西南交通大学学报

第 55 卷 第 3 期 Vol. 55 No. 3
JOURNAL OF SOUTHWEST JIAOTONG UNIVERSITY
2020 年 6 月 June 2020

ISSN: 0258-2724 DOI：10.35741/issn.0258-2724.55.3.42

Research article

Social Science

EFFECTIVENESS OF STREET VENDOR REGULATION POLICIES TO

IMPROVE PUBLIC ORDER IN YOGYAKARTA, INDONESIA

印度尼西亚日惹街头供应商监管政策对改善公共秩序的有效性

Argo Pambudi
Public Administration Department, Social Sciences Faculty, Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta
Yogyakarta, Indonesia, argopambudiuny@gmail.com, argo_pambudi@uny.ac.id

Received: March 3, 2020 ▪ Review: May 20, 2020 ▪ Accepted: May 30, 2020

This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)

Abstract
Street vendors represent a phenomenon that occurs in urban areas, both in developing and developed
countries. Their existence is supported by the entrepreneurial spirit of the vendors. However, the practice
could be improved if street vendors were made aware of the rights of the community whose public space
they utilize and must respect. A well-organized street vendor will benefit various parties such as tourists
and will support the community’s economy as well. This study aims to analyze the level of success of the
implementation of government policy regarding the regulation of street vendors in Yogyakarta and
surrounding areas. The method used in this study is qualitative descriptive analysis, which builds a
conceptual model that reflects the actual hidden phenomenon. The data for the study were collected
through observations, interviews, and an exploration of the relevant literature. The results found that the
licensing regulations as stipulated by the decision of the mayor of Yogyakarta are not implemented in
accordance with the provisions. An evaluation of the implementation of licensing rules shows that they
have not yet reached the most beneficial results. Some street vendors cannot implement them due to a
combination of several factors, namely the importance of their economic survival, the non-financial
“costs” that street vendors would incur, and the lack of knowledge about the substance of the policies
governing street vendors.

Keywords: Public Policy, Regulatory Policy, Street Vendor

摘要 街头小贩代表着在发展中国家和发达国家的城市地区都发生的一种现象。他们的存在受到供
应商的企业家精神的支持。但是，如果让街头小贩了解他们使用并必须尊重其公共空间的社区的
权利，则可以改善这种做法。井井有条的摊贩将使游客等各方受益，并将支持社区的经济。本研
究旨在分析日惹及周边地区有关街头小贩监管的政府政策实施的成功程度。本研究中使用的方法
是定性描述性分析，它建立了一个反映实际隐藏现象的概念模型。该研究的数据是通过观察，访
 2 Pambudi / Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University / Vol.55 No.3 June 2020
谈和对相关文献的探索而收集的。结果发现，日惹市长的决定所规定的许可规定没有按照规定执
行。对许可规则执行情况的评估表明，它们尚未达到最有益的结果。由于一些因素的综合考虑，
一些街头小贩无法实施这些措施，这些因素包括其经济生存的重要性，街头小贩将招致的非金融
“成本”，以及缺乏有关街头小贩管理政策实质的知识。
关键词: 公共政策，监管政策，摊贩
I. INTRODUCTION
Public policies are governmental instruments
developed and implemented to regulate and
protect citizens’ activities; an example is street
vendors’ activities that are spread throughout
cities worldwide, both in developing and
developed countries. Public policy is also defined
as “activities of what the government wants to do
and what the government does not want to do to
achieve certain public goals”. This paper explains
and discusses the street vendor regulations that
are being implemented in Yogyakarta City,
Indonesia, based on public policy theory. The
results of this paper are expected to improve the
formulation quality of public policy by
empowering effort, public order, and facilitating
the entrepreneurial spirit. The discussion focuses
on the effectiveness of regulative and protective
functions of that policy. The discussion material
is based on the descriptive-qualitative analysis of
the implementation study in Yogyakarta in 2017.
The Yogyakarta district, and its surrounding
local government area, have a great number of
street vendors. They have some potential
advantages to support the government’s program,
by decreasing unemployment and increasing
social welfare; for example, lifting Yogyakarta’s
image as a development program center for small
enterprises and informal businesses, to a main
tourism destination program, and facilitating the
entrepreneurial spirit of street vendor. On the
other hand, the large number of street vendors
has developed some problems. One of them is
that many street vendors interfere with the public
interest and occupy public facilities, especially
pedestrian and disabled spaces. They have to be
solved urgently by government – as well as in
Yogyakarta. The vast number of street vendors
and their derivative problems are raised in this
research.
High population growth that is not balanced
with existing employment, has caused street
vendors to spread to many areas. Each region has
its own way to regulate street vendors, but not all
street vendors in Yogyakarta are arranged neatly.
They are only arranged in an organized manner
in tourist areas. The government should govern
the street vendors, not only in certain tourist areas,
but in all Yogyakarta areas. It would be better if
street vendors were aware of other people’s rights
to public space, because well-organized street
vendors benefit various sectors, such as tourism
and the community's economy.
The research questions of this paper are: (1)
Which government policies are currently used for
street vendor arrangements in Yogyakarta and its
surrounding areas? (2) Are these government
policies designed to increase empowerment,
improve public order, and facilitate the
entrepreneurial spirit of street vendors? (3) How
are the government's policies being
implemented? (4) Have the government's policies
given maximum benefit to the public through
improvement and increasing facilities among the
street vendors? (5) What causes government
policies not to provide maximum benefits?
II. LITERATURE REVIEW AND
HYPOTHESIS
In this section, we reviewed some literature as
references to explain main aspects related to this
topic in a deductive manner. The increasing
migration of low-skill workers from rural areas to
cities is an important factor that could increase
the number of street vendors; [1] states that after
the monetary crisis in 1998, there was a rapid
increase in the number of street vendors. A study
in Botswana [2] showed there were some reasons
that triggered workers to change professions and
become street vendors, such as a lack of job
security in the private sector, underpayment,
savings, and the effort it requires to become an
entrepreneur.
Commonly, public in developing countries
recognize street vendors in these countries as
self-employed traders. They create jobs and sell
goods at reasonable prices [1], [3]. While street
vendors contribute significantly to the urban
economy, urban planners sometimes view their
presence as a sign of chaos or underdevelopment.
These vendors are the first to be driven out by
urban policies created to modernize cities [4], [5].
Recent literature categorizes street vendors as
legal, semilegal, and illegal [6]. Some of the

street vendors cause direct harm to citizens or
damage the state as an institution [6]. Because
street vendors operate in public spaces, legality
and illegality issues arise. When considering the
socio-spatial conflict of public space, literature
analyzes the collective action of street vendors as
a strategy of avoidance or resistance [7] or as a
struggle for the street vendors’ right [8].
According to [9], a new generation of street
vendors is emerging, characterized by
sophisticated business techniques, such as
branding, international supply chain management,
and sophisticated information technology. The
authors argue that this newer generation of
vendors has either a university or secondary level
of education. In contrast, the older generation of
street vendors sell low-cost products and services
with limited technical skills. The older generation
also serves local and foreign customers.
Every day, the conflict between street vendors
and municipal authorities can be found in most
major cities around the world [10]. Street vendors
as a public issue is related to the conflict over
public spaces between the government and street
vendors (i.e., each has a different interpretation
and definition of what constitutes a public space).
The government has a vision to maintain city
order and control the street vendors in public
spaces; however, street vendors interpret public
spaces as strategic locations to conduct their
business. The differences in interpretation have
encouraged the birth of the street vendor
movement [11]. It drives the governments of
each city to intervene in regulating street vendor
activity in public spaces. In order to regulate
street vendors, municipal governments employ
various strategies and ordinances to control street
vendors in the urban environment, such as
through licensing requirements, zoning, and
relocation [10].
A. Public Policy and Its Implementation
Public policy is the principle guide for the
administrative executive branches of the state
with regard to a class of issues, in a manner
consistent with law and institutional customs. In
other words, public policy is what the
government chooses to do and not to do
inmanaging and regulating public affairs. Public
policy also defined as a “standing decision”
characterized by behavioural consistency and
repetitiveness on those who make it and abide by
it [12]. In Public Policy, Howlett and Ramesh
argue that this approach does not suitable with
the wealth of empirical studies pointing different
set of factors responsible for general patterns of
policy making. Public policy making often
3
applies general assumptions about political life to
specific case studies. [13] define public policy as
“a projected program of values and practices”.
[14] defines public policy as a government action
to achievethe goals or objectives. Based on these
definitions, the keyword is "a decision to achieve
goals".
Meanwhile, the implementation of public
policy is what the government do to achieve its
goal contained in its statutes. Therefore,
the“implementation research” focuses to answer
“What happens in the design, implementation,
administration, operation, service and outcomes
of the government policies and programs [15]?
While, Wethan contrasted with the ideal values
of improving public order, facilitating
entrepreneurial spirit, and other ideal public
policynorm. All of those have to be contained in
the government decision’s design, rule
implementation, and other successful public
policy as seen in Table 1. The government
concept in this paperhas broader meaning.It
includes all of the public organization, not only
executive institution branch, namely legislative,
executive, and judicial institutions, etc. In general,
public policy is embodied in the legalistic rule of
the implementation of the state, such as: Law,
Act (Undang-Undang), Government Regulations
(Peraturan Pemerintah), Ministerial Decrees
(Keputusan Menteri), Regional Regulations
(Peraturan Daerah), Governors Decisions
(Keputusan Gubernur), Mayor Decisions
(Keputusan Walikota), and so on. The public
policy successful indicator can be seen in Table 1.
Table 1.
Successful public policy indicators [14]
No. Indicators Questions
Has the desired result been
1 Effectiveness
achieved?
How far has the results achieved
2 Adequacy
to solved the problem?
Are costs and benefits equitably
3 Equality distributed to different groups of
people?
Do the policy outcomes be the
4 Responsiveness preference of the target group
and can satisfy them?
Are the results of the policy
5 Accuracy
beneficial to the target group?
From Table 1, it can be inferred that the street
vendor policy in Yogyakarta is a study to
understand the successful of public policy,
explain the reality of the policy, the
implementation results, and the relationship
patterns among variables that influence it.
Furthermore, this study also looked at the
compliance of the actors involved, namely
 4 Pambudi / Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University / Vol.55 No.3 June 2020

government (bureaucracy) and the community as policy, researchers seldom to explain about how
the target group of the street vendor regulation much impact they have. Deductive logic in the
policy in accordance with the standards set by the literature review matches and correct when
policy. In addition, our study also looked whether applied in empirical contexts policy regulation of
the policy’simplementation is felt by the target street vendors on field research.
group directly or indirectly as intended by policy
makers. Indirect target groups can be socio- III. RESEARCH METHOD
economic consequences of policies perceived to This paper uses Descriptive-Qualitative
be beneficial to society. Analysis Methods and Content Analysis related to
It is known that the successful of public policy the public policy implemented by the government
indicators are defined as: (1) the success in Yogyakarta during 2017. Descriptive
implementation of the norms contained [16], [17], qualitative analysis is carried out in order to
[18], [19]. The success implementation of policy describe the facts, conditions, or symptoms that
is determined by two variables, namely, content appear so that it can describe all the symptoms
of policy and context of policy. and circumstances that exist in accordance with
the actual situation at the time the research was
Table 2.
Policy variables content [16]
conducted. Descriptive-Qualitative Analysis is
inductively and deductively done alternately for
Larson (1980) Van Horn Mazmanian & building conceptual model which reflected
(1975) Sabatier (1983) hidden phenomenon that fragmented previously.
1. Vague 1. Clarity 1. Precision and Meanwhile the deductive Content Analysis is
2. Unrealistic 2. The clarity of the used to discuss formal regulation that has
goal contradiction target developed on the basis of a theory reviewed.
between 2. Theory of Content analysis is used to obtain information
policy studs causal or causal
(initial policy) relationships
from communications delivered in the form of
and target used symbol that can be documented. This analysis
(goals) can be used to analyse all forms of
3. SOP communications, such as newspaper, book,
(standard
movie, and et cetera. By using this analysis
operating
procedure) method, an understanding of the various contents
of the communication message delivered by mass
Table 3.
media or from other sources can be obtained
Policy variables context [16] objectively, systematically, and relevantly.
The data were collected by extensive
Larson Edward (1980) Mazmanian & observations, interviews, and research of relevant
(1980) Sabatier (1983) documents. The data collection process involved
Changes in Communication, 1. Variation students that were enrolled in Implementation of
the transition and law Public Policy classes in the Public
economic clarity 2. The Administration department of Social Science
environment consistency attention of the
mass media
faculty at Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta
3. Public (Yogyakarta State University). The research
support method employed qualitative data collection.
4. The Analysis strategies are open-ended and
amount of support
exploratory, as suggested by [21]. The
and resources
5. Support exploratory questions are typically used for
of the "ruler" qualitative inquiry when: (a) there is little
knowledge in a particular research area; (b)
The creation process of public policy that existing research is confusing, contradictory, or
emerged the policy content is determined by stagnant; or (c) the topic is highly complex. The
many factors. According to [20], there are 4 questions meet the aims of exploratory questions
factors that most strongly and most often as mentioned [22]:
influence it: (1) public opinion, (2) interest 1. Definitional: What is the nature of this
groups, (3) the intervention of political parties, phenomenon? What are its defining features?
and (4) other factors. The public interest has the 2. Descriptive: What kinds or varieties does
greatest impact than the other variables, but it is the phenomenon appear in? What aspects does it
difficult to measure. When variables do influence have?
 5

3. Interpretive: Why does this phenomenon
occur? How does it happen over the time?
4. Critical/action: What is wrong (or right)
about the phenomenon? How can it be made
better?
5. Deconstruction: What assumptions are
made in this research? Whose social or political
interests are served?
IV. RESULT AND DISCUSSION
The results of this study indicate that: (1) The
central government had formally regulated street
vendor policies, such as acts (Undang-Undang),
government regulations (Peraturan Pemerintah),
presidential decrees (Peraturan Presiden), and
regulations from the Minister of Home Affairs.
All of these regulations are ineffective due to
lack of policy statutes. Some policies are too
brief, and few mention street vendors as
economic agents with a high level of
entrepreneurial spirit. Some policies are too
detailed to implement nationally. Therefore, these
policies shackle local knowledge and thus create
subordinate damage. This centralized street
vendor arrangement format reduces the local
government's autonomy to solve specific
problems in their respective areas – including the
Yogyakarta district area and its surroundings – of
which street vendors are its trademark.
Empirically, the government's concern is
insufficient for street vendors that sell many
goods.
From the government’s point of view, street
vendors and their merchandise are considered the
same while in reality, street vendors and their
merchandise have distinct characteristics. The
government reluctantly supports the development
of street vendor businesses. Many kinds of street
vendors have developed organically without
regulation, such as culinary; souvenir; book and
magazine; automotive maintenance, and other
vendors.
There is no regulatory policy that specifically
regulates street vendor activities. (3) Placement
of specific or similar goods of street vendor
locations have been sufficient to date, but others
are less coordinated and not included in
government programs, such as tourism programs
and facility building programs (for disabilities).
People are empowered by becoming street
vendors, improving urban aesthetics, and making
Yogyakarta a student-friendly city.
Policy makers are not facilitating the
entrepreneurial spirit of street vendors. (4)
Regulating competition among street vendors has
not been a government priority in supporting
economic empowerment. (5) The licensing rules
as stipulated in the Mayor's Decree of
Yogyakarta are not executed in accordance with
the provisions. Evaluation of the implementation
of these licensing rules has not achieved the best
results. Some street vendors cannot implement
these because of the combination of several
factors, namely the demand for life of street
vendors, non-financial "costs" that must be spent,
and the lack of knowledge of the substance of the
policy that manage the street vendors. The result
of this research is feasible to be used as the basic
academic script to review and rearrange these
policies, or create an integrated strategy on the
implementation of these street vendor policies.

Table 4.
Resume of street vendor policies
No. Policy
Central Government Policy
1. Act No. 20 of 2008
concerning Micro, Small
and Medium Enterprises
(UU No. 20 Tahun 2008
tentang Usaha Mikro, Kecil,
dan Menengah)
2. Law No. 11 of 2009
concerning Social Welfare
(UU Nomor 11 Tahun 2009
tentang Kesejahteraan
Sosial)
3. Government Regulation No.
39 of 2012 concerning
Implementation of Social
Welfare
(Peraturan Pemerintah No.
Content of policy
- Just mention the existence of
street vendors at a glance
- Street vendors are not
entering as part of micro, small and
medium enterprises (MSME)
The term of street vendor is unknown
in this Act
- As Implementation rule
- Just mention the street
vendors at a glance
- Street vendor as a target
group of empowering social program.
Implication
The street vendors do not receive same
treatment of government as received by
MSME
The term of street vendor is unrecognized
in the body of the Central Government act,
but it is recognized in the implementation
rules (PP). It means an inconsistency item.
In the implementation rules (PP), street
vendor as a target group of social
empowerment program, not an economic
empowerment program.
- It can be interpreted that the street
vendors are included as persons with social
problems.
- Equal to other people with social
problems, such as poverty, neglect,
 6 Pambudi / Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University / Vol.55 No.3 June 2020

39 tahun 2012 tentang
Penyelenggaraan
Kesejahteraan Sosial)
4. Presidential Regulation No.
125 of 2012 concerning
Coordinating the
Arrangement and
Empowerment of Street
Vendors
(Peraturan Presiden Nomor
125 tahun 2012 tentang
Koordinasi Penataan dan
Pemberdayaan Pedagang
Kaki Lima)
3. Regulation of the Minister
of Home Affairs No. 41 of
2012 concerning
Arrangement and
Empowerment of Street
Vendors
(Peraturan Menteri Dalam
Negeri Nomor 41 Tahun
2012 tentang Penataan dan
Pemberdayaan Pedagang
Kaki Lima)
There was no pressure in economic disability, and so on. So the type of
empowerment. coaching is not economic coaching but
social coaching.
- The applied policy types tend to
be policies with distributive formats – not
regulative and empowerment and
facilitating of entrepreneurial spirit of the
street vendor.
- The government is pessimistic
and does not take advantage of the potential
revenue of the state (taxes) and exploits it
for other purposes, such as the distributor of
government school instructional texts,
authorized distributors of Official
Document, as filters of pirated manuscripts,
plagiarism, etc.
- Issued later or 6 months after - Violate legal order so that its
Ministerial Regulation No. 41/ 2012. legitimacy is questioned.
- The content of this regulation - What is the urgency of this
is not only the direction of provision in the Presidential Regulation
coordination, but also in the form of made?
detailed (specific) provisions that are
binding nationally.
Implications:
1. This regulation material
reduces the right of regional autonomy.
2. Since the empirical problems
in the field are distinctive or specific
and different between regions, this
Presidential Regulation becomes
ineffective.
- The regulation is too specific
and detail
- This regulation material
reduces the right of regional autonomy.
- Since the empirical problems
in the field are distinctive or specific
and different between regions, this
Ministerial Regulation becomes
ineffective.

All of the research findings above indicate
unfavourable conditions for the empowerment
and development of the entrepreneurial spirit
among street vendors in Yogyakarta and the
surrounding areas. Therefore, public order cannot
be achieved through the application of the
regulation policy. There are many pieces of
public policy literature reviewed above. The
research findings are feasible as a basis for
consideration for rearranging and reorganizing
the street vendors policy for the future.
V. CONCLUSION
The conclusions of the paper are as follows:
(1) The street vendor term is almost unknown in
the act that must regulate it. It was just mentioned
at a glance in the Micro, Small, and Medium
Enterprises Act, and it was not included as part of
MSME (micro, small and medium enterprises)
because it does not grant privilege rights, special
rights, advantage, or immunity granted by the
governments; (2) Central government policies
that regulate street vendors are limited, but
covered a very large domain up to the national
level. This centralized arrangement format
reduces the autonomy rights of Local
Government to solve specific problem in their
respective areas; (3) There is wrong and
inconsistent thought. The street vendor problem
is a local issue, not a national issue. Then, why
are local public issues resolved nationally by
central government regulations? The problem of
street vendors has no domino effect that can
spread to the national level. The greatest effect
occurs between adjacent cities or districts, not
within the scope of inter-provincial or the
national level. Based on this logic, rules on street
vendors by the lowest local government are
needed; (4) The central government policy to
govern the street vendors in Indonesia
(Presidential Regulation No. 125/2012) is too
specific. It results in less effective regulations,
less fit, or less appropriate associated with the

format of real problems of street vendors in
Yogyakarta and the surrounding areas. The
research results show that the government does
not facilitate the street vendors and does not
empower the entrepreneurial spirit among street
vendors in Yogyakarta. Therefore, the public
order-related street vendor won't be able to be
achieved through the implementation of those
regulation policies.
Finally, the government should review and
revise all the components of the policy system
governing the existence of these street vendors,
ranging from strategic policies at the national
level to implementation policies at the local
government level. The street vendor term should
be approved and inserted as a part of the Micro,
Small, and Medium Enterprises Act so it will be
able to receive the same treatment of government
as other Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises.
REFERENCES
[1] BHOWMIK, S.K. (2005) Street
vendors in Asia: A review. Economic and
Political Weekly, 40 (20-23), pp. 2256-2264.
[2] JOSEPH, M. (2011) Beyond
modernist planning: Understanding urban
street vending in Botswana. In: Proceedings
of the RC21 Conference on ‘The Struggle to
Belong: Dealing with Diversity in 21st
Century Urban Settings, Amsterdam, July
2011. Available from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/257
943477_Beyond_modernist_planning_unders
tanding_urban_street_vending_in_Botswana.
[3] CROSSA, V. (2016) Reading for
difference on the street: De-homogenising
street vending in Mexico City. Urban
Studies, 53 (2), pp. 287-301.
[4] BROMLEY, R. (2000) Street vending
and public policy: A global review.
International Journal of Sociology and
Social Policy, 20 (1/2), pp. 1-28.
[5] HUNT, S. (2009) Citizenship's place:
The state's creation of public space and street
vendors' culture of informality in Bogota,
Colombia. Environment and Planning D:
Society and Space, 27 (2), pp. 331-351.
[6] MORRIS, J. and POLESE, A. (2015)
Quo Vadis informality? In: MORRIS, J. and
POLESE, A. (eds.) Informal Economies in
Post-Socialist Spaces: Practices, Institutions
and Networks. London: Palgrave, pp. 294-
299.
7
[7] HUMMEL, C. (2017) Disobedient
markets: Street vendors, enforcement, and
state intervention in collective action.
Comparative Political Studies, 50 (11), pp.
1524-1555.
[8] SWIDER, S. (2015) Reshaping
China's urban citizenship: Street vendors,
Chengguan and struggles over the right to the
city. Critical Sociology, 41 (4-5), pp. 701-
716.
[9] MANEEPONG, C. and WALSH, J.C.
(2013) A new generation of Bangkok Street
vendors: Economic crisis as opportunity and
threat. Cities, 34, pp. 37-43.
[10] WENG, C.Y. (2013) Accommodate
street vendors during the urban development
process: with two empirical cases of Zhu
Lian (ZL), and Guan Dong (GD) public
markets in Hsinchu City, Taiwan. Doctoral
thesis, Massachusetts Institute of
Technology.
[11] HERMAWATI, R., ABDOELLAH,
O.S., GUNAWAN, B., and RIAWANTI, S.
(2019) The social movement of street
vendors to maintain their business places in
Bandung. Masyarakat, Kebudayaan dan
Politik, 32 (1), pp. 1-15.
[12] JONES, C.O. (2001) Introduction to
the Study of Public Policy. 4th ed. Orlando,
Florida: Harcourt College Publishers.
[13] HOWLETT, M., RAMESH, M., and
PERL, A. (2009) Studying Public Policy:
Policy Cycles and Policy Subsystems, Vol. 3.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[14] DUNN, W.N. (2012) Public Policy
Analysis: An Introduction. 5th ed. London,
New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis
Group.
[15] WERNER, A. (2004) A Guide to
Implementation Research. Washington,
District of Columbia: The Urban Institute
Press.
[16] MAZMANIAN, D.A. and
SABATIER, P.A. (1983) Implementation
and Public Policy. Glenview, Illinois: Scott,
Foresman.
[17] GRINDLE, M.S. (ed.) (1980) Politics
and Policy Implementation in the Third
World. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton
University Press.
 8 Pambudi / Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University / Vol.55 No.3 June 2020

[18] LARSON, J.S. (1980) Why 比较政治研究，50（11），第 1524-1555

Government Programs Fail: Improving 页。
Policy Implementation. New York: Praeger. [8] SWIDER，S.（2015）重塑中国的城市
[19] VAN METER, D.S. and VAN
公民：街头小贩，城关和城市权之争。批
HORN, C.E. (1975) The policy
implementation process: A conceptual 判社会学, 41（4-5），第 701-716 页。
framework. Administration & Society, 6 (4), [9] MANEEPONG，C。和 WALSH，J.C
pp. 445-488. 。（2013）新一代的曼谷街头小贩：经济
[20] BURSTEIN, P. (2018) The 危机既是机遇又是威胁。城市，34，第
Determinants of Public Policy: What Matters 37-43 页。
and How Much. Policy Studies Journal, 48,
[10] WENG，C.Y.（2013）在城市发展过
pp. 87-110.
[21] POPE, C., VAN ROYEN, P., and 程中适应街头小贩：在台湾新竹市有两个
BAKER, R. (2002) Qualitative methods in 朱对于（阴影）和关东（GD）公共市场
research on healthcare quality. BMJ Quality 的经验案例。麻省理工学院博士学位论文
& Safety, 11 (2), pp. 148-152. 。
[22] ELLIOTT, R. (2000) Rigor in [11] HERMAWATI，R.，ABDOELLAH，
Psychotherapy Research: The Search for O.S.，B. GUNAWAN，和 RIAWANTI，
Appropriate Methodologies. Toledo, Ohio:
S.（2019）街头小贩的社会运动，以维持
University of Toledo.
其在万隆的营业场所。社会，文化与政治
，32（1），第 1-15 页。
参考文: [12] JONES，C.O。（2001）公共政策研
究导论。第四版。佛罗里达奥兰多：哈考
[1] BHOWMIK，S.K。（2005）亚洲的街
特学院出版社。
头小贩：回顾。经济和政治周刊，40（
[13] HOWLETT，M.，RAMESH，M., 和
20-23），第 2256-2264 页。
PERL，A.（2009）研究公共政策：政策
[2] JOSEPH，M.（2011）超越现代主义规 周期和政策子系统，第 1 卷。3.牛津：牛
划：了解博茨瓦纳的城市街道自动售货机
津大学出版社。
。于：RC21 会议的会议记录，“为归属而 [14] DUNN，W.N。（2012）公共政策分
奋斗：应对 21 世纪城市环境中的多样性” 析：简介。第五版。伦敦，纽约：劳特利
，阿姆斯特丹，2011 年 7 月。 奇，泰勒和弗朗西斯集团。
[3] CROSSA，V.（2016）阅读街头差异： [15] WERNER，A。（2004）实施研究指
墨西哥城街头自动贩卖的均质化。城市研 南。华盛顿哥伦比亚特区：城市研究所出
究，53（2），第 287-301 页。 版社。
[4] BROMLEY，R.（2000）街头自动贩卖 [16] MAZMANIAN，D.A. 和 SABATIER
与公共政策：全球回顾。国际社会学与社 ，P.A.（1983）实施与公共政策。伊利诺
会政策杂志，20（1/2），第 1-28 页。 伊州格伦维尤：工头斯科特。
[5] HUNT，S.（2009）公民身份：国家在 [17] GRINDLE，硕士（编。）（1980）第
哥伦比亚波哥大创立的公共空间和街头小 三世界的政治与政策实施。新泽西州普林
贩的非正式文化。环境与规划 D：社会与 斯顿：普林斯顿大学出版社。
空间，27 (2)，第 331-351 页。 [18] LARSON，J.S。（1980）为什么政府
[6] MORRIS，J. 和 POLESE，A.（2015） 计划失败：改善政策实施。纽约：普拉格
瓦迪斯的非正式性？在：后社会主义空间 。
的非正式经济：实践，制度和网络中， [19] D.S. VAN METER 和 C.E. VAN
MORRIS，J。和 POLESE，A。（编辑） HORN（1975）政策实施过程：概念框架
。伦敦：帕尔格雷夫，第 294-299 页。 。行政与社会，6（4），第 445-488 页。
[7] HUMMEL，C.（2017）不听话的市场
：街头小贩，执法和国家干预集体行动。
 9

[20] BURSTEIN，P.（2018）公共政策的
决定因素：重要和重要。政策研究期刊，
48，第 87-110 页。
[21] POPE ， C. ， VAN ROYEN ， P., 和
BAKER，R.（2002）研究医疗质量的定性
方法。英国医学杂志质量与安全，11（2
），第 148-152 页。
[22] ELLIOTT，R.（2000）心理治疗研究
中的严格：寻找适当的方法。俄亥俄州托
莱多：托莱多大学。
1