TheJakartaPost
Please Update your browser
Your browser is out of date, and may not be compatible with our website. A list of the most popular web browsers can be found below.
Just click on the icons to get to the download page.
Village funds and sociocultural shifts in rural areas
Instead of creating progress and prosperity, village funds have been blamed for "new chaos" within villages.
Change Size
Field work: Farmers in Wegil village, Pati regency, Central Java, plant rice seedlings on Nov. 13, 2023. Gotong royong or mutual help is the norm that has been preserved for generations in rural areas.
(Antara/Fikri Yusuf)
O
ne of the three presidential candidates contesting the 2024 election recently made a promise to increase village funds, grants from the state budget, to around Rp 5 billion (US$322,000) per village yearly from Rp 1.1- Rp 1.3 billion. Should this promise be realized, it would be an encouraging move since it reflects the national government’s support for rural people.
The positive impacts of village funds on increasing rural communities’ economic activities and quality of life are beyond doubt. But how do village funds impact sociocultural values in rural areas?
From a sociocultural perspective, there are a number of negative allegations regarding the impact of village funds or grants from the state budget. While from a socioeconomic perspective, village funds are associated with opportunities for prosperity, from a sociocultural perspective, they are perceived to be the root cause of a number of paradoxes. This, for example, can be seen in the decline of cooperation, a spirit of solidarity and practices among village communities. Nowadays, it is difficult for villagers to participate in village meetings or run community programs without financial support. In short, village funds have the capacity to encourage people to be calculative and materialistic.
The urban lifestyle, which is characterized by high rates of consumption, individualism and other forms of capitalist relation patterns, has become more dominant in the sociocultural life in rural areas. Instead of creating progress and prosperity, village funds have been blamed for "new chaos" within villages.
This allegation still needs to be verified to prove whether village funds have caused negative influences on the shift of sociocultural values in the rural areas. Moreover, how do village funds impact other things outside socioeconomic aspects, for example, intangible assets in villages?
It may be too early to conclude that village funds have caused a shift in sociocultural values as described above. Especially when the shift itself has been going on for a long time.
Long before the state budget began transferring grants in the form of village funds in 2015 as mandated by the Village Law, the flow of financial capital to villages was already underway.
