The Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) is an index which ranks countries "by their perceived levels of public sector corruption, as determined by expert assessments and opinion surveys." The CPI generally defines corruption as an "abuse of entrusted power for private gain". Corruption Index In Indonesia Jakarta, January 31st, 2023– On this day (31/1/2023), Transparency International launched the Corruption Perception Index (CPI) 2022 results worldwide with the theme: Corruption, Conflict, and Security. The CPI is a composite indicator to measure perceptions of public sector corruption on a scale of 0 (very corrupt) to 100 (very clean) in 180 countries and territories based on a combination of 13 global surveys and assessments of corruption according to business sector perceptions and expert judgment since 1995. The theme was raised to remind governments around the world that corrupt practices can undermine political, social, and economic stability, which in the end, will threaten peace, safety, and security in general. Corruption can also create fertile ground for organized crime, terrorism, and even war, as impunity continues to exist through the complicity of corrupt public and law enforcement officials. Since it was launched for the first time in 1995, Indonesia has been one of the countries whose corruption situation has been monitored regularly. The 2022 Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) demonstrates that Indonesia continues to experience severe challenges in fighting corruption. “Indonesia’s CPI in 2022 is at a score of 34/100 and is ranked 110 out of 180 countries surveyed. This score is down 4 points from last 2021, which was at a score of 38/100. This score is down 4 points from 2021, the most drastic decline since 1995.” told Wawan Suyatmiko, Deputy Secretary General of Transparency International Indonesia. With this result, Indonesia could only increase its CPI score by 2 points from a score of 32 over the last decade since 2012. This condition shows that the response to corruption practices is still slow and worsens due to stakeholders’ lack of factual support. Results of Indonesia’s 8 composite indicators on CPI 2022: ● Three data sources experienced a decrease compared to the previous year’s findings: PRS, which fell 13 points; IMD World Competitiveness Yearbook, which fell 5 points; and PERC Asia, which fell 3 points. ● Three data sources experienced stagnation: Global Insight, Bertelsmann Transformation Index, and the Economist Intelligence Unit. ● Two data sources experienced a one-point increase, namely the World Justice Project – Rule of Law Index and the Varieties of Democracy Project (VDem). Nonetheless, the indicators for both data sources are exclusively contributed by the increase in the general aggregate regionally. This is because in the last five years, the WJP-ROL Index and the VDem have always been far below and the lowest when viewed from the average annual CPI score during the previous two decades Relationship Between Income Distribution and Land Distribution In Indonesia, there exists a complex relationship between income distribution and land distribution. Here's an explanation of how these two factors are interconnected: ● Historical Context: Indonesia's history is marked by a legacy of colonialism and land concentration. During the Dutch colonial period, vast tracts of land were controlled by a small elite, leading to significant income inequality. After gaining independence in 1945, land reforms were initiated to address this issue, aiming to redistribute land to the landless peasants. ● Land Ownership: Land distribution is a fundamental factor influencing income distribution in Indonesia. Land ownership patterns play a crucial role in determining who benefits from agriculture, which is a significant source of income for a large portion of the population. Unequal land ownership can lead to a concentration of income among those who control larger parcels of land. ● Agricultural Productivity: Land distribution affects agricultural productivity. Small- scale farmers with limited land may struggle to achieve economies of scale, resulting in lower agricultural output and income. Conversely, those with larger land holdings often have access to better resources and can generate higher incomes. ● Urban-Rural Divide: Indonesia's income distribution is also influenced by the urban- rural divide. Land distribution disparities can be more pronounced in rural areas where agricultural land is a primary source of income. Rural communities may face challenges related to landlessness and limited access to agricultural resources. ● Government Policies: Government policies and land reform initiatives have varied over the years, impacting both income and land distribution. Policies aimed at land redistribution can directly affect income distribution by providing land to landless farmers and reducing inequality. ● Economic Development: Indonesia's economic development, including industrialization and urbanization, has led to shifts in income distribution. As the country's economy diversifies, income sources expand beyond agriculture, but land distribution still has a significant impact on rural incomes. ● Social and Cultural Factors: Social and cultural factors also play a role in the relationship between income and land distribution. Customary land tenure systems, for example, can influence who has access to land and how income is generated within specific communities. Some Issue That Happened In Indonesia: 1. Land Distribution: ● Land Ownership Disparities: Land distribution in Indonesia has been characterized by significant disparities. Large portions of land are owned by a small elite, while many landless or small-scale farmers have limited access to productive land. ● Land Conflicts: Land disputes and conflicts were common due to unclear land titles, competing claims, and inadequate land tenure systems. These conflicts often led to social tensions and sometimes violence. ● Lack of Land Reform: Progress on land reform and redistribution efforts was slow, despite government initiatives. The effectiveness of land reform programs in providing land to landless farmers was a concern. The Solution: ● Land Reform: The Indonesian government had initiated various land reform programs to redistribute land to landless or marginalized farmers. These programs aimed to improve land access and ownership for those who historically had limited access. ● Land Tenure Regularization: Efforts were made to formalize land tenure systems and provide clearer land titles to individuals and communities, reducing land disputes and conflicts. 2. Income Distribution ● Income Inequality: Income distribution in Indonesia has been unequal, with significant disparities between the rich and poor. High-income inequality has been particularly pronounced in urban areas. ● Urban-Rural Divide: Income inequality was more pronounced in rural areas, where agriculture is a primary income source. Small-scale farmers often struggled to earn a decent income, while urban areas saw greater income opportunities. ● Informal Labor Market: A large portion of the population worked in the informal sector, where job security and income stability were low, contributing to income disparities. The Solution: ● Social Assistance Programs: Indonesia had implemented social assistance programs, such as the Family Hope Program (Program Keluarga Harapan or PKH) and the Smart Indonesia Card (Kartu Indonesia Pintar or KIP), to provide financial assistance to low-income households and support access to education and healthcare. ● Minimum Wage Policies: The government had been working on adjusting and increasing minimum wage levels to improve the income of workers in varios sectors 3. Health Distribution: ● Healthcare Access Disparities: Indonesia faced challenges in ensuring equitable access to healthcare services. Disparities in healthcare infrastructure and quality existed between urban and rural areas, with urban areas having better access to healthcare facilities. ● Healthcare Financing: Limited access to affordable healthcare and health insurance was a concern for many Indonesians, affecting their ability to receive essential medical services. ● Health Outcomes: Variations in health outcomes and life expectancy existed across regions. Remote and underserved areas often had poorer health indicators. The Solution: ● Healthcare Expansion: Efforts were made to expand healthcare infrastructure and services, particularly in rural and underserved areas, to improve access to healthcare. ● National Health Insurance (JKN): Indonesia had launched a national health insurance program (Jaminan Kesehatan Nasional or JKN) to provide health coverage to a larger portion of the population and reduce financial barriers to healthcare access. ● Community Health Programs: Initiatives focused on strengthening community-based healthcare programs, including the training of village midwives and healthcare workers to provide essential services in remote areas. 4. Education Distribution: ● Educational Disparities: Disparities in education were evident, with differences in access to quality education between urban and rural areas. Many rural regions lacked adequate schools and well-trained teachers. ● Quality of Education: Even when education was accessible, the quality of education varied widely. There were concerns about the curriculum, teaching standards, and infrastructure in some schools. ● Dropout Rates: High dropout rates, especially in secondary education, were a challenge. Economic constraints often forced students to leave school prematurely. The Solution: ● Education Access: The government aimed to improve access to quality education, particularly in rural areas, by building more schools and ensuring the availability of trained teachers. ● Scholarship Programs: Scholarships and financial assistance programs were implemented to help students from low-income backgrounds access and complete their education.