A. BACKGROUND
The national community empowerment program (PNPM Mandiri) is a national program in a policy framework used as the basis and reference for implementing community driven proverty programs.
This program, launched by the government in Palu, Central Sulawesi, on April 30, 2007 will implemented until 2015, in line with the achievement of the MDGs (Millenium Development Goals) targets. It is expected that between 2007-2015, the community’s self –help will have been established to continue the implementation of the program.
The objective of PNPM Mandiri are to improve the welfare and increase the employment of the poor independently by creating / building the individual and collective capacity of the community in solving various problems in relation to life quality improvement, self-reliance and welfare by taking advantage of their economic and social potentials through independent development processes.
PNPM has contributed a lot to people welfare and optimistic that PNPM can help the government of Indonesia to achieve MDGs goal to decrease proverty rate from 14,5% to 7,5% by 2015. Since PNPM was launched in 2007, PNPM has provided work to 3.188 consultants, 18.000 facilitators, and 62 million villagers. PNPM has also given capital fund to 680.000 groups in villages and urban areas. As PNPM highly involved community participation in the process, it saves development cost as much as 35%.
The local government have to emphasized the important role of the communities to actively monitoring the program implementation. Complains delivery mechanism in also set up at each level of governmental structure (village/desa, sub-district, district, province, and national). Beside that, local government also have to ensuring fund to implement the program at each years.
But on the implementation of this program indicated that it’s not the directly relationship between this program and the proverty. The number of proverty was not pull-down significantly. So, it’s need the more effort by all the doers of this program to improve the progress of this program thus give the huge impact for proverty and employement in the villages.
B. MAIN PROBLEM
Base on the topic of this paper, and the background below, the main problem at this paper is “ How the impact of PNPM implementation in Sitaro Regency ?”
C. ANALYSIS
By the implementation of PNPM, many thing can describes as the evaluation :
1. By 2008, when PNPM should cover all Sitaro Regency, it can benefit around 24.000 workers and their families, increasing their income by 10%-14% for 60 days of work.
2. Some 6.000 families will be pull out of proverty and another 10.000 families of the poor will have increase income, but not enough to escape proverty. But, the number of poor depends as much or more on : (a). the price of rice and others basic foods, (b). jobs created elsewhere in the economy, and (c). how many are benefited by the Conditional Cash Transfer program.
3. PNPM will hire 1.000 directly in 2010, but a larger number, some 14.000 will benefit indirectly from the economic activity generated by the program. PNPM is not just an employment program, it is also a long-term development program.
4. To reach its targets PNPM needs to allocate Rp.20 Million a year for an average Kecamatan.
5. There will be benefits in addition to direct employement and income :
a. The additional income will benefit workers primarily when they need it the most; when there are few other jobs because it is the off-season in agriculture, or because of drought, flood or other natural or economic catastrophes in a region. The benefits will therefore be more important than a 10%-14% increase in annual income.
b. PNPM can be a Social Safety Net, expanding as needed.
c. It will raise the wages of all unskilled workers significantly by reducing the competition during the off-season from desparate workers who drive all wages down.
d. By developing roads, irrigation and drainage works, water supply and sanitation works, PNPM will permanently increase employment and income.
e. Injecting purchasing power into vaillages and poor urban areas will have an indirect effect in “activating” the village economy.
f. The combine indirect effect of development and activation is to increase rural income per year.
6. PNPM can be sustained as a permanent program if government spends large sums each year on building infrastructure. Some of those funds could be spent for local infrastructure throught PNPM permanently.
7. But the PNPM contribution to solving the unemployement and proverty problems, while important, is also limited, because : (a). it provides supplementary employment and income, not full-time regular jobs, (b). it provides few job for professional, technical, and other middle class workers, (c). it can not help families that have no one in the labor force.
This paper just concerned with the impact of PNPM, and does not addres these other factors in the number of poor. It just recognized that demand for labor and the price of basic staple foods can affect the poor as much or more as the supplementary jobs under PNPM. Neither an increase not a decrease in the number of poor can therefore be ascribed to PNPM without a careful analysis of other factors determining the number below the poverty line.
D. CONCLUTION
The conclution of this paper are :
1. There are impact of PNPM implementation on proverty, that show by the building infrastructure (to get the many worker in village), and the urban micro credit.
2. The Impact of PNPM also show by the participation of the people in the village to self-help for they future.
3. PNPM was not enough to escape proverty
