This article sheds light on the dualistic case of electricity supply in Andung Biru, rural Indonesia, managed by the state and the community. This research uses a case study method and interviews with 30 informants; the findings reveal that this contestation is unavoidable. It features the State Electricity Company (PLN) as a state business entity and the Tirta Pijar Group as a community group. This disparity leads to economic dualism in electricity supply, with the public choosing their preferred provider in line with customer preferences. Based on the innovation of electricity management by the Tirta Pijar Group, the analysis shows how economic dualism in unequal actors creates a resilient strategy for informal economic activities. The findings demonstrate that community-based economic power grows organically and can be resilient against superior state actors. Additionally, this study has implications for rethinking the resource management concept based on the strength of community empowerment.
AfriantoD. (2015, November 29). Lebih dari 90% Program Desa Mandiri Energi Gagal. Okezone. https://economy.okezone.com/read/2015/11/29/320/1257833/lebih-dari-90-program-desa-mandiri-energi-gagal
2.
AisahI. U., & HerdiansyahH. (2020). Strategi Pemberdayaan Masyarakat dalam Pelaksanaan Program Desa Mandiri Energi. Share: Social Work Journal, 9(2), 130. https://doi.org/10.24198/share.v9i2.21015
3.
AkhyatA. (2015). Dualisme Ekonomi pada Kredit Rakyat di YOGYAKARTA pada Tahun 1912-1990. Humaniora, 27(2), 252–262.
4.
AlboG. (2007). The limits of eco-localism: Scale, strategy, socialism. Socialist Register, 43.
5.
AlkireS., KanagaratnamU., & SuppaN. (2022). The global Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI) 2022 country results and methodological note (OPHI MPI Methodological Note 52). Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative (OPHI), University of Oxford.
6.
AlmeshqabF., & UstunT. S. (2019). Lessons learned from rural electrification initiatives in developing countries: Insights for technical, social, financial and public policy aspects. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 102, 35–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RSER.2018.11.035
7.
ApriliyantiI. D., NugrahaD. B., KristiansenS., & OverlandI. (2024). To reform or not reform? Competing energy transition perspectives on Indonesia’s monopoly electricity supplier Perusahaan Listrik Negara (PLN). Energy Research & Social Science, 118, 103797. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2024.103797
8.
BhusalT. (2019). Do informal forums matter? Lessons from Nepal’s local policymaking. The International Journal of Community and Social Development, 1(4), 310–331. https://doi.org/10.1177/2516602619896187
9.
BlumN. U., Sryantoro WakelingR., & SchmidtT. S. (2013). Rural electrification through village grids—Assessing the cost competitiveness of isolated renewable energy technologies in Indonesia. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 22, 482–496. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.01.049
10.
BoekeJ. H. (1953) Economics and economic policy of dual societies. H.D. Tjeenk Willink.
11.
BoekeJ. H. (1973). Ekonomi Dualistis: Dialog antara Boeke dan Burge. Bhratara.
12.
BudionoM. F. (2019). Potret Penyediaan Listrik Mandiri Berbasis Masyarakat (Studi tentang Proses Pengelolaan Pembangkit Listrik Tenaga Mikro Hidro di Desa Andung Biru, Kecamatan Tiris, Kabupaten Probolinggo). Universitas Gadjah Mada.
13.
BudionoM. F. (2022). Peluang Energi Terbarukan Sebagai Masa Depan Elektrifikasi Desa di Indonesia. https://megashift.fisipol.ugm.ac.id/2022/07/18/peluang-energi-terbarukan-sebagai-masa-depan-elektrifikasi-desa-di-indonesia/
14.
BudionoM. F., & Susetiawan. (2023). Pengelolaan Sumber Daya berbasis Komunitas: Potret Penyediaan Listrik Berbasis Masyarakat di Desa Andung Biru, Kabupaten Probolinggo. Journal of Social Development Studies, 4(2), 142–157. https://doi.org/10.22146/jsds.9334
15.
CammetM., & MacLeanL. M. (2014). The politics of non-state social welfare. Cornel University Press.
16.
CurtisF. (2003). Eco-localism and sustainability. Ecological Economics, 46(1), 83–102.
17.
DalyH., & CobbJ. (1989). For the common good: Redirecting the economy toward community, the environment, and a sustainable future. Beacon Press.
18.
FilčákR., & ŽivčičL. (2017). Energy poverty and multi-dimensional perspectives of social inequalities and policy challenges. International Issues & Slovak Foreign Policy Affairs, 26(1–2), 40–61.
19.
González-EguinoM. (2015). Energy poverty: An overview. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 47, 377–385. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RSER.2015.03.013
20.
Institute for Essential Services Reform. (2019). Akses Energi yang Berkelanjutan untuk Masyarakat Desa: Status, Tantangan, dan Peluang.
21.
HandayaniD., & GultomE. (2024). Privatisasi Dalam Penyediaan Tenaga Listrik Untuk Kepentingan Umum. Eksekusi: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum dan Administrasi Negara, 2(1), 240–254. https://doi.org/10.55606/eksekusi.v2i1.876
22.
KerkvlietB. J. T. (2018). An approach for analysing state-society relations in Vietnam. Sojourn: Journal of Social Issues in Southeast Asia, 33(S), S156–S198. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26531811
23.
KurniaA. R. (2020). Dinamika Negara dan Pasar dalam Program Elektrifikasi Rural: Studi Kasus Sumba Iconic Island (2011-2018). Universitas Gadjah Mada.
24.
LöfquistL. (2020). Is there a universal human right to electricity? The International Journal of Human Rights, 24(6), 711–723. https://doi.org/10.1080/13642987.2019.1671355
25.
MajidM. A., SusetiawanNurhadi, & YudaT. K. (2024). Risk rationalities in welfare state policy and practice in Indonesia: A phenomenological study of national health insurance in a rural community. The International Journal of Community and Social Development, 6(2), 149–165. https://doi.org/10.1177/25166026241256435
26.
Mas’udiW., & LayC. (2018). Politik Kesejahteraan: Kontestasi Rezim Kesejahteraan di Indonesia. Yayasan Pustaka Obor Indonesia.
27.
MeiwandaG. (2018). Kontestasi Energi Antara Masyarakat Desa Rantau Sakti Dan PLN dalam Pemanfaatan Tenaga Listrik di Desa Rantau Sakti, Kabupaten Rokan Hulu. Natapraja, 6(1), 25–34. https://doi.org/10.21831/jnp.v6i1.20737
28.
MillsA. J., DureposG., & WiebeE. (2009). Encyclopedia of case study research. Sage Publications.
29.
MoleongL. J. (2008). Metode Penelitian Kualitatif. Remaja Rosda Karya.
30.
OstromE. (1990). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge University Press.
31.
PratiyudhaP. P. (2020). Meninjau Tanggungjawab Sosial Perusahaan dalam Pendekatan Kapabilitas. Jurnal Sosial Politik, 6(1), 16. https://doi.org/10.22219/sospol.v6i1.11214
32.
PriyaA. (2021). Case study methodology of qualitative research: Key attributes and navigating the conundrums in its application. Sociological Bulletin, 70(1), 94–110. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038022920970318v
33.
ReddyB. S. (2015). Access to modern energy services: An economic and policy framework. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 47, 198–212. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RSER.2015.03.058
34.
ReinertK. A., & RajanR. S. (2009). K. A. Reinert, R. S. Rajan, A. J. Glass, & L. S. Davis (Eds), The Princeton encyclopedia of the world economy. Princeton University Press.
35.
SambodoM. T. (2022, April 22). Riset: Masyarakat Indonesia masih kekurangan energi listrik dan energi bersih untuk memasak. The Conversation. https://theconversation.com/riset-masyarakat-indonesia-masih-kekurangan-energi-listrik-dan-energi-bersih-untuk-memasak-135734
36.
SarkodieS. A., & AdamsS. (2020). Electricity access, human development index, governance and income inequality in Sub-Saharan Africa. Energy Reports, 6, 455–466. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.EGYR.2020.02.009
37.
SchumacherE. F. (1973). Small is beautiful. Blond & Briggs.
38.
ShyuC. W. (2014). Ensuring access to electricity and minimum basic electricity needs as a goal for the post-MDG development agenda after 2015. Energy for Sustainable Development, 19(1), 29–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ESD.2013.11.005
39.
SovacoolB. K. (2012). The political economy of energy poverty: A review of key challenges. Energy for Sustainable Development, 16(3), 272–282. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ESD.2012.05.006
40.
SturmanA. (1997). Case study methods. Pergamon.
41.
SwanditoG. (2015, December 29). Setelah Dinilai 95% Gagal dan Bohong-bohongan, Desa Mandiri Energi Butuh Regulasi Ini. Kompasiana. https://www.kompasiana.com/gatotswandito/56824431d59373530701210a/setelah-dinilai-95-gagal-dan-bohongbohongan-desa-mandiri-energi-butuh-regulasi-ini
42.
TaufiqB. S., & La ChoviyaH. (2016). Sistem Pengembangan “Desa Mandiri Energi” (DME) Di Desa Sumber Bendo, Saradan, Kabupaten Madiun. Jurnal Keteknikan Pertanian Tropis Dan Biosistem, 4(2), 128–135.
43.
TullyS. (2006). The human right to access electricity. The Electricity Journal, 19(3), 30–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TEJ.2006.02.003
44.
WebbJ. W., BrutonG. D., TihanyiL., & IrelandR. D. (2013). Research on entrepreneurship in the informal economy: Framing a research agenda. Journal of Business Venturing, 28(5), 598–614. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2012.05.003
45.
WebbJ. W., TihanyiL., IrelandR. D., & SirmonD. G. (2009). You say illegal, I say legitimate: Entrepreneurship in the informal economy. Academy of Management Review, 34(3), 492–510. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2009.40632826
46.
WhiteheadM. (2007). Spaces of sustainability: Geographical perspectives on the sustainable society. Routledge.
47.
YinR. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
