Social capital is a result of social movement  and vice versa. Social movement’s theories such as the mobilization of resource model tries to explain the anatomy of collective action in the context of liberal political system in the West. These theories can be used to dechiper collective action in general but may be not enough to explain rural social action in Indonesia which under transitional democracy political regime. In present rural Indonesia,  social movement participated by “weak” groups of peasants break out most frequently. These peasents movements are against local governments or enterprises who distupt citizens’  rights. The civic protest against semen enterprise in Maitan Village in Pati District is the case in point. The social networks created thecollective action. However, the horizontal networks among  protesters themselves cannot be succesful without the help of vertical network such as support that they may have received from high-ranking officials in the local government bureaucracy.

This research will investigate how bureaucratic reforms in the context of decentralization impact on state bureaucratic capacity in Indonesia. It argues that bureaucratic reforms in Indonesia has resultin a two-particular political outcomes. Firstly, to strengthen government political control over the bureaucracy by swinging back the decentralization approach toward a prefectoral system as a mean of changing the political arena in their favor, and, secondly, to gain popular support. In this way, bureaucracy reforms have indeed increased efficiency of the public sector, butat the same time decrease its autonomy. Democracy, decentralization, hybrid regime, partial bureaucracy reforms.