Beyond path dependency: Analysing Indonesia's social policy responses to two crises

Abstract

This article sets out a coherent framework for debates and discussions on social policy changes during crisis periods. Using Indonesia as a case, this article compares its social policy responses to the 1997–1998 economic crisis and the current COVID‐19 pandemic crisis. Both two crises and their responses, once analysed, lead to an argument that path dependence does not always dominate policy processes, as most literature claims, but rather it operates alongside other path‐creation‐related processes, such as path‐clearing policy accelerators and path‐creation policy accelerators. This article also presents that ‘old player’ penetration in policy processes does not necessarily preclude alternatives and, in some examined cases, it, instead, strengthens impulses toward substantial reforms. Therefore, revised policies must be viewed as political vehicles for seeking popular support and power reconsolidation as democracy allows. Furthermore, this current analysis contributes to enhancing our understanding of crises, often seen as issues in public policy literature, yet less explored in terms of their importance as unique critical junctures and their implications for social policy changes in multiple paths.

Interruptions, interventions, and innovations in social services during COVID‐19 in Bangladesh

“…The authorities had to intervene due to interruptions of social services and made innovations which were policy responses to deal with the situation that emerged because of the pandemic. The study investigated policy responses and changes in social services deploying the theories of institutionalism (Cruz‐Martínez et al., 2023; Hall, 1993; Hogan et al., 2022; Yuda, 2023; Yuda et al., 2022). It revealed that the nature and delivery system of social service programs had been changed due to the quick spread of COVID‐19 which was a short‐term policy response also found in many other studies (Cruz‐Martínez et al., 2023; Dorlach, 2023; Hogan et al., 2022; Yuda et al., 2022).…”

“…Yuda (2023) also noticed similar changes in Indonesia and claimed that the pandemic didn't create a conducive environment to have major revisions in current social policies. He pointed out that introducing unemployment insurance during COVID-19 was a path-breaking, which later became institutionalized (Yuda, 2023). In a similar vein, Yuda et al (2022) pointed out that COVID-19-affected countries like Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, and Thailand launched some social protection programs temporarily without any basic modification.…”

“…A gamut of research has been conducted globally to explore the impact of COVID‐19 on social services and social policy responses to the COVID‐19 pandemic (Asogwa et al., 2022; Abdoul‐Azize & El Gamil, 2021; Devereux, 2021; Dorlach, 2023; Hasan et al., 2021; Holliday et al., 2020; Yuda, 2023; Yuda et al., 2022). Social service sectors have been positively and negatively affected due to the spread of COVID‐19 (Asogwa et al., 2022; Bacil & Soyer, 2020).…”

“…Changes in the institutions may take place over time, especially institutions that have to be changed while facing a crisis during a critical juncture. Institutions gradually evolve which may be analyzed by deploying three theoretical models, namely path dependency, punctuated equilibrium, and endogenous change or gradualism (Yuda, 2023). According to the path dependency theoretical model, changes in the institutions are practically not possible as cross-class coalitions intend to uphold their interests through a parliamentary system opposing institutional changes.…”

Moving beyond stereotype: A qualitative study of long‐standing recipients of the Indonesian conditional cash transfers (CCT/PKH)

“…Focusing specifically on the Indonesian case, this paper aims to contribute to the growing body of research on welfare stereotypes and stigma (Dukelow et al, 2022). To our knowledge, this topic has not yet been explored in relation to conditional cash transfer (CCT) programs, particularly in Southeast Asia as emerging welfare capitalism (Sumarto, 2020a; Yuda, 2023; Yuda et al, 2022; Yuda & Kühner, 2022). Accordingly, our paper outlines its objectives, which include examining the effects of CCT on impoverished families, exploring their attitudes towards these programs in response to stereotyping, and considering the implications of such stereotypes for the claim motivation of claimants.…”