The paradox of political dynasties of regeneration type and poverty in regional autonomy era

Abstract

Purpose

This paper aims to identify some key points about the practice of political dynasties and poverty in the era of regional autonomy through literature studies.

Design/methodology/approach

This research uses literature study method and is organized into three parts. The first is to elaborate reflections on regional autonomy, political dynasty and substantive poverty. The second is to decipher the reality and the practice of political dynasty in the era of regional autonomy and poverty level. The third is to analyze the political dynasty and poverty in the era of regional autonomy. The last is the policy advices.

Findings

The start of dynastic leadership began before the era of direct elections in 2005 and continued after the direct elections, so that the decentralization system provided space to build a political dynasty. Regional autonomy poses the risk of full control by local elites and the birth of local ruling elites, or it indicates the presence of local elite dominance both economically and politically in the region. The autonomy era had an impact on the decrease of poverty in the area of regeneration political dynasty. This is evidenced by the decrease in the percentage of poverty index from year to year, although not yet out of the category of poor areas (based on national index), or only 4 regions from 12 regions that belong to non-poor areas. Although the average dynasties count is able to reduce poverty each year, the income distribution in majority of the political dynasty regions is uneven.

Originality/value

This research is a preliminary study on the political dynasty of regeneration type in Indonesia which is a hot issue in the era of regional autonomy as well as can add empirical evidence about the debate about political dynasty and poverty.

Citation

Guritno, D.C., Samudro, B.R. and Soesilo, A.M. (2019), "The paradox of political dynasties of regeneration type and poverty in regional autonomy era", International Journal of Ethics and Systems, Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 179-194. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOES-05-2018-0069