Accelerating Institutional Strengthening at the District Level in a Fiscally Fragile Border Region: Evidence from Arso Kota District, Keerom Regency, Papua
This study analyzes the acceleration of institutional strengthening at the district level in a fiscally fragile border region. The Arso Kota District, the administrative center of Keerom Regency in Indonesian Papua, is selected as the case study. The study poses three research questions. Firstly, it seeks to understand how structural determinants condition service capacity. Secondly, it explores how relations with customary authority shape spatial governance. Third, it investigates which reform sequence is proportional to these constraints. The study used a qualitative, embedded, single-case design within a constructivist paradigm. The data were collected through a combination of methods, including in-depth interviews with purposively and snowball-selected key informants, non-participant observations of the district office during field visits, and a documentary study of regulations, development plans, audited financial reports, and personnel records. The analysis followed a rigorous process of data reduction, thematic display, and verification through source and method triangulation, as well as member checking. The district exhibits a fictive presence syndrome: of the eighty-five personnel, approximately half reside in Jayapura City, meaning effective service relies on just three officers. Consequently, the absence of these three officers causes service to collapse. The region's fiscal autonomy ratio averages 2 percent of total revenue. In addition, of the district's annual budget of approximately five billion rupiah, only four hundred million remains for programs after deducting salaries and fixed costs. The district lacks operational vehicles and relies on manual processes, which are vulnerable to unstable connectivity. Its remaining functions are limited to issuing business licenses, domicile certificates, and inheritance transfers. The delegation of regent authority is ineffective because no budget, personnel, or equipment has been transferred. The institutional capacity assessment is approximately 2.5 out of 5. Digital services and infrastructure are the weakest area, while customary collaboration and dispute settlement are the strongest. The latter depends on the district head's personal relationship with customary authority, rather than institutionalized mechanisms. The study proposes a hybrid agile district model, operationalized as a four-phase roadmap that integrates capacity-building theory, dynamic governance, agile organization, and the district-building (DMMD) paradigm. The model prioritizes mobile and digital delivery over capital-intensive infrastructure, revitalizing the district's role in the village-fund accountability cycle and establishing a permanent forum for customary and government collaboration. The projected service improvements are qualitative and indicative only; a limited pilot is therefore warranted before full adoption in the Keerom long-term regional development plan for 2025–2045.
Keywords: Agile government, Capacity building, District institutional strengthening, Dynamic governance, Fiscal fragility
Adam, L., Sambodo, M. T., Purwanto, P., Purnagunawan, R. M., Sarana, J., Ermawati, T., Saptia, Y., Soekarni, M., Adityawati, S., Thoha, M., & Suryanto, J. (2024). Village fund and Indonesia rural development: Rethinking institutional capacity and governance. Journal of Infrastructure Policy and Development, 8(14), 9875. https://doi.org/10.24294/jipd9875
Agneman, G., Cappelen, C., Brandt, K., & Sjöberg, D. (2025). The uneven reach of the state: A novel approach to mapping local state presence. Journal of Development Economics, 174, 103453. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2025.103453
Åsblad, M. (2026). Governing on the Edge. How International Pressures Shape the Geography of State Power. Governance, 39(1). https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.70097
Astuti, Y., Pribadi, U., Ahmad, J., & Purwaningsih, T. (2026). Understanding urban–rural disparities in digital government maturity: a governance perspective. Frontiers in Political Science, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpos.2026.1779611
Batley, R., McCourt, W., & Mcloughlin, C. (2012). Editorial: The Politics and Governance of Public Services in Developing Countries. Public Management Review, 14(2), 131–144. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2012.657840
Bauer, Z., AbouAssi, K., & Johnston, J. M. (2023). Governance Arrangements of Cross-Sector Collaboration and Its Effectiveness. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 52(2), 346–369. https://doi.org/10.1177/08997640221100705
Baxter, D., Dacre, N., Dong, H., & Ceylan, S. (2023). Institutional challenges in agile adoption: Evidence from a public sector IT project. Government Information Quarterly, 40(4), 101858. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2023.101858
Beckers, D., Mora, L., Platania, F., & Gerli, P. (2026). There Is No Rose Without a Thorn: Examining the Contribution of Collaborative Platforms to Sustaining Collaborative Governance. Governance, 39(1). https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.70090
Bucaite-Vilke, J., Vigoda-Gadot, E., & Vilkas, M. (2026). Collaborative governance at the local level: Lithuanian politicians’ impact on the collaborative management of wicked problems. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 39(7), 1140–1163. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPSM-06-2025-0244
Chang, A. (2022). A formal model of street-level bureaucracy. Rationality and Society, 34(1), 6–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/10434631211043205
Chang, A., & Brewer, Gene. A. (2023). Street-Level bureaucracy in public administration: A systematic literature review. Public Management Review, 25(11), 2191–2211. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2022.2065517
Cheema, F. S., Lee, E., Gupta, R., & Perry, J. L. (2026). Conceptualizing the Street-Level Bureaucrat Construct. Public Administration and Development. https://doi.org/10.1002/pad.70093
Cornell, A., Knutsen, C. H., & Teorell, J. (2020). Bureaucracy and Growth. Comparative Political Studies, 53(14), 2246–2282. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414020912262
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. SAGE.
David, S., Virlanuta, F., Bacalum, S., Bărbuță‐Mișu, N., & Mihai, I. (2025). Exploring Digital Transformation as a Catalyst for Institutional Agility in the Delivery of Public Services. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences / Revue Canadienne des Sciences de l’Administration, 42(4), 514–532. https://doi.org/10.1002/cjas.70007
de la Riva Agüero, R. (2026). Complexity in Service Provision: Unpacking Administrative Capacity to Understand Differential Performance. Public Administration Review, 86(4), 901–915. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.70062
Desai, A., & Manoharan, A. P. (2024). Digital Transformation and Public Administration: The Impacts of India’s Digital Public Infrastructure. In International Journal of Public Administration (Vol. 47, Number 9). https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2024.2350762
Deutschmann, E., Gabrielli, L., & Recchi, E. (2023). Roads, rails, and checkpoints: Assessing the permeability of nation-state borders worldwide. World Development, 164, 106175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2022.106175
Dhiaulhaq, A., Sambodo, M. T., Hidayat, S., Stacher, N., Sari, D., Haryadi, T., McDonald-Madden, E., Gero, A., Megaw, T., Maharani, C., & Rumfabe, M. (2026). Joined-up governance and sustainable finance for inclusive ridge-to-reef conservation in Southwest Papua, Indonesia. Environmental Development, 57, 101360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envdev.2025.101360
Edri-Peer, O., & Cohen, N. (2025). Revisiting coping mechanisms on the street-level: a systematic literature review. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 35(4). https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muaf022
Eiró, F., & Lotta, G. (2024). On the Frontline of Global Inequalities: A Decolonial Approach to the Study of Street-Level Bureaucracies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 34(1), 67–79. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muad019
Emerson, K., & Nabatchi, T. (2015). Evaluating the Productivity of Collaborative Governance Regimes: A Performance Matrix. Public Performance & Management Review, 38(4), 717–747. https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2015.1031016
Eriksson, E., & Andersson, T. (2024). The ‘service turn’ in a new public management context: a street-level bureaucrat perspective. Public Management Review, 26(7), 2014–2038. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2023.2241051
Fiestiandani, I., Setijaningrum, E., Supeno, E., & Samad, S. (2026). Between bytes, being, and the bridging of boundaries: the human dimension of policy capacity in rural Indonesia’s digital public service delivery. Cogent Social Sciences, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2026.2624790
Galdino de Magalhães Santos, L. (2024). Dynamic capabilities in the public sector: Research agenda in the context of digital transformation. JeDEM - EJournal of EDemocracy and Open Government, 16(2), 74–87. https://doi.org/10.29379/jedem.v16i2.883
Grindle, M. S. (1980). Politics and Policy Implementation in the Third World (M. S. GRINDLE, Ed.). Princeton University Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1m323qj
He, J. (2022). Subnational territorial reforms and state capacity: evidence from the developing world. Global Public Policy and Governance, 2(2), 232–251. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43508-022-00040-3
Hidayat, A. R., Hospes, O., & Termeer, C. J. A. M. (2026). Uneven recognition: A comparative study of indigenous communities’ struggle for securing customary land rights in Indonesia. Land Use Policy, 167, 108061. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2026.108061
Hummel, D., & Kusumasari, B. (2026). Local Government Financial Performance and Decentralization in Indonesia. State and Local Government Review, 58(2), 206–227. https://doi.org/10.1177/0160323X251364379
Johansson, J. (2025). Research on digital discretion—The subjectification of street‐level work in public administration. Review of Policy Research, 42(1), 122–148. https://doi.org/10.1111/ropr.12637
Karso, A. J. (2025). Natural resources governance and the vulnerability of indigenous communities in Indonesia. Frontiers in Political Science, 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpos.2025.1601480
Kurniawan, R. C., Faedlulloh, D., Warganegara, A., & Hermawan, D. (2023). Multilevel dynamic governance in dealing with crisis: the case of handling corona virus disease 19 (COVID-19) in Lampung Province, Indonesia. Cogent Social Sciences, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2222574
Kurniawan, R. W., Handoko, V. R., & Kusbandrijo, B. (2025). Collaborative Governance of Public Service Malls in Order to Improve the Quality of Public Services in Surabaya City. Asian Journal of Applied Business and Management, 4(1), 273–292. https://doi.org/10.55927/ajabm.v4i1.1
Larson, A. M., Sarmiento Barletti, J. P., & Heise Vigil, N. (2022). A place at the table is not enough: Accountability for Indigenous Peoples and local communities in multi-stakeholder platforms. World Development, 155, 105907. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2022.105907
Latupeirissa, J. J. P., Dewi, N. L. Y., Prayana, I. K. R., Srikandi, M. B., Ramadiansyah, S. A., & Pramana, I. B. G. A. Y. (2024). Transforming Public Service Delivery: A Comprehensive Review of Digitization Initiatives. Sustainability, 16(7), 2818. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16072818
Lewis, B. D. (2023). Indonesia’s New Fiscal Decentralisation Law: A Critical Assessment. Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies, 59(1), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/00074918.2023.2180838
Marjerison, R. K., & Gatto, A. (2024). Public sector digitalization, corruption, and sustainability in the developing world: A scoping review. Sustainable Development, 32(5), 5627–5638. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2900
Mergel, I., Edelmann, N., & Haug, N. (2019). Defining digital transformation: Results from expert interviews. Government Information Quarterly, 36(4), 101385. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2019.06.002
Milèn, A. (2001). What do we know about capacity building? An overview of existing knowledge and good practice. World Health Organization.
Neo, B. S., & Chen, G. (2007). Dynamic Governance. WORLD SCIENTIFIC. https://doi.org/10.1142/6458
Neumann, O., Kirklies, P.-C., & Schott, C. (2024). Adopting agile in government: a comparative case study. Public Management Review, 26(12), 3692–3714. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2024.2354776
PATTIRO. (2021, January 29). PATTIRO dan CSO di Jayapura Sampaikan Gagasan Pengembangan Distrik Membangun Membangun Distrik. https://pattiro.org/2021/01/pattiro-dan-cso-di-jayapura-sampaikan-gagasan-pengembangan-distrik-membangun-membangun-distrik/
Permatasari, P., Budiarso, A., Dartanto, T., Samosir, A. P., Saputro, B., Ekayana, D., Agustono, E. D., Alim, T. E., Hartono, L., Wahyuputri, F. W., & Wardhana, I. W. (2024). Village fund management and reporting systems: Are they accountable? Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 18(4), 512–528. https://doi.org/10.1108/TG-07-2023-0098
Persson, A., Boräng, F., & Carlitz, R. (2025). The Power of Ideational Reach: A New Approach to State Capacity. Governance, 38(3). https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.70020
Rammohan, A., & Tohari, A. (2023). Rural poverty and labour force participation: Evidence from Indonesia’s Village fund program. PLOS ONE, 18(6), e0283041. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0283041
Salvador, M., & Sancho, D. (2021). The Role of Local Government in the Drive for Sustainable Development Public Policies. An Analytical Framework Based on Institutional Capacities. Sustainability, 13(11), 5978. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13115978
Setiawan, A., Tjiptoherijanto, P., Mahi, B. R., & Khoirunurrofik, K. (2022). The Impact of Local Government Capacity on Public Service Delivery: Lessons Learned from Decentralized Indonesia. Economies, 10(12), 323. https://doi.org/10.3390/economies10120323
Shabnam Sharmin, & Rakibul Hasan Chowdhury. (2025). Digital Transformation in Governance: The Impact of e-governance on Public Administration and Transparency. Journal of Computer Science and Technology Studies, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.32996/jcsts.2025.7.1.27
Shou, M., Jia, F., Yu, J., & Wu, Y. (2025). Challenges in developing information and communication technology (ICT) use for rural e-governance: An ecology perspective. Information Systems Journal, 35(1). https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12540
Siki, M., Samudra, A. A., & Satispi, E. (2024). Conflict Situation and Proposals for Resolving Customary Land Conflicts in East Nusa Tenggara, Indonesia. Journal of Law and Sustainable Development, 12(1), e2743. https://doi.org/10.55908/sdgs.v12i1.2743
Sofyani, H., Pratolo, S., & Saleh, Z. (2022). Do accountability and transparency promote community trust? Evidence from village government in Indonesia. Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change, 18(3), 397–418. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAOC-06-2020-0070
Sopaheluwakan, W. R. I., Fatem, S. M., Kutanegara, P. M., & Maryudi, A. (2023). Two-decade decentralization and recognition of customary forest rights: Cases from special autonomy policy in West Papua, Indonesia. Forest Policy and Economics, 151, 102951. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2023.102951
Suryawati, D., Rohman, H., Anwar, Maulana, M. I., Handika, Y. R., Hanim, A. N., Muluk, M. R. K., & Rochman, F. (2026). Adaptive governance in fiscal decentralization: Insight from institutional reform in Banyuwangi Regency, Indonesia. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 13, 102606. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2026.102606
Tai, K.-T., & Awasthi, P. (2025). An exploration of agile government in the public sector: A systematic literature review at macro, meso, and micro levels of analysis. Government Information Quarterly, 42(4), 102082. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2025.102082
Vidyattama, Y., Sutiyono, W., & Sugiyarto. (2022). Factors of Budget Delay: Local Government Capacity, Bargaining and Political Interaction in Indonesia. Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies, 58(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/00074918.2020.1812515
Yin, R. K. (2018). Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Zia ud din, M., Yuan yuan, X., Khan, N. U., & Han, H. (2023). Linking local collaborative governance and public service delivery: mediating role of institutional capacity building. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 10(1), 906. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-02421-3
Refbacks
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
The copyright is reserved to Bulletin of Social Studies and Community Development that is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Address:
CV. IMRECS: Jalan Gagak I, Kecamatan Larangan, Kota Tangerang. Postal Code: 15155