Revealing the Motives Behind Executive and Legislative “Interests” in the Discussion Process and Determination of the Budget Regional Revenue and Expenditures (APBD)

Abstract

Purpose: This interpretive case study delves into the dynamics of executive and legislative interactions in the determination of Regional Revenue and Expenditures (APBD), aiming to understand the underlying motives driving their actions. Theoretical Reference: Drawing on Siegel and Marconi's theory, which emphasizes the influence of individual perspectives on budget figures, this study employs symbolic interactionism to explore the behavior and motivations of the Executive and Legislative branches in the APBD process. Method: Qualitative research is conducted, employing a symbolic interactionism approach to analyze the behavior and discourse of the Executive and Legislative branches during APBD discussions. Results and Conclusion: The study reveals that despite public rhetoric emphasizing performance-oriented budgeting, traditional practices still largely dictate APBD discussions, hindered by a prevailing paternalistic culture and elite commitments. Conflicts between the branches often arise, delaying APBD approval. The findings suggest a phenomenon of Budgetary Mutualism, where both branches engage in strategic maneuvers to secure mutually beneficial gains while maintaining a facade of harmony. However, underlying this facade is a reality of hypocrisy, where public rhetoric masks conflicting interests and power dynamics. Implications of Research: This research sheds light on the complexities of APBD determination, highlighting the need to address underlying power dynamics and conflicting interests between the Executive and Legislative branches. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for reform efforts aiming to improve budgetary processes and governance. Originality/Value: By applying symbolic interactionism to analyze APBD dynamics, this study offers a novel perspective on the behavior and motivations of government actors in budgetary processes. The identification of Budgetary Mutualism and the revelation of underlying hypocrisy contribute to a deeper understanding of governance dynamics.