfortable in the services provided by the village because these are provided in 24 hours, whereas otherwise this is not the case because the device is not local villagers; and e) Local wisdom values aspects – the village community is more comfortable. According to the findings of the study, the village should remain a village and should not be forced to change. The most important thing is to increase the capacity of village devices and provide village government with management support.

Keywords: rejection, village, districts

[1] Suryaningrat B. Pemerintahan Administrasi Desa dan Kelurahan. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta; 1992.

[2] Widjaja HAW. Otonomi desa: merupakan otonomi yang asli, bulat dan utuh. Jakarta: Raja Grafindo Persada; 2008.

[3] Eko S. Past, Present and Future of Village Autonomy. Yogyakarta: Institute for Research and Empowerment (IRE); 2008.

[4] Lokadata. Anggaran Dana Desa, 2015-2020 [Internet]. Date accessed 2013 Feb 4. Available from: https://lokadata.id/data/anggaran-dana-desa-2015 2020- 1565947501

[5] Khaidir A, Suryanef. Telaah Yuridis Formal Tentang Keberadaan dan Perubahan Regulasi Nagari sebagai Lembaga Pemerintahan Terendah Di Sumatera Barat di Bawah Rezim UU No. 6 Tahun 2014. In: Wibawa, S, Pratama, AB, Fadlurrahman, Wulandari, C, editors. Menata Desa: Bunga Rampai Pemikiran. Yogyakarta: K-Media; 2019.

[6] Nurcholis H. Pertumbuhan & Penyelenggaraan Pemerintahan Desa. Jakarta: Erlangga; 2011.

[7] Liputan6. Warga Menolak Perubahan Status Desa Menjadi Kelurahan [Internet]. Date accessed 2020 October 8. Available from: https://www.liputan6.com/news/read/106856/warga-menolak-perubahan statusdesa-menjadi-kelurahan

[8] Jogjapolitan. Desa Jadi Kelurahan? Kades Menolak [Internet]. Date accessed 2013 Feb 4. Available from: https://jogjapolitan.harianjogja.com/read/2013/02/04/512/375435/de a-jadikelurahan-kades-menolak

[9] Soesatyo, B. Lagi, Warga Desa di Tangsel Tolak Status Kelurahan [Internet]. Date accessed 2013 Feb 4. Available from: http://www.tangerangnews.com/tangsel/read/8214/Lagi-Warga-Desa-di TangselTolak-Status-Kelurahan

[10] Muhammad B. Asas- Asas Hukum Adat: Suatu Pengantar. 3rd ed. Jakarta: Pradnya Paramita; 1981.

[11] Horton PB, Hunt CL. Sosiologi. 6th ed. Ram A, Sobari T, translators. Jakarta: Erlangga;1991.

[12] Pranoto, SW. Politik Lokal: Perlemen Desa, Awal Kemerdekaan sampai jaman Otonomi Daerah. Yogyakarta: Lapera Pustaka Utama; 2001.

[13] Tahir MI. Sejarah Perkembangan Desa di Indonesia: Desa Masa Lalu, Masa Kini dan Bagaimana Masa Depannya. Jurnal Ilmu Pemerintahan. 2012; 38 ed:1-17.

[14] Maschab, M. Politik Pemerintahan Desa di Indonesia. Yogyakarta: PolGov; 2013.

[15] Susanti A. Pelestarian Tradisi Petekan Dalam Menunjang Konsep Desa Adat dan Desa Wisata di Ngadas, Malang, Jawa Timur. In: Wibawa, S, Pratama, AB, Fadlurrahman, Wulandari, C, editors. Menata Desa: Bunga Rampai Pemikiran. Yogyakarta: K-Media; 2019.

[16] Schein EH. Organizational Culture and Leadership. 2nd ed. San Francisco: JosseyBass Inc.; 1992.

[17] Adam I, Indrawijaya. Teori, Perilaku, dan Budaya Organisasi. Bandung: Refika Aditama; 2010.

[18] Soekanto S. Sosiologi: suatu pengantar. Jakarta: Raja Grafindo Persada; 1992.

[19] Burger DH. Perubahan-perubahan struktur dalam masyarakat jawa. Jakarta: Bhratara; 1977.

[20] Eko S. Desentralisasi dan demokrasi desa. Makalah dipresentasikan pada: Konsultasi Publik Revisi UU No. 22 Tahun 1999 organized by Forum Pengembangan Partisipasi Masyarakat (FPPM) Jakarta, Bitra Indonesia Medan, and Pustaka Indonesia, Deli Serdang, Sumatera Utara, Indonesia; 2003 Nov 19.

[21] Adisasmita R. Membangun Desa Partisipatif. Yogyakarta: Graha Ilmu; 2006.

[22] Stoner, JAF and Freeman, R. E. Management, Fourth Edition, Switch language by Bakowatun, WW. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall; 1989

[23] Handoko, H. Manajemen. Yogyakarta: BPFE Yogyakarta; 1999.

[24] Tjiptoherijanto, P and Manurung M. Paradigma Administrasi Publik dan Perkembangannya. Jakarta: Universitas Indonesia (UI-Press); 2010.

[25] Lubis, SBH and Huseini, M. Teori Organisasi: Suau pendekatan makro. Jakarta: Pusat Antar Universitas Ilmu-ilmu Sosial Universitas Indonesia; 1987.

[26] Government Regulation No. 73 year 2005 about Neighborhoods.

[27] Koentjaraningrat. Kebudayaan, Mentalitas, dan Pembangunan. Jakarta: Gramedia; 2004.

[28] Zanibar MZ. Otonomi desa: dengan acuan khusus pada desa di propinsi Sumatera Selatan. [Dissertation of Postgraduate Program of Faculty of Law]. Depok: University of Indonesia; 1998.

[29] Solekhan, M. Penyelenggaraan pemerintahan desa: berbasis partisipasi masyarakat dalam membangun mekanisme akuntabilitas. Malang: Setara Press; 2012.