Improving Budget Transparency in Bandung City, West Java Province, Indonesia

Abstract

Founded in 1999, the Bandung Institute of Governance Studies (BIGS) is an NGO devoted to promoting budget transparency in Bandung city, West Java province. To date, BIGS has been successful in obtaining and disseminating city budget information, publishing several books as well as an annual poster which lists the budget allocations and unit manager names and telephone numbers for all 80 city government units. It has provided citizens, politicians, NGO staff, the media and students with training on how to analyze and use budget information in advocacy efforts. Information provided by BIGS has empowered the city parliament or DPRD to strengthen its role as a check on the executive branch of city government and is being used by government to reduce budgetary fraud and waste. BIGS has even taken some direct action of its own, bringing a well-publicized case of corruption against some Bandung city DPRD members that is still under investigation. Bandung city citizens’ awareness of the importance of the budget and the need for budget transparency has been raised, and the issue of budget transparency is being taken up in other cities and by other NGOs because of BIGS. Key to BIGS’ success has been its ability to bring its strategy in line with its organizational strengths and weaknesses. Other important factors include its reputation for honesty, excellence and sincerity, its charismatic leader, multi-year untied core funding, its wide network of government contacts, and its use of many different channels and formats to reach people. Finally, national-level decentralization and accompanying reforms created an enabling environment for organizations such as BIGS. Despite BIGS’ successes, BIGS’ work has not yet resulted in a more pro-poor city budget. Perhaps most importantly, BIGS depends on other NGOs to serve as “pollinators” to put its information to work on behalf of specific groups such as the poor. In fact, BIGS does not target the poor explicitly, though budget analysis, training, and information dissemination are all activities that could be effectively re-designed with the poor in mind. BIGS’ citizen outreach is limited in both numbers and impact: a frequent criticism is that its budget analysis is too complicated for ordinary citizens to understand and use. The fact that it does not publish information on draft budgets, but only on approved budgets, also limits the ability of citizens and NGOs to use the information for change. Finally, entrenched local groups and dishonest leaders undermine some of BIGS’ attempts at reducing budgetary fraud and waste.