PUBLIC

PRIVATE
Oleh: Azhar Kasim

PARTNERSHIP
Pengertian Public-Private
Partnership
1. Kerjasama pemerintah dengan privat
(swasta) dalam penyelenggaraan
pelayanan atau produksi barang publik,
dalam bentuk kontrak, franchises, atau
grants
2. Privatisasi proyek infrastruktur yang
kompleks dan melibatkan banyak pihak,
swasta dan pemerintah
Pengertian Public-Private
Partnership
3. Kolaborasi formal antara swasta (bisnis
privat), pemerintah daerah dan
pemimpin masyarakat untuk
memperbaiki kondisi fasilitas perkotaan,
seperti sekolah, pelatihan tenaga kerja
(job training), pembangunan perumahan,
dsb
Diagram Tentang Berbagai Barang & Jasa
E.S. Savas, 1982 Feasible

Private Goods Toll Goods

Toko, Bengkel Mobil Angkutan Umum
Perguruan Tinggi Jalan Tol
Restaurant, Hotel, Rumah Taman Nasional
Exclusion

Sakit TV Kabel, Asuransi

Common – Pool Collective Goods

Goods Taman Kota, Jalan Umum
Infeasible

Air Bawah Tanah, Udara Pemadam Kebakaran

Garam di Laut Vaksinasi
Sungai, Danau Mercu Suar, Siaran TV

Individual Joint
Consumption
EL/Public Service and Privatigation/2003
Keterkaitan Pemikiran Savas
dengan Harding & Preker
No Harding & Preker E. Savas
Private Toll Collective Common
Goods Goods Goods Pool Goods

V X
1 Budgetary Units

V V X
2 Autonomous Unit

3 Corporatized
Units V V X
V X
4 Privatized Units
 Figure 3.1 Diagram showing the exclusion and joint-
consumption properties of various goods & service. “Pure”
goods are shown at the four corner points
Consumption
Private Individual Joint Toll
Goods •Store-bought goods •Taxi Service •Restaurant •Mass Trasit •Communication •Cable Goods
(e.g., food, auto, housing) hotel service TV
•Professional education •Higher education •Bridge •Insurance
Feasible

•Fish in a creel turnpike •Weather

•Elective Surgery •Medical Care •Theater forecast
•Refuse removal Stadium • Water supply,
library Electric power,
Sewer service
•Elementary •National Parks
Exclusion

education
•On street parking
•Fish in stocked lake •Watching parade,
Fireworks, air show
•Open range •Central Park
•Rivers lake •Fire protection
•Streets
•Watching auto
Infeasible

•Water in underground aquifer Road race, •Police protection

marathon
•Air and water
Pollution control,
Common- •Vaccination lighthouse Collec-
•Fish in the sea
•Broadcast TV
Pool •Minerals in the ocean tive
•Air National defense
Goods Goods
 Figure 6.1 EXTENT OF STATE-OWNED ENTERPRISES,
BY COUNTRY (1980)
Private sector

n
io

ry
n
more than 75%

io
at

g
st

in
ic

al uct

ee d u
Public sector

y
un

ild
Ga ricit

rli s

n
Co rod
m
25% 50%

ay

Mo s

bu
rI
ne
om

ilw
t
st

l
to
lP

ip
ec
le c

s
Po

Sh
Ra
75%

El

Oi

St
Ai
Te
more than Australia na Australia
75%
Austria na Austria
Belgium na Belgium
Brazil Brazil
Britain Britain
Canada Canada
France na France
West West
Germany Germany
Holland na na Holland
India India
Italy na na Italy
 Figure 6.1 EXTENT OF STATE-OWNED ENTERPRISES,
BY COUNTRY (1980)
Private sector

n
t io

ry
n
more than 75%

io

g
st
ic a

in
ct

ee du
Public sector

y
un

ild
Co odu
Ga ricit

rli s

St r I n
m
25% 50%

ay

Mo s

bu
ne
om

ilw
t
st

l
to
lP

ip
ec

al
le c

s
Po

Sh
Ra
75%

El

Oi

Ai
Te
more than Japan na Japan
75%
Mexico Mexico
South na South
Korea Korea
Spain na Spain
Sweden na na Sweden
Switzerland na na na Switzerland
United United
stated stated

Source: The Economist, 4 January 1986, 72. Reproduced with permission. Includes Conrall.
Note: Extensive denationalization has taken place in Britain Since 1980.
 Figure 1: Traditional Conceptualization of
Relationship between Citizen and
Government – Baseline
Government
Obligations
Accountability
Administrative Obligations
Linkages

Citizen Obligation
Market
Transactions Market
 Figure 2: Conceptualization of Relationship between
Citizen and Government During the Orthodox Era (the late
19th century until the early 20th century)

Government
Accountability Obligations
Linkages Administrative Obligations

Citizen Obligation
Market
Market
Transactions
 Figure 3: Conceptualization of Relationship between
Citizen and Government during Self Examination Era (the
New Deal Era 1932-1950)

Government
Obligations
Accountability
Linkages Administrative Obligations

Citizen Obligation
Market
Transactions Market
 Figure 4: Conceptualization of Relationship between
Citizen and Government during the Era of Diversity (1960s-
1970s)

Government
Obligations
Accountability
Linkages Administrative Obligations

Citizen Obligation
Market
Transactions Market
 Figure 5: Conceptualization of Relationship between
Citizen and Government during the Era of Market-Based
Reforms (1980-2000s)
Government
Obligations
Accountability
Administrative Obligations
Linkages

Citizen Obligation
Market
Market
Transactions Market
 Citizen – State Contractual
Relationship
Factors of
during
Orthodox Era Self –
20 th
Diversity
Century
Market –
Citizen – (Citizen as Examination Implemen- Centered
Government Owner) (Citizen as tation Era Reforms
“Contract” Beneficiary) (Citizen as (Citizen as
Relationship Participant) Customer)
Persetujuan •Persetujuan •Persetujuan •Persetujuan •Persetujuan
untuk secara implisit secara implisit secara implisit secara implisit
hubungan melalui melalui melalui melibatkan
perjanjian penerusan penerusan penerusan pengaturan swasta
tempat tinggal tempat tinggal tempat tinggal melalui
dengan scope dengan scope dengan scope peningkatan
wilayah wilayah wilayah tempat tinggal
pemerintahan pemerintahan pemerintahan dengan scope
•Persetujuan •Persetujuan •Persetujuan bidang market
explisit atau explisit atau explisit atau •Persetujuan
penerusan penerusan penerusan eksplisit melalui
barang bukti barang bukti barang bukti partisipasi dan
melalui melalui melalui turunan barang
partisipasi politik partisipasi politik partisipasi politik bukti politik melalui
non-oartisipation
dalam market
 Citizen – State Contractual
Relationship during 20th Century
Factors of Orthodox Era Self – Diversity Market –
Citizen – (Citizen as Examination Implemen- Centered
Government Owner) (Citizen as tation Era Reforms
“Contract” Beneficiary) (Citizen as (Citizen as
Relationship Participant) Customer)
Obligasi •Warga negara •Warganegara •Warganegara •Wargenegara
(peraturan) adalah adalah penerima adalah adalah customer
warganegara participant pasif jasa participant aktif dalam market
dalam pemerintahan dalam dengan ketentuan
pemerintahan (new deal) operasional pemerintahan
pemerintahan dalam barang dan
•Partisipasi jasa
“grassroots”
dalam
mendukung atau
melawan policy
pemerintahan
 Citizen – State Contractual
Relationship during 20th Century
Factors of Orthodox Era Self – Diversity Market –
Citizen – (Citizen as Examination Implemen- Centered
Government Owner) (Citizen as tation Era Reforms
“Contract” Beneficiary) (Citizen as (Citizen as
Relationship Participant) Customer)
Obligasi •Pemerintahan •Pemerintahan •Pemerintahan •Menarik kembali
(peraturan) adalah hanya bertindak untuk memperluas batas keamanan
pemerintah terbatas kepada menyediakan batas keamanan sosial untuk
perlindungan batas keamanan nasional “disadvantage”
warganegara sosial untuk •pemerintah •Memberikan lebih
dari bahaya warga negara bertujuan untuk kebebasan bagi
“eksternal” (social security) menyediakan yang sudah sukses
•Melindungi dari perlindungan dari
monopoli perasaan
eksternal.
“Musuh” seperti
komunis
 Citizen – State Contractual
Relationship during 20th Century
Factors of Orthodox Era Self – Diversity Market –
Citizen – (Citizen as Examination Implemen- Centered
Government Owner) (Citizen as tation Era Reforms
“Contract” Beneficiary) (Citizen as (Citizen as
Relationship Participant) Customer)
Obligasi •Administration •Adminstration •Administrator •Administrator
(peraturan) sebagai suatu menjadikan sebagai sebagai audit
administration mekanisme “sadar diri” pelayanan sipil kontrak
•Administration menurut •Administrator
sebagai sosial kesadaan adalah
dan politik bersosialisasi enterpreneur
respon •Administrator
pada “grassroots”
atau “street-level”
 Citizen – State Contractual
Relationship during 20th Century
Factors of Orthodox Era Self – Diversity Market –
Citizen – (Citizen as Examination Implemen-tation Centered
Govern- Owner) (Citizen as Era (Citizen as Reforms
ment Beneficiary) Participant) (Citizen as
“Contract” Customer)
Relation-
ship
Pertanggung •Pertanggung- •Pertanggung- •Pertanggung- •Accountability
-jawaban/ jawaban melalui jawaban melalui jawaban melalui (pertanggung-
pengawasan prosedur prosedur prosedur jawaban) adalah
mekanisme mekanisme mekanisme mekanisme definisi orientasi
•Pengawasan •Pengawasan •Pengawasan politik aktif melalui
politik melalui politik melalui melalui pemilihan, efisiensi,
pemilihan, pemilihan, pembagian penyampaian
pembagian pembagian kekuasaan, dan secara efektif dari
kekuasaan, dan kekuasaan, dan kekeliruan legislatif outputs
kekeliruan kekeliruan dalam administrasi
legislatif dalam legislatif dalam
administrasi administrasi
 Citizen – State Contractual
Relationship during 20th Century
Factors of Orthodox Self – Diversity Market – Centered
Citizen – Era Examination Implementation Reforms (Citizen as
Govern- (Citizen (Citizen as Era (Citizen as Customer)
ment as Owner) Beneficiary) Participant)
“Contract”
Relation-
ship
Pertanggung •Kontrol melalui •Dalam kasus kontrak
-jawaban/ keterlibatan diluar jasa dan pekerjaan,
pengawasan langsung kontrol adalah to maintain
mekanisme warganegara atau melalui ketentuan resmi
keterlibatan dan kepabilitas audit
terhadap wakil terhadap pemerintahan
warganegara dalam hal referensi untuk
kontrak didalam market
•Dalam kasus swasta
market tidak terkontrol
 Citizen – State Contractual
Relationship during 20th Century
Factors of Orthodox Era Self – Diversity Market –
Citizen – (Citizen as Examination Implemen- Centered
Government Owner) (Citizen as tation Era Reforms
“Contract” Beneficiary) (Citizen as (Citizen as
Relationship Participant) Customer)
Interaksi State - •Interaksi •Pemerintahan •Pemerintahan •Pemerintahan
Market pemerintahan menjadi terlibat semakin terlibat semakin aktif dalam
dalam “market” dalam “market: dalan kontak militer market dengan
adalah terbatas untuk pengganti selama PD II menggunakan alat
untuk memecahkan kerugian disfungsi •Pemerintah market untuk
monopoli dan market (depresi) melakukan memberikan
memberantas •Mengambil kunci distribusi kembali pelayanan umum
kolusi (laissez faire) philosohy untuk kekayaan melalui •Pemerintahan
•Membuat pengeluaraan program menyerahkan
peraturan dalam •Pemerintahan pemerintahan beberapa pelayanan
industri mendominasi dalam pengadaan public kepada market
market selama PD sosial •Pemerintahan
II dipengaruhi oleh
globalisasi dalam
ekonomi pasar
(market)
Pengaruh Kompetisi
Market Quasi Non Market
Competition Market Competition
Productivity +++ + 0
Cost Reduction +++ + 0
Quality + ++ 0
Fees ++ + 0
Personnel -- 0 0
Work Condition +++ ++ 0
Work Load + + 0
Employment Security -- 0 to - 0
Risk of Efficiency Loss Yes No No
Risk of Bad Governance Yes No No
Interdependence of Goals
(Selected Goals)
If…then Market Quasi Non-market
Competition Market Competition
Efficiency & Productivity +++ + ---
Quality ++ +++ 0
Employment - 0 +++
Kompetisi (1)
1. Elemen kompetisi merupakan unsur
penting dalam menciptakan pelayanan
publik yang efisien dan berkualitas
2. Market competition adalah bentuk
persaingan yang paling cocok untuk
persaingan antar penyelenggara
pelayanan publik oleh sesama oranisasi
privat (private-private competition)
maupun antar org privat dan publik
(private-public competition)
Kompetisi (2)
3. Quasi market adalah bentuk
persaingan antar sesama instansi
pemerintah penyelenggara
pelayanan publik (public-public
competition)
4. Non-market competition adalah
bentuk persaingan berdasarkan tolok
banding (benchmarking)
Kompetisi (3)
5. Privatisasi menjadi lebih mahal
apabila tidak ada persaingan.
6. Proses privatisasi yang tidak
transparan dan tanpa
persaingan sangat rawan
terhadap praktek korupsi, kolusi
dan nepotisme
 Characteristics of For-profit
versus Nonprofit Governance
For – Profit Sector NonProfit Sector
•Grow market capitalization Mission •Delivery services to key
through products and constituencies
services

•Financial performance Measure •Financial performance

balanced with other
measures

•CEO is sole boss Leadership •CEO reports to non

executive chair
 Characteristics of For-profit
versus Nonprofit
For – Profit Sector
Governance
NonProfit Sector
•Small Board •Large
•Executive committee is Composition •Executive committee is vital but
relatively inactive can get out of control
•No operations •Nominating committee
committee constantly at work
•Operations committee essential
•Predictable profiles, Board •Diverse profiles often
often senior business Members incorporating potential financial
professionals donors
•Predictable roles •Diverse roles
•Predictable hours •Antisocial hours
•Long service •High turnover
•Highly paid •Expected to donate
 Table 1: Client –
Contractor – Relations
Characteristics of
Goods and Service
Type of Interaction
between Client and
Type of Market and
Supplier Structure
Contractor
Low specificity •Weak position of •High accessibility to
“mass production” contractor due to number market
Low strategic of available •Big private enterprise
relevance •Weak adjustment are dominating
flexibility, low flexibility of •Risk of oligopolies
contractor sufficient
•Price as central parameter
•Local availability of
contractor is not relevant
•Short-term relation,
procurement
 Table 1: Client –
Contractor – Relations
Characteristics of
Goods and Service
Type of Interaction between
Client and Contractor
Type of Market and
Supplier Structure
High specificity •Strong position of contractor •Low accessibility to
“core business” due to highly specialized market
strategic relevance production •Local government
•High adjustment flexibility and units are dominating
high flexibility of contractor •Risk of monopoly
necessary
•Cooperation determines
specification of contract; not
necessarily price as central
parameter
•Local availability relevant
•Long-term partnership
preferred
Fig.1: Institutional Choices for Public
Service production
High

D A
Specificity

C B
Low
Low High
Strategic Relevance
Picot and Wolff 1994, 78 (fig.5)
 Fig.2: Institutional Choices AND Market
Situations
High
Specificity Internal
Lo production
Co St ng-
m ra te “Make”
pe t e rm
gic c

Monopoly
t it i pa ont
on rtn rac
be er tin
tw sh g
Sh ee ips
or n
pu
t -t bli
er ca
m nd
co

Oligopolistic
nt pr
r

markets
“Buy” a ct i iva
ng te High
procurement Strategic
Relevance
Industrial mass Pluralistic
production markets
 Competition between Public
& Private Service producers
Competition
Arrangements

Quasi-Market Non-Market
Market Competitions
Competition Competition
Private-Private Competition

Public-Private Competition

Intra-Unit Competition

Inter-Unit Competition
CONTRACTING COMPETITIVE
OUT SERVICE SERVICE
DELIVERY ARRANGEMENT

Private Monopoly Competition

Unresponsive Improve Quality
Expensive Reduce Costs