IMPLEMENTASI KEBIJAKAN REDISTRIBUSI PENERIMAAN RE'I'RIBUSI TPI DI KOTA PEKALONGAN

Abstract

ABSTRACT The focus problem of this research is implementing the redistribution polie. implement to Region Government Rule (Perda) No. 3 1999 jo. Perda No. 3 2000, in relating to the realization of using TPI retribution fluid and influence factors. The aims of this research are knowing the redistribution policy retribution TPI revenue in Pekalongan especially for fishermen and knowing the influence factors of that implementation policy. The benefits of this research are giving input for Region Government in improving the Region Government Rule (Perda) of Central Java Province No 3 1999 jo. Perda No. 3 2000, which feels do not make any profit for fishermen and giving input for the related Region Government or institution to improve the working mechanism of implementation policy redistribution TPI and also giving input the related government to run the retribution. The framework theory which used as the basic to analize problem is about the rule implementation redistribution Perda No 3 1999 jo. Perda No 3 2000, is theoritic system which state that rule implementation has been influence by internal and external factors. The researcher is also using theory Edward DI about the factors which is influence to implementation policy that covers variables: organization communication, organization structures, and quality resources. The research methodologi is using quality research, concept definition covers the implementation policy to redistribute retribution TPI in Pekalongan, communication, resources and organizational structure. The research indicatorscovers implementation policy to redistribute retribution TPI in Pekalongan, communication, organization structure and resource. Population taken from TPI, KUL) Makaryo Mino, HNSI, KUD Mina Baruna and Fisherries and Sea Services of Central Java Province/Pekalongan City (Dinas Perikanan dan Kelautan). The technical sampling use purposive sample (snow boiling), technical data collecting is through documentation, interviewing indept and direct observation. Analysist technic is using taxonomi supported by frequention tble and percentage table. Research Result. 1. Implementing implementation Perda No 3 1999 jo. Perda No 3 2000 infact have no benefit to fishermen (AMC). Redistribution of retribution revenue (TPI) as much as 37% are not fully can ben used by fishermen, precisely those merchants and ship foremen who taken more profit. Redistribution of retribution revenue TPI as mush as 63%, seems not take a side to those fishermen entirely, due to the realization of using fund is still beyond the fishermen activity, beside that the level benefit of activity/program which run the government institution has not been evaluated. 2. Based on the research result shows that the implementation of Perda No 3 1999 jo. Perda No 3 2000 which is obviously make harm to the fishermen (ABK) but until now still prevails, caused by below factors: a. Communication between HNSI and government institution that mostly affected by the authority of formal — non formal institution in arranging/formulating the policy so there is still government domination (formal institution) to the non formal institution (HNSI).b. Organization structure (the authority and controlling distance (geografi) which impact to the monitoring activity of Perda No 3 1999 jo. Perda No 3 2000 that executed by the Province. c. Resource quality of HNSI is still lower that caused the trouble or obstacles of articulating the fisherman's interest (ABK) or because of as a ship foreman/KUD board make them reluctantly defend the fisherman's fate due to in reason of material they do not get any harm. Recomendation 1. The role and managerial of HNSI must be more focus on effort to defend the fisherman's fate, by selection. 2. Requested the evaluation of the fund application of retribution TPI to improve the government activity and the benefit to fisherman, by LAKIP model.