Authors:

Dodik Ariyanto, Ayu Aryista Dewi

Abstract:

“This study aims to examine the effects of incumbent opportunistic behavior on budget compilation related to the simultaneous election of regional heads (pemilukada) in regencies, cities, and provinces in Indonesia in 2017. In addition, the study also examines differences in incumbent opportunistic behavior when preparing budgets for elected incumbent heads compared with those who did not get elected as well as differences in incumbent opportunistic behavior a year prior to and during the simultaneous elections. The research population comprises all regencies, cities, and provinces in Indonesia. The sampling method used for this study was purposive sampling. Data were analyzed using multiple linear regression and different types of t-Tests. The results of the analysis showed that PAD and SiLPA had an effect on the incumbent opportunism behavior and DAK had no effect on incumbent opportunism behavior. The results of different t-Tests revealed differences in incumbent opportunistic behaviors of winners and losers as well as differences in incumbent opportunistic behavior in the budgeting year prior to and during the post-conflict simultaneous local elections held in 2017. Keywords: incumbent opportunistic behavior, post-conflict local elections, regional income and expenditure budget.”

Keywords

incumbent opportunistic behavior, post-conflict local elections, regional income and expenditure budget.

Downloads:

Download data is not yet available.

References

  • Abdullah, S. (2012). Perilaku Oportunistik Legislatif dan FAktor-Faktor yang
  • Mempengaruhinya: Studi Empiris dari Pengnggaran Daerah di Indonesia. In Ringakasan
  • Disertasi (pp. 1–100).
  • Abdullah, S., & Asmara, J. A. (2006). Perilaku Oportunistik Legislatif Dalam Penganggaran
  • Daerah Bukti Empiris atas Aplikasi Agency Theory di Sektor Publik. In Simposium
  • Nasional Akuntansi 9 Padang (pp. 23–26).
  • Ban, P., Llaudet, E., & Snyder, J. M. (2016). Challenger Quality and the Incumbency
  • Advantage. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 41(1), 153–179.
  • https://doi.org/10.1111/lsq.12109
  • Ennser-Jedenastik, L. (2016). The Politicization of Regulatory Agencies: Between Partisan
  • Influence and Formal Independence. Journal of Public Administration Research and
  • Theory, 26(3), 507–518. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muv022
  • Fathony, A. D. (2011). Pengaruh Pendapatan Asli Daerah, Sisa Lebih Perhitungan Anggaran
  • Dan Dana Alokasi Umum Terhadap Perilaku Oportunistik Penyusun Anggaran (Studi
  • Kasus Kabupaten/Kota Di Provinsi Jawa Tengah). Skripsi Fakultas Ekonomi Universitas
  • Diponegoro Semarang.
  • Fischer, D.-H., & Krimmer, R. (2018). Towards a Networked Modern Democracy Thoughts
  • on How ICT Could Enable New Forms for the Relationship Between Citizens and Their
  • Representatives. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series.
  • https://doi.org/10.1145/3209281.3209284
  • Florensia, T. M. (2009). Perilaku Oportunistik Legislatif Dalam Penganggaran Daerah:
  • Bukti Empiris atas Aplikasi Agency Theory di Sektor Publik. Universitas Gajah Mada,
  • Yogyakarta.
  • Garamfalfi, L. (1997). Corruption in the Public Expenditures Management Process. 8th
  • International Anti-Corruption Conference, Lima, Peru, 1–28.
  • Ghozali, I. (2011). Aplikasi Analisis Multivariate dengan Program SPSS (Cetakan IV).
  • Semarang: Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro.
  • Jawa Pos; 10 Agustus 2017. (2017). Eksekutif-Legislatif Gerogoti Anggaran, p. 2.
  • Jawa Pos; 27 Februari 2017. (, February). 60 Persen Calon Petahana Unggul. Jawa Pos, p. 2.
  • Jumaidi, L. (2014). Perilaku legislatif dalam praktik penganggaran dengan pendekatan nilai-
  • nilai kearifan lokal (nilai budaya sasak). Simposium Nasional Akuntansi 17 Mataram
  • Lombok 24 -27 September 2014, 1–20.
  • Klašnja, M. (2015). Corruption and the Incumbency Disadvantage: Theory and Evidence.
  • The Jurnal of Politics, 77(4), 928–942. https://doi.org/10.1525/jsah.2012.71.3.273.and
  • Krenn, C. (2017). The European Court of Justice’s Financial Accountability. European
  • Constitutional Law Review, 13(3), 453–474.
  • https://doi.org/10.1017/S1574019617000153
  • Lalvani, M. (1999). Elections and Macropolicy Signals: Political Budget Cycle Hypothesis,
  • 34(37), 11–17.
  • Magner, N. R., Johnson, G. G., Little, H. T., Staley, A. B., & Welker, R. B. (2006). The Case
  • for Fair Budgetary Procedures. Managerial Auditing Journal, 21(4), 408–419.
  • https://doi.org/10.1108/02686900610661414
  • Martinez-Vazquez, J., Boex, J., & Granado, J. A. del. (2006). Corruption, Fiscal Policy, and
  • Fiscal Management. In Corruption, Fiscal Policy, and Fiscal Management.
  • Maryono, R. (2013). Pengaruh Perubahan Dana Alokasi Umum Terhadap Perilaku
  • Oportunistik Legislatif Dalam Penganggaran Daerah (Studi Kasus pada Kabupaten/Kota
  • di Sumatera Barat). Tesis Fakultas Ekonomi Universitas Negeri Padang.
  • Mitchell, P. (2000). Voters and Their Representative: Electoral Institutions and Delegation in
  • Parliamentary Democracies. European Journal of Political Research, (37), 335–351.
  • Musripah, S. (2014). Pengaruh Perubahan Pendapatan Asli Daerah, Sisa Lebih Perhitungan
  • Anggaran, Dan Dana Alokasi Umum Terhadap Perilaku Oportunistik Penyusun
  • Anggaran (Studi pada Kabupaten/Kota di Provinsi Jawa Timur). Universitas Jember.
  • Oktariniatmaja, R. (2011). . Pengaruh Pendapatan Asli Daerah, Dana Alokasi Umum dan
  • Dana Alokasi Khusus terhadap Pengalokasian Anggaran Belanja Modal dalam
  • Anggaran Pendapatan dan Belanja Daerah Pada Pemerintah Daerah Kabupaten/Kota di
  • Pulau Jawa, Bali dan Nusa Tenggara. E-Journal Universitas Sebelas Maret.
  • Parwati, S. M. (2015). Perilaku Oportunistik Penyusu Anggaran di Kabupaten/Kota Se- Bali.
  • Tesis, 127–133.
  • PP 71 2010. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2007.03.021
  • Prasojo, E. (2009). Reformasi Kedua-Melanjutkan Estafet Reformasi. Jakarta: Penerbit
  • Salemba Humanika.
  • Riharjo, I. B., & Isnadi. (2010). Perilaku Oportunistik Pejabat Eksekutif Dalam Penyusunan
  • APBD ( Bukti Empiris Atas Penggunaan Penerimaan Sumber Daya Alam ). Ekuitas,
  • 14(3), 388–410.
  • Ritonga, I. T., & Alam, M. I. (2010). Apakah Incumbent Memanfaatkan Anggaran
  • Pendapatan Dan Belanja Daerah (APBD) Untuk Mencalonkan Kembali Dalam
  • Pemilihan Umum Kepala Daerah (Pemilukada). In SNA 13 (pp. 1–25).
  • Sarman, M. (2015). Pilkada Serentak: Quo Vadis Kedaulatan Rakyat (Pertama). Salakan
  • Baru No 1 Sewon Bantul: PT. LKiS Printing Cemerlang.
  • Schillemans, T., & Busuioc, M. (2015). Predicting Public Sector Accountability: From
  • Agency Drift to Forum Drift. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory,
  • 25(1), 191–215. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muu024
  • Smith, R. W., & Bertozzi, M. (1998). Principals And Agents: An Explanatory Model For
  • Public Budgeting. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management
  • Principals, 10(3), 325–353.
  • Suartini, N. K. A., Ariyanto, D., & Sari, M. M. R. (2016). Determinan Perilaku Opportunistic
  • Penyusun Anggaran Calon Incumbent Terkait Pilkada Serentak Tahun 2015. Jurnal
  • Ekonomi Dan Bisnis, 1–34.
  • Sularso, H., Restianto, Y. E., & Istiqomah, A. E. (2014). Determinan Perilaku Oportunistik
  • Penyusunan Anggaran (Studi pada Kabupaten/Kota di Jawa Tengah). Jurnal Simposium
  • Nasional Akuntansi 17 Mataram Lombok.
  • Tanzi, V., & Davoodi, H. (1998). Corruption, Public Investment, and Growth. The Welfare
  • State, Public Investment and Growth, 1–25.
  • Undang-Undang Nomor 32 Tahun 2004 tentang Pemerintahan Daerah (Lembaran Negara
  • Republik Indonesia Tahun 2004 Nomor 125,Tambahan Lembaran Negara Republik
  • Indonesia Nomor 4437).
  • Undang-Undang Nomor 33 Tahun 2004 tentang Perimbangan Keuangan Antara Pemerintah
  • Pusat dan Pemerintahan Daerah (Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 2004
  • Nomor 126, Tambahan Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Nomor 4438)
  • Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 1 Tahun 2015 Penetapan Peraturan Pemerintah
  • Pengganti Undang-Undang Nomor 1 Tahun 2014 Tentang Pemilihan Gubernur, Bupati,
  • Dan Walikota Menjadi Undang-Undang). Indonesia.
  • Von Hagen, J. (2002). Fiscal Institutions and Fiscal Performance. The Economic and Social
  • Review, 33(3), 263–284. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13398-014-0173-7.2

PDF:

https://jurnal.harianregional.com/jiab/full-42907

Published

2019-01-10

How To Cite

ARIYANTO, Dodik; DEWI, Ayu Aryista. Oportunistik Incumbent dalam Penganggaran Pendapatan dan Belanja pada Pemilihan Kepala Daerah Serentak Tahun 2017.Jurnal Ilmiah Akuntansi dan Bisnis, [S.l.], v. 14, n. 1, p. 41-55, jan. 2019. ISSN 2303-1018. Available at: https://jurnal.harianregional.com/jiab/id-42907. Date accessed: 28 Aug. 2025. doi:https://doi.org/10.24843/JIAB.2019.v14.i01.p05.

Citation Format

ABNT, APA, BibTeX, CBE, EndNote - EndNote format (Macintosh & Windows), MLA, ProCite - RIS format (Macintosh & Windows), RefWorks, Reference Manager - RIS format (Windows only), Turabian

Issue

Vol 14 No 1 (2019)

Section

Articles

Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License