Amid narratives of Generation Z’s heightened political awareness through internet access, this study examines a specific subset: santri in Islamic boarding schools—Muslim groups with limited access to the internet to engage in online political discourse. They are frequently characterised as merely a traditional group, and prior studies have largely attributed their political choices to the authority of the kiai (pesantren leaders). To revisit this assumption, the study was conducted in two contrasting Islamic boarding school traditions: traditional and modern. It investigates five potential influences on santri voting behaviour in Indonesia’s 2024 Presidential Election: kiai, teachers (ustaz/ustazah), peer groups, political promises, and evaluations of the Joko Widodo–Ma’ruf Amin government. This study, employing mixed methods, reveals that, contrary to previous studies, kiai exert no significant influence. Instead, teachers shape political preferences through classroom discussions, which also enable students to critically evaluate the Jokowi–Ma’ruf government. These findings enhance the diversity within the field of voting behaviour studies in religion communities with limited internet access while challenging assumptions about Generation Z’s short-term political outlook. The findings also extend voting behavior theory in the context of religious communities with restricted internet access.

This paper analyses the KPR Sejahtera policy, a mortgage loan programme for low-income communities (masyarakat berpenghasilan rendah/MBR) initiated by the Ministry of Public Works and Housing (Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum dan Perumahan Rakyat/PUPR). Although the policy has good intentions, its implementation, particularly the funding scheme has hindered the effectiveness of housing provision in the Special Region of Yogyakarta. Using the pathology of public policy framework by Hogwood & Peters (1985) and the NATO scheme from Hood & Margetts (2007), this study explores why the KPR Sejahtera funding mechanism has proven ineffective and has instead created new issues. The Directorate of Infrastructure Financing (Direktorat Jenderal Pembiayaan Infrastruktur) delegates this programme to state-owned banks, but the implementation details are left to each bank. The core problem arises from the mismatch between the banks' profit-oriented nature and the social mission of the program. This leads to internal conflicts within the banks and results in the failure to reach the targeted MBR beneficiaries. This situation reflects the ‘earmarking’ pathology, in which a budget designed for a specific programme is allocated outside of its original purpose, leading to sub-optimal policy outcomes.

This study analyses the neo-clientelist relationship between largest laskar group in the Purwoboyo region, the Laskar Nusantara Rider, and the party and elites of Prosperous National Party in the Purwoboyo region. Data were collected through in-depth interviews and non-participatory observation as primary sources. In addition, secondary data were gathered from online media literature. Using Hopkin’s (2014) framework, this study finds that the clientelist relationship was established due to a convergence of interests between both sides. The party and elites of the Prosperous National Party in the Purwoboyo region regard the Laskar Nusantara Rider as a vote bank in elections. Conversely, the Laskar Nusantara Rider group perceives clientelism relationship as means of gaining access to public and formal resources via government programmes and social assistance. Furthermore, this study finds that the Laskar Nusantara Rider play a role in distributing public resources, aligning with Torquist (1990) notion of a state-backed client theory.

This article examines the transformation of two types of knowledge—government/official knowledge, which represents "scientific" and “expertise”; and local knowledge, represented by the "Jalin Merapi" community, considered as “non-scientific” and layman's understanding. Both types of knowledge are linked by a common "boundary object" (Gieryn, 1983) of Mount Merapi, but they are often in a competition to influence public discourse. The main argument of this article is that integrating government/scientific and local/non-scientific knowledge can result in more effective disaster mitigation strategies. However, in Indonesia, there is a significant gap between these two types of knowledge systems, and competition often overshadows collaboration. Using a qualitative case study approach, the research highlights a shift in knowledge dynamics, from competition to collaboration, facilitated by the "Jalin Merapi" community. Despite this progress, the inclusion of local knowledge in policy making in Indonesia remains limited. This finding emphasises the importance of more inclusive policies that combine scientific knowledge with local insights to improve disaster management system in Indonesia.

This study discusses the participatory resilience of the waste pickers at the Bantargebang Waste Processing Site by analysing the link between the waste pickers’ resilience and public participation after land degradation occurs. Similar studies use qualitative evidence to understand how public participation is driven by the issue of land degradation. However, this approach also begs the question as to the roles of the actors and publics involved. This study thus divides actors into two categories, i.e., implementing actors and capital-holding actors. More specifically, this study seeks to understand the realisation and practice of participatory resilience in Bantargebang. For data collection, three methods were used: library research, interviews, and observations.

It is commonly assumed that multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary research collaborations involve various values, knowledge, and practices, thereby existing between science and policy. This study argues, oppositely, that multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary research collaborations are socially constructed and not to be taken for granted. To support its argument, this article uses the concept of boundary work to see how the interaction between science and policy is constructed. Taking as its case study the Ground Up consortium, a collaborative water management research programme involving the Netherlands and Indonesia, this study finds that boundary work generated and formed boundaries between science and policy through a joint call for proposal documents, research proposals, and three people operating at boundaries. Furthermore, this article shows that the collaborative research in the Ground Up consortium was a social process evidenced through three mediums: text, object, and person. This qualitative research thus uses a single-case study to explore boundary work in a consortium setting. Data were collected through a review of documents (meeting notes, research proposals, and calls for proposals) as well as in-depth interviews with three members of the Ground Up consortium.

This article elaborates on two important elements of women's leadership. First, it explores how leadership theory has abandoned its masculine perspective in favour of a "more feminine" one. The COVID-19 pandemic, a crisis that crippled the socio-political structure, has contributed to this shift. Second, the experiences of grassroots leaders who are active in the domestic sphere have begun to be considered, as has their increased activeness in the public sphere during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, studies of women's leadership are highly elitist; such a paradigm is problematic, as it prioritises formal power structures and ignores the grassroots leaders who play a central role in maintaining the social order. This research finds that the pandemic has provided a valuable impetus not only for studies of formal elites but also women at the grassroots. Women have become highly powerful agents in the domestic sphere during the pandemic, and even expanded their agency into the public sphere. Women leaders have facilitated the implementation of government and community crisis response measures at the grassroots level.

This article explores how village chief candidates can utilise a suburban community's understanding of public land use to mobilise political support, taking as its example the village chief election in Baleharjo, Yogyakarta, Indonesia. This article argues that, where village residents still rely on land for their welfare, candidates can politicise land grievances to gather popular support. In Baleharjo, the incumbent received the backing of merchants and investors from predominantly non-agrarian pedukuhan (hamlets) who felt that they had benefitted from the use of village-controlled land for tourism purposes. At the same time, the challenger recognised the hardships of farmers who had been deleteriously affected by such use of village-controlled land, and thus mobilised them on voting day. Applying a qualitative approach, data for this article were collected through interviews and participatory observation over the course of October 2018.

This article discusses the involvement of youths in independent political movements since Indonesia’s political reform. Political reform became important to be elaborated cause the opening of political space in both political parties and civil society, including for youths. However, this ideal has not been realised, as political parties have been limited by several pathologies and the lack of inclusivity. In the other hand, the establish of independent movements have created alternative spaces for political activity, including for youths. Applying a Bourdieuan perspective, this article examines the habitus and capital evident within such independent movements’ political interactions. This article examined the youths in the Jogja Independent Movement (Gerakan Jogja Independent, JOINT), one independent political movement that has been involved in mayoral elections in Yogyakarta City. The exclusivity of political parties has led the movement to gather public support by collecting identity cards and public donations. Although no longer extant, the movement can still be understood as an arena for interactions between openly recruited volunteers and initiators. This study finds that youths have been unable to become agents and voice their own interests. Elitism continues to pose an obstacle to youths’ political involvement, as positions of power remain dominated by a small group of elites. Youths, having become involved through open recruitment, have yet to become capable of cross-field movement as they lack the capital of their closed-recruitment peers. At the same time, the academic habitus of these volunteers is incongruent with the political field, leading many youths to leave the movement. Political space being dominated by a small group of elites further limits their available space. The decreasing number of volunteers indicates that JOINT was unable to ensure sustained membership, leading to its ultimate failure.