Stakeholder Salience Analysis in the Policy Formulation of Anti-Violence Against Women and Children
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.46507/jcgpp.v4i2.158Keywords:
Anti-Violence, Policy Formulation, Stakeholder Salience AnalysisAbstract
This article explores stakeholders influence in the policy formulation of anti-violence against women and children by using the stakeholder salience model as a conceptual framework. Stakeholder engagement in policy formulation is essential to achieving optimal policy practise and performance. However, the contestation of interests and imbalance of power between stakeholders in the policy formulation of anti-violence against women and children inhibit the development of policy alternatives based on problem solving, resulting in low policy performance. The research method used is qualitative research with a case study approach, and the stakeholder analysis method is applied to the data analysis. The research findings demonstrate that the policy formulation of anti-violence against women and children is dominated by dependent stakeholders with only power and legitimacy attributes, while the attributes of urgency are not available, reflected in their inattentiveness in providing a quick response to the rising cases of violence and their lack of knowledge on the issue of violence. This study concludes that stakeholders' influence in the policy process is limited. Stakeholders are only involved during public hearings, and the policy is only drafted and discussed by the policy elite, specifically Commission VI of the Aceh Legislative Council, an expert’s team, and the Aceh Women's Empowerment and Child Protection Unit. It indicates that stakeholder engagement is only to gain legitimacy for policy decisions. This research contributes to providing knowledge about stakeholder dynamics in policy formulation contexts and theoretical knowledge about the creation of the most powerful and influential stakeholders for maximising policy formulation and policy performance.References
Aaltonen, K., & Kujala, J. (2010). A project lifecycle perspective on stakeholder influence strategies in global projects. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 26(4), 381–397. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scaman.2010.09.001
Ackermann, F., & Eden, C. (2011). Strategic Management of Stakeholders: Theory and Practice. Long Range Planning, 44(3), 179–196.
Ancker, S., & Rechel, B. (2015). HIV/AIDS policy-making in Kyrgyzstan: A stakeholder analysis. Health Policy and Planning, 30(1), 8–18.
Arnstein, S. R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35(4), 216–224. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315255101-34
Aryeetey, R., Harding, K., Hromi-Fiedler, A., & Pérez-Escamilla, R. (2020). Analysis of stakeholder networks for breastfeeding policies and programs in Ghana. International Breastfeeding Journal, 15(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13006-020-00311-x
Behzadifar, M., Gorji, H. A., Rezapour, A., Rezvanian, A., Bragazzi, N. L., & Vatankhah, S. (2019). Hepatitis C virus-related policy-making in Iran: A stakeholder and social network analysis. Health Research Policy and Systems, 17(42), 1–11.
Best, B., Moffett, S., & Adam, R. M. (2019). Stakeholder salience in public sector value co-creation. Public Management Review, 21(11), 1707–1732.
Brugha, R., & Varvasovszky, Z. (2000). Stakeholder analysis : a review. Health Policy and Planning, 15(3), 239–246. https://doi.org/10.1093/heapol/15.3.239
Bryson, J. M. (2004). What to do when stakeholders matter: Stakeholder Identificatixon and analysis techniques. Public Management Review, 6(1), 21–53.
Buccini, G., Harding, K. L., Eguiluz, I. F., Safon, C. B., Hromi-Fielder, A., De Cosio, T. G., & P rez-Escamilla, R. (2020). An analysis of stakeholder networks to support the breastfeeding scale-up environment in Mexico. Journal of Nutritional Science, 9, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1017/jns.2020.4
Burby, R. J. (2003). Making plans that matter: Citizen involvement and government action. Journal of the American Planning Association, 69(1), 33–49.
Carroll, A. B. (1991). The Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility: Toward the Moral Management of Organizational Stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34(1), 39–48.
Carroll, A. B., & Näsi, J. (2016). Understanding Stakeholder Thinking: Themes from a Finnish Conference. The Corporation and Its Stakeholders, 6(1), 71–80.
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design Choosing Among Five Approach. London: SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9299.00177
Cuppen, E., Brunsting, S., Pesch, U., & Feenstra, Y. (2015). How stakeholder interactions can reduce space for moral considerations in decision making: A contested CCS project in the Netherlands. Environment and Planning A, 47(9), 1963–1978.
Dawson, K., Joscelyne, A., Meijer, C., Steel, Z., Silove, D., & Bryant, R. A. (2018). A controlled trial of trauma-focused therapy versus problem-solving in Islamic children affected by civil conflict and disaster in Aceh, Indonesia. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 52(3), 253–261. https://doi.org/10.1177/0004867417714333
Dunn, W. N. (2018). Public Policy Analysis: An Integrated Approach. London: Taylor & Francis Group.
Edelenbos, J., & Klijn, E. H. (2006). Managing stakeholder involvement in decision making: A comparative analysis of six interactive processes in the Netherlands. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 16(3), 417–446.
Fischer, F., Miller, G. J., & Sidney, M. S. (2007). Handbook of Public Policy: Theory, Politics, and Methods. United States: Taylor & Francis Group.
Fischer, S. E., & Larsen, M. S. (2016). Power and agenda-setting in Tanzanian health policy: An analysis of stakeholder perspectives. International Journal of Health Policy and Management, 5(6), 355–363. https://doi.org/10.15171/ijhpm.2016.09
Fraser, E. D. G., Dougill, A. J., Mabee, W. E., Reed, M., & McAlpine, P. (2006). Bottom up and top down: Analysis of participatory processes for sustainability indicator identification as a pathway to community empowerment and sustainable environmental management. Journal of Environmental Management, 78(2), 114–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2005.04.009
Freeman, E., Jalaludin, B., & Thompson, S. L. (2011). Healthy Built Environments: Stakeholder Engagement in Evidence Based Policy Making. 5th State of Australian Cities National Conference, 1–12. Melbourne.
Friedman, A. L., & Miles, S. (2006). Stakeholder Theory and Practice. New York: Oxford University Press Inc.
Gibson, K. (2000). The Moral Basis of Stakeholder Theory Kevin Gibson. Journal of Business Ethics, 26(3), 245–257.
Godakandage, S. S. P., Senarath, U., Jayawickrama, H. S., Siriwardena, I., Wickramasinghe, S. W. A. D. A., Arumapperuma, P., … Thow, A. M. (2017). Policy and stakeholder analysis of infant and young child feeding programmes in Sri Lanka. BMC Public Health, 17(Suppl 2), 93–123. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-017-4342-4
Grimble, R. (1998). Socio-Economic Methodologies Best Practice Guidelines. Chatham: Natural Resources Institute.
Habibi, A., Hanafi, A., Nursiti, Nisa, H., & Muthaleb, A. A. (2018). Naskah Akademik Rancangan Qanun Aceh tentang Tata Cara Penyelesaian Kekerasan Terhadap Perempuan dan Anak. Banda Aceh.
Hutahaean, M. (2017). The Importance of Stakeholders Approach in Public Policy Making. International Conference on Ethics in Governance (ICONEG 2016), 84, 462–466. Atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/iconeg-16.2017.104
Johnson, N. L., & Johnson, D. M. (2017). An Empirical Exploration Into the Measurement of Rape Culture. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 36(1–2), 1–26.
Jones, T. M. (1995). Instrumental Stakeholder Theory: a Synthesis of Ethics and Economics. Academy of Management Review, 20(2), 404–437.
Jones, T. M., Felps, W., & Bigley, G. A. (2007). Ethical theory and stakeholder-related decisions: The role of stakeholder culture. Academy of Management Review, 32(1), 137–155. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2007.23463924
Malfait, S., Hecke, A. V, Hellings, J., Bodt, G. De, & Eeckloo, K. (2017). The impact of stakeholder involvement in hospital policy decision-making: a study of the hospital’s business processes. Acta Clinica Belgica: International Journal of Clinical and Laboratory Medicine, 72(1), 63–71.
Mitchell, R. K., & Wood, D. J. (1997). Toward a Theory of Stakeholder Identification and Salience : Defining the Principle of Who and What Really Counts. Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 853–886.
Mulyaningrum, M., Kartodihardjo, H., Jaya, I. N. S, & Nugroho, B. (2013). Stakeholders analysis of policy-making process: The case of timber legality policy on private forest. Jurnal Manajemen Hutan Tropika, 19(2), 156–162.
Nurfatriani, F., Darusman, D., Nurrochmat, D. R., & Yustika, A. E. (2015). Analisis Pemangku Kepentingan Dalam Transformasi Kebijakan Fiskal Hijau. Jurnal Analisis Kebijakan Kehutanan, 12(2), 105–124.
Nurjannah, N. (2019). The Women’s Collective Experience of Violence Victim of Military Operation Area in East Aceh. Proceedings of The 5th Annual International Seminar on Trends in Science and Science Education, AISTSSE 2018, 18-19 October 2018. Medan, Indonesia: EAI. https://doi.org/10.4108/eai.18-10-2018.2287421
Nurmala, I., Sari, J. D. E., Dewi, D. M. S. K., & Devi, Y. P. (2021). Analisis Stakeholder untuk Mendukung Peran Banyuwangi Children Center dalam Upaya Menurunkan Kekerasan Seksual pada Anak. Buletin Penelitian Kesehatan, 49(1), 47–56. 8
Olyaaeemanesh, A., Jaafaripooyan, E., Abdollahiasl, A., Davari, M., Mousavi, S. M., & Delpasand, M. (2021). Pharmaceutical subsidy policy in Iran: a qualitative stakeholder analysis. Health Research Policy and Systems, 19(1), 1–17.
Palinkas, L. A., Horwitz, S. M., Green, C. A., Wisdom, J. P., Duan, N., & Hoagwood, K. (2015). Purposeful Sampling for Qualitative Data Collection and Analysis in Mixed Method Implementation Research. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 42(5), 533–544. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-013-0528-y
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods. New Delhi: SAGE Publications.
Prukkanone, K., & Wang, G. (2016). Stakeholder Analysis of Environmental Policymaking Process in Thailand. Journal of Public Administration and Governance, 6(2), 100–114. https://doi.org/10.5296/jpag.v6i2.9364
Reed, M. S., Graves, A., Dandy, N., Posthumus, H., Hubacek, K., Morris, J., … Stringer, L. C. (2009). Who’s in and why? A typology of stakeholder analysis methods for natural resource management. Journal of Environmental Management, 90(5), 1933–1949.
Scott, S. G., & Lane, V. R. (2000). A Stakeholder Approach to Organizational Identity. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 43–62.
Siddall, E., Grey, T., & Dyer, M. (2013). Indicators and stakeholder engagement: A Dublin case study. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers: Engineering Sustainability, 166(2), 85–97. https://doi.org/10.1680/ensu.12.00004
Squires, J. E., Hutchinson, A. M., Coughlin, M., Bashir, K., Curran, J., Grimshaw, J. M., … Graham, I. D. (2022). Stakeholder Perspectives of Attributes and Features of Context Relevant to Knowledge Translation in Health Settings: A Multi-Country Analysis. International Journal of Health Policy and Management, 11(8), 1373–1390.
Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610.
Sujatmiko, I. G. (2012). Conflict transformation and social reconciliation: The case of aceh, Indonesia. Asian Social Science, 8(2), 104–111.
Uddin, S., Mahmood, H., Senarath, U., Zahiruddin, Q., Karn, S., Rasheed, S., & Dibley, M. (2017). Analysis of stakeholders networks of infant and young child nutrition programmes in Sri Lanka, India, Nepal, Bangladesh and Pakistan. BMC Public Health, 17(Suppl 2), 15–123. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-017-4337-1
Uwe, F. (2018). The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Data Collection. United Kingdom: SAGE Publications.
Windsor, D. (2010). The role of dynamics in stakeholder thinking. Journal of Business Ethics, 96(July), 79–87. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-0937-3
Wosahlo, P. (2014). An analysis of the implementation of palliative rehabilitation in five UK hospices using the Stakeholder Salience model. Progress in Palliative Care, 22(6), 342–346. https://doi.org/10.1179/1743291X14Y.0000000103
Ying, M., Shan, H., & Tikuye, G. A. (2022). How Do Stakeholder Pressures Affect Corporate Social Responsibility Adoption? Evidence from Chinese Manufacturing Enterprises in Ethiopia. Sustainability, 14(1), 1–23.
Zarnaq, R. K., Ravaghi, H., Mosaddegh-rad, A. M., Jalilian, H., & Bazyar, M. (2021). HIV/AIDS policy-making in Iran: A stakeholder analysis. International Journal of Health Planning and Management, 36(6), 2351–2365. https://doi.org/10.1002/hpm.3313
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Please find rights and licences in Journal of Contemporary Governance and Public Policy. By submitting articles or article manuscripts, the author agrees to this policy. No special documents are required.
1. Licence
Use of articles will be governed by the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike licence as currently displayed on the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International Licence (CC BY-SA).
2. Author(s)' Warranties
The author warrants that the article is original, written by the stated author(s), has not been published before, contains no unlawful statements, does not infringe the rights of others, is subject to copyright that is vested exclusively in the author and free of any third-party rights, and that any necessary written permissions to quote from other sources have been obtained by the author(s).
3. User Rights
The spirit of Journal of Contemporary Governance and Public Policy is to disseminate articles published as freely as possible. Under the Creative Commons licence, Journal of Contemporary Governance and Public Policy permits users to copy, distribute, display, and perform the work. Users will also need to attribute authors and Journal of Contemporary Governance and Public Policy for distributing works in journal and other media of publication.
4. Rights of Authors
Authors retain all their rights to the published works, such as (but not limited to) the following rights:
1. Copyright and other proprietary rights relating to the article, such as patent rights,
2. The right to use the substance of the article in future works, including lectures and books,
3. The right to reproduce the article for own purposes,
4. The right to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the article's published version (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal (Journal of Contemporary Governance and Public Policy).
5. Co-Authorship
If the article was jointly prepared by more than one author, any author submitting the manuscript warrants that he or she has been authorised by all co-authors to agree on this copyright and licence notice (agreement) on their behalf and agrees to inform his or her co-authors of the terms of this policy. Journal of Contemporary Governance and Public Policy will not be held liable for anything that may arise due to the author's internal dispute. Journal of Contemporary Governance and Public Policy will only communicate with the corresponding author.
6. Royalties
Being an open-access journal and disseminating articles for free under the Creative Commons licence term mentioned, the author(s) are aware that Journal of Contemporary Governance and Public Policy entitles the author(s) to no royalties or other fees.
7. Miscellaneous
Journal of Contemporary Governance and Public Policy will publish the article (or have it published) if the editorial process is successfully completed and the Journal or its sublicensee is obliged to proceed with its publication. The Journal also reserves the right to conform the article to its preferred style of punctuation, spelling, capitalisation, and usage.
