4.1. Strategies for Achieving Sustainable Welfare Outcomes
Social development is perceived across various societal tiers, encompassing individual, community, and organisation, although its activities often unfold within societal and community contexts where deep-seated poverty persists. It encompasses a comprehensive and integrated approach, addressing economic but also political, social, cultural, and ecological dimensions of society [
67]. From this perspective, the constituents contributing to the overarching welfare outcome encompass various facets, including the quality of the environment, the standard of living, the quality of daily life, and the quality of life [
67].
Social development theory links economic and social development while incorporating an ecological perspective [
67]. To achieve welfare outcomes of social development, Pandey (1981) offers a framework comprising four distinct strategies: distributive strategy, participative strategy, human development strategy (economic empowerment), and social integration strategy (social empowerment).
The distributive strategy places a significant emphasis on the equitable distribution of resources and wealth with an overarching aim of promoting social justice through social development [
68]. This approach directly impacts quality of life by enabling individuals to access critical resources, opportunities, roles, and identities that contribute to their wellbeing within the community [
15].
Furthermore,
a participative strategy underscores the active involvement of all segments of society and an enhancing of their capacity to partake in the processes of social change and social development [
68] to enhance the quality of daily life wherein individuals, groups, and communities are involved in activities that can support productivity and self-fulfilment. This strategy is inherently community-driven, targeting poverty-stricken, vulnerable, and marginalised populations [
70]. It acknowledges the community’s inherent knowledge and self-awareness of its conditions, assets, available resources, strengths, capabilities, and developmental constraints. Central to the participatory strategy is recognising local knowledge’s potency and promoting democratic practices and diverse knowledge acquisition methods.
The human development strategy seeks to increase productivity and the capacity to generate income for the workforce [
68], and is also closely related to the focus on improving standards of living, namely how people live their lives and meet the needs of households, families, and groups that must not depart from the quality of the environment [
15]. The ecological economic empowerment condition underpins the human development strategy where village communities are empowered to achieve economic benefits that can be distributed fairly [
71,
72], while preserving the environment. Meanwhile, Polanyi argues for the existence of diverse modes of provisioning [
5] that support for human development, including the local market mechanism, redistribution, and reciprocity [
6].
The reciprocity mechanism can be observed through mutual care among community members to support each other, especially during crises. Sangha et al. [
7] argue that reciprocity involves nurturing a relationship between humans and nature to support human development and conservation of nature. In this context, such reciprocity is an enabling environment for manifesting the livelihood political economy. The redistribution mechanism is manifested through basic service provision, which includes health, education, water, sanitation, and roads to improve living standards, inter alia. Finally, the effective functioning of the local market mechanism as an arena to facilitate economic exchange among community members under the local price-making market mechanism is expected to contribute to the sustainability of their livelihood, thereby supporting human development.
The social integration strategy involving communities and areas that are neglected in development [
68] is closely related to the goal of achieving quality of life [
15], where people participate in social interactions that connect them with essential resources, opportunities, roles, and intensity, which support self-development and experiences in their daily lives. This strategy requires the presence of social empowerment conditions where social integration is recognised and realised through the presence and support of community groups and their involvement in social interactions.
Self-governing or the principle of subsidiarity provides local-scale power, delegated authority, and decision-making structures that align with their interests and achieve their welfare through the policy instrument of the Village Fund. This principle signifies the state’s recognition of the village as a legally recognised societal unit whose existence predates the establishment of Indonesia as a nation-state. Additionally, the principle of subsidiarity embodies an emancipatory spirit and empowerment, defining empowerment as a mechanism that empowers individuals, organisations, and communities to exercise control over their lives. It fosters independence, choice, dignity, control, and the capacity to manage their lives and interactions with their environment [
73,
74]. The causal relationship involving self-governing and local self-government suggests that state acknowledgement and recognition of the village’s right to independently manage its assets, encompassing natural resources, human capital, and social modalities, can enhance the welfare and overall quality of life within village communities.
These strategies embody the four essential principles of sustainable welfare [
42] The distributive strategy corresponds to the fair distribution principle, aiming for the equitable allocation of resources and opportunities in society. The participative strategy aligns with the principles of needs satisfaction and democratic governance, emphasising democratic rights, equal opportunities, and the fulfilment of human needs for autonomy and freedom [
2]. The human development and social integration strategies align with the principles of needs satisfaction and compatibility with the planetary boundary, incorporating the concepts of wellbeing, welfare, and environmental preservation. Additionally, the concept of a strong connection between improving living standards and environmental quality in social development theory underscores the importance of maintaining what Hirvilammi [
32] terms “virtuous” human development. It involves reframing the policy concept of the virtuous circle of sustainable welfare.
4.2. Operationalising the Conditions of Locality-Based Sustainable Welfare
Building on our interpretation of Polanyi’s theory on transforming the dynamics of the state, society, and market, as discussed in
Section 1, we employ an empowerment approach [
43] to identify conditions conducive to sustainable welfare outcomes. Contrary to the traditional development paradigm, which often portrays men, women, and children as passive beneficiaries (commonly seen in Indonesia), the empowerment approach prioritises community action, collective ownership, capacity building, and meaningful participation [
43,
75]. This approach aims to attain better welfare outcomes [
10].
Our model encompasses five conditions underpinning strategies leading to sustainable welfare outcomes. The operationalisation of these conditions, drawn from synthesising theoretical assumptions and primary data sources, is outlined as follows:
(i) Referring to the theoretical conceptualisation of
self-governing and local self-government, the condition of self-governing encompasses several components, including robust leadership that is capable of effectively translating authority and regulatory practices, initiatives that align with the values, culture, and preferences of local communities, and collaboration with social networks, institutions, central, regional, and other government entities. This collaboration reflects the pivotal role of the village as a local institution responsible for distributing essential life support resources, enhancing life opportunities, fostering local capacity building, facilitating the fulfilment of basic needs such as health and economic opportunity and enabling job creation to advance collective wellbeing [
15].
We operationalise the self-governing (or denoted as “SelfG”) condition as an index of three components: (1) the perceived presence of strong leaderships of village government as witnessed and acknowledged by the community or supervisory body of the village coordination under the Ministry of Village; (2) the presence of innovative initiatives including policies that reflect the values, interests, and preferences of communities; and (3) the presence of strong social networks or collaborations of the village government with a higher level governmental body or external entities or organisations. We assign the membership value of 1 to index scores > or equal to 0.6 and 0 to index scores < 0.6.
(ii)
Political empowerment is a condition underpinning the operational effectiveness of the participative strategy, primarily focusing on improving the daily quality of life within village communities. According to the elaboration of Sultan and Yahaya (2018) [
76] on various dimensions of empowerment, this dimension catalyses the engagement and active participation of all segments of society, particularly marginalised groups, including ethnic minorities, women, and economically disadvantaged groups in decision-making processes such as village development planning and oversight [
71,
72].
Upon comprehensive review of the participative strategy concept and its concentration on daily quality improvements, the components inherent to political empowerment must demonstrate the participation of vulnerable and marginalised groups in village development planning, indicated through the presence of women’s groups or groups for people with disabilities, and the presence of institutions or entities that carry out political empowerment activities in the community as well as evidence of community participation, especially from women’s groups and vulnerable and marginalised groups, in the village’s deliberation process.
We operationalise the political empowerment (denoted as “PolEmp”) condition as an index of three components, including (1) the presence of functioning women’s groups, (2) the presence of other institutions providing political empowerment activities, and (3) the community, especially women and members of vulnerable groups, actively participating in the village planning process. We assign the membership value of 1 to index scores > or equal to 0.6 and 0 to index scores < 0.6.
(iii) Improving living standards, according to Simeon, Butterfield, and Moxley [
15] must not depart from environmental quality, which is an essential goal of social development. The theoretical conceptualisation of
ecological economic empowerment suggests critical components, including the presence of village economic institutions that strive for a fair distribution of economic benefits, such as village-owned enterprises (BUMDES), the existence of initiatives that transform local modes of production, for example, organic farming, the integration of economic activities and environmental conservation such as through circular economy, including community-based waste management applying Reduce, Reuse, Recycle (TPS 3R) principles, waste upcycling initiatives, or a local economic ecosystem that is designed to promote a shorter value chain, and the presence of economic empowerment activities through varied forms of entrepreneurship, BUMDES, small, medium, and micro-community enterprises and other institutions. Notably, this framework incorporates tangible economic empowerment outcomes, such as increased BUMDES turnover or gross annual village revenues (PADES).
We operationalise ecological economic empowerment (denoted as “EconEmp”) condition as an index of five components, including (1) the presence of a village economic institution or cooperative with more than one business unit; (2) the presence of a community waste management facility (using Reduce, Reuse, Recycle principles); (3) the use of renewable energy sources or a functioning circular economy or local modes of production (e.g., organic farming); (4) the presence of economic empowerment activities or a varied form of entrepreneurship; and (5) tangible results through increased village revenues or job creation. We assign the membership value of “1” to the index score of > or equal to 0.8 and the membership value of “0” if the index score < 0.8.
(iv) Theoretical conceptualisation of social empowerment comprises components, including village activities, that promote social interaction, cooperation (gotong royong) activities, or social forums, services for disabilities and vulnerable people, and access to knowledge such as skill improvements, village libraries, literacy programmes, or the internet. We operationalise the social empowerment (denoted as “SocEmp”) condition as an index of three components, including (1) community solidarity or social forum activity more than six times a year; (2) services for vulnerable groups; and (3) access to the internet for the village community and literacy or vocational training. We assign the membership value of “1” to the index score of > or equal to 0.6 and the membership value of “0” if the index score < 0.6.
(v) The post-growth literature suggests the need to ensure access to basic goods and services for all through decommodification of basic services, including health care, education, and housing or measures to guarantee a minimum level of wellbeing for all through
universal basic services (UBS) schemes, among other things [
42,
77]. The universal basic services underpinning the distributive strategy may involve the provision of healthcare, education, sanitation, electricity, and transportation facilities that enhance the community’s quality of life. For example, the National Health Insurance (JKN) exemplify the redistribution function through a risk pooling mechanism to achieve social welfare and social justice. Similarly, progress in universal basic education in Indonesia suggests significant progress in access to primary education for all (it is worth noting that the term “universal basic services” is not commonly known or used in the operational context of Indonesian policies). This study is limited to universal basic services (UBS) only, as a centrally administered conditional cash transfer targeting vulnerable and the lowest income households is implemented uniformly in all villages across Indonesia. Such uniformity prohibits variations required for comparative analysis.
Based on the theoretical conceptualisation of the UBS and the analysis of the primary data drawn from the FGDs and interviews, we operationalise the UBS condition as an index of five components, including (1) membership in the National Health Insurance of Indonesia (JKN); (2) the availability and accessibility of community health facilities and medical personnel (doctors and nurses); (3) access to clean water; (4) scholarship programmes, school-fees assistance, or priority to education and higher education; (5) and the availability of public transport or good village or district road conditions. We assign the membership value of “1” to the index score of > or equal to 0.8 and the membership value of “0” if the index score < 0.8 (
Table 1).
A theoretical model derived from combined theories provides a structured framework for causal factors, and the agency of relevant actors applied in this study. Per the elaborated theoretical model, sustainable welfare is operationalised as an index of four components: (1) environmental quality (ENV); (2) economic and universal basic services (UBS) performance (POV); (3) the absence of social conflict (SCON); and (4) policies favouring vulnerable groups at the village level (PVG). These components are assumed to reflect observable outcomes of the aforementioned conditions, though not necessarily their aggregated value. They align with the four essential principles of sustainable welfare: compatibility with planetary boundaries, needs satisfaction, fair distribution, and democratic governance [
42].
We use various data sources, including focus group discussions, in-depth interviews, reports, documentation, and the Village Annual Survey data to assess the presence or absence of sustainable welfare outcomes. The Village Annual Survey (IDM) serves as primary data for evaluating environmental quality (ENV), the absence of social conflict (SCON), and policies favouring vulnerable groups. While this survey might lack rigorous scientific tools for environmental quality assessment, it relies on direct observations of water, soil, and air pollution occurrences in the area.
We utilise the provincial poverty indicator or the percentage of district poverty sourced from the National Statistics Office’s biannual surveys for economic and basic services’ performance. These surveys measure household expenditures on food and nonfood items (health, education, housing, and clothing), providing insights into economic aspects and basic services’ provision. The poverty indicator is given twice the weight of the other components due to its integration of economic and universal basic services components based on available data.
Therefore, the formula for the overall membership value in the set “sustainable welfare outcomes” is as follows: