Evaluation of Cultural Governance Policy and Performance in Lingga Regency
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.69812/jgs.v3i1.204Keywords:
Cultural Governance, Policy Evaluation, Performance, AccountabilityAbstract
Lingga Regency occupies a distinctive place in Indonesia's cultural landscape as the historical core of the Riau-Lingga Malay world and as a local government that formally positions itself as Bunda Tanah Melayu. This study evaluates the congruence between cultural-governance policy and publicly documented performance in Lingga. A qualitative evaluative case-study design was applied through structured document analysis of national legislation, Lingga Regency Regulation No. 1 of 2020, official statistical publications, intangible-cultural-heritage designation records, peer-reviewed studies, and comparative governance literature. The analysis introduces a Cultural Governance Policy-Performance Congruence (CGPPC) framework covering mandate clarity, coordination, safeguarding continuity, participation, performance evidence, and archipelagic accessibility. The findings indicate a pattern of strong normative commitment and visible recognition outputs, particularly in cultural-heritage safeguarding and national intangible-cultural-heritage designations, alongside uneven public evidence on long-term outcomes, cross-island access, community decision rights, data integration, and learning-oriented performance measurement. Sixteen Lingga cultural works were designated as Indonesian intangible cultural heritage in 2019, while all four Riau Islands works designated in 2022 originated from Lingga. These achievements demonstrate institutional capacity for recognition, but recognition counts alone cannot establish continuity of transmission, participation quality, or public value. The study proposes a cultural governance performance compact linking policy mandates to outcome indicators, evidence stewardship, and adaptive coordination. It concludes that Lingga's next governance challenge is not policy creation, but converting a strong cultural mandate into traceable, inclusive, and longitudinal evidence of cultural value.
Downloads
References
Aas, C., Ladkin, A., & Fletcher, J. (2005). Stakeholder collaboration and heritage management. Annals of Tourism Research, 32(1), 28-48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2004.04.005
Ananda, Y., Elric, W., & Rusnadi, R. (2024). Government performance evaluation; Case study in the Cultural Service of Kepulauan Riau Province. Journal Governance Society, 1(2), 135-145. https://doi.org/10.69812/jgs.v1i2.77
Anugrah, F. C., Winarti, N., & Riyadi, S. F. (2024). Analisis tata kelola cagar budaya di Kabupaten Lingga. Multidisciplinary Indonesian Center Journal, 1(1), 218-232. https://doi.org/10.62567/micjo.v1i1.27
Ansell, C., & Gash, A. (2008). Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(4), 543-571. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mum032
Badan Pusat Statistik Kabupaten Lingga. (2025). Kabupaten Lingga dalam angka 2025. BPS Kabupaten Lingga. https://linggakab.bps.go.id/id/publication/2025/02/28/297334287845a610c3241007/kabupaten-lingga-dalam-angka-2025.html
Badan Pusat Statistik Kabupaten Lingga. (2026). Kabupaten Lingga dalam angka 2026. BPS Kabupaten Lingga. https://linggakab.bps.go.id/id/publication/2026/02/27/dcea41bfb5e33c554488696f/kabupaten-lingga-dalam-angka-2026.html
Balai Pelestarian Nilai Budaya Kepulauan Riau. (2019, December 22). Lipat 44, karya budaya dari Lingga. Kementerian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan. https://kebudayaan.kemdikbud.go.id/bpnbkepri/lipat-44-karya-budaya-dari-lingga/
Balai Pelestarian Nilai Budaya Kepulauan Riau. (2022, October 28). 2022: 4 karya budaya Kepri ditetapkan sebagai WBTB Indonesia. Kementerian Pendidikan, Kebudayaan, Riset, dan Teknologi. https://kebudayaan.kemdikbud.go.id/bpnbkepri/2022-4-wbtb-kepri-ditetapkan-mendikbudristek/
Behn, R. D. (2003). Why measure performance? Different purposes require different measures. Public Administration Review, 63(5), 586-606. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-6210.00322
Belfiore, E. (2002). Art as a means of alleviating social exclusion: Does it really work? A critique of instrumental cultural policies and social impact studies in the UK. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 8(1), 91-106. https://doi.org/10.1080/102866302900324658
Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27-40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027
Bovaird, T. (2007). Beyond engagement and participation: User and community coproduction of public services. Public Administration Review, 67(5), 846-860. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2007.00773.x
Bovens, M. (2007). Analysing and assessing accountability: A conceptual framework. European Law Journal, 13(4), 447-468. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0386.2007.00378.x
Bryson, J. M., Crosby, B. C., & Stone, M. M. (2015). Designing and implementing cross-sector collaborations: Needed and challenging. Public Administration Review, 75(5), 647-663. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12432
Cordella, A., & Tempini, N. (2015). E-government and organizational change: Reappraising the role of ICT and bureaucracy in public service delivery. Government Information Quarterly, 32(3), 279-286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2015.03.005
Duxbury, N., Kangas, A., & De Beukelaer, C. (2017). Cultural policies for sustainable development: Four strategic paths. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 23(2), 214-230. https://doi.org/10.1080/10286632.2017.1280789
Emerson, K., Nabatchi, T., & Balogh, S. (2012). An integrative framework for collaborative governance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 22(1), 1-29. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mur011
Evans, G. (2005). Measure for measure: Evaluating the evidence of culture's contribution to regeneration. Urban Studies, 42(5-6), 959-983. https://doi.org/10.1080/00420980500107102
Fan, L. (2014). International influence and local response: Understanding community involvement in urban heritage conservation in China. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 20(6), 651-662. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527258.2013.834837
Fung, A. (2006). Varieties of participation in complex governance. Public Administration Review, 66(S1), 66-75. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00667.x
Gerrish, E. (2016). The impact of performance management on performance in public organizations: A meta-analysis. Public Administration Review, 76(1), 48-66. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12433
Government of Lingga Regency. (2020). Regional Regulation of Lingga Regency No. 1 of 2020 on the Advancement of Culture of Lingga Regency as Bunda Tanah Melayu. https://peraturan.bpk.go.id/Details/172637/perda-kab-lingga-no-1-tahun-2020
Gray, C. (2007). Commodification and instrumentality in cultural policy. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 13(2), 203-215. https://doi.org/10.1080/10286630701342899
Harefa, S. (2025). The integration of governance theory in the development of equitable legal policies. Journal Governance Society, 2(3), 134-148. https://doi.org/10.69812/jgs.v2i3.188
Head, B. W., & Alford, J. (2015). Wicked problems: Implications for public policy and management. Administration & Society, 47(6), 711-739. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399713481601
Janowski, T. (2015). Digital government evolution: From transformation to contextualization. Government Information Quarterly, 32(3), 221-236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2015.07.001
Janssen, M., & van der Voort, H. (2016). Adaptive governance: Towards a stable, accountable and responsive government. Government Information Quarterly, 33(1), 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2016.02.003
Kroll, A. (2015). Drivers of performance information use: Systematic literature review and directions for future research. Public Performance & Management Review, 38(3), 459-486. https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2015.1006469
Landorf, C. (2009). A framework for sustainable heritage management: A study of UK industrial heritage sites. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 15(6), 494-510. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527250903210795
Li, J., Krishnamurthy, S., Pereira Roders, A., & van Wesemael, P. (2020). Community participation in cultural heritage management: A systematic literature review comparing Chinese and international practices. Cities, 96, 102476. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2019.102476
Luna-Reyes, L. F., & Gil-Garcia, J. R. (2014). Digital government transformation and internet portals: The co-evolution of technology, organizations, and institutions. Government Information Quarterly, 31(4), 545-555. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2014.08.001
Meijer, A. J., Gil-Garcia, J. R., & Rodriguez Bolivar, M. P. (2016). Smart city research: Contextual conditions, governance models, and public value assessment. Social Science Computer Review, 34(6), 647-656. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439315618890
Mergel, I., Edelmann, N., & Haug, N. (2019). Defining digital transformation: Results from expert interviews. Government Information Quarterly, 36(4), 101385. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2019.06.002
Nabatchi, T., Sancino, A., & Sicilia, M. (2017). Varieties of participation in public services: The who, when, and what of coproduction. Public Administration Review, 77(5), 766-776. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12765
Newman, J., Barnes, M., Sullivan, H., & Knops, A. (2004). Public participation and collaborative governance. Journal of Social Policy, 33(2), 203-223. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047279403007499
Nuragnianti, M. R., & Mahirta, M. (2024). Implementasi prinsip koleksi dinamis di Museum Linggam Cahaya sebagai sumber edukasi sejarah Melayu. Jambura History and Culture Journal, 6(2), 85-100. https://doi.org/10.37905/jhcj.v6i2.25040
Ostrom, E. (2010). Beyond markets and states: Polycentric governance of complex economic systems. American Economic Review, 100(3), 641-672. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.100.3.641
Pendlebury, J. (2013). Conservation values, the authorised heritage discourse and the conservation-planning assemblage. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 19(7), 709-727. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527258.2012.700282
Petti, L., Trillo, C., & Makore, B. N. (2020). Cultural heritage and sustainable development targets: A possible harmonisation? Sustainability, 12(3), 926. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12030926
Republic of Indonesia. (2010). Law No. 11 of 2010 on Cultural Heritage.
Republic of Indonesia. (2017). Law No. 5 of 2017 on Advancement of Culture.
Republic of Indonesia. (2018). Presidential Regulation No. 65 of 2018 on Procedures for Preparing Regional Cultural Thought Documents and Cultural Strategy.
Rhodes, R. A. W. (1996). The new governance: Governing without government. Political Studies, 44(4), 652-667. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.1996.tb01747.x
Ripp, M., & Rodwell, D. (2016). The governance of urban heritage. The Historic Environment: Policy & Practice, 7(1), 81-108. https://doi.org/10.1080/17567505.2016.1142699
Rizkan, I., Kustiawan, K., & Putra, A. (2023). Strategi pemerintah daerah dalam meningkatkan daya tarik wisata sejarah dan budaya di Kabupaten Lingga tahun 2022. Birokrasi: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum dan Tata Negara, 1(2), 104-118. https://doi.org/10.55606/birokrasi.v1i2.499
Scholta, H., Mertens, W., Kowalkiewicz, M., & Becker, J. (2019). From one-stop shop to no-stop shop: An e-government stage model. Government Information Quarterly, 36(1), 11-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2018.11.010
Soini, K., & Birkeland, I. (2014). Exploring the scientific discourse on cultural sustainability. Geoforum, 51, 213-223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2013.12.001
Sorensen, E., & Torfing, J. (2009). Making governance networks effective and democratic through metagovernance. Public Administration, 87(2), 234-258. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2009.01753.x
Spekle, R. F., & Verbeeten, F. H. M. (2014). The use of performance measurement systems in the public sector: Effects on performance. Management Accounting Research, 25(2), 131-146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mar.2013.07.004
Su, M. M., & Wall, G. (2014). Community participation in tourism at a World Heritage Site: Mutianyu Great Wall, Beijing, China. International Journal of Tourism Research, 16(2), 146-156. https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr.1909
Throsby, D. (2009). Explicit and implicit cultural policy: Some economic aspects. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 15(2), 179-185. https://doi.org/10.1080/10286630902760840
UNESCO. (2003). Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage. UNESCO.
Wahyudi, M., Alfiandri, A., & Hendrayady, A. (2024). Penerapan nilai-nilai budaya Melayu dalam tata kelola Aparatur Sipil Negara di Kabupaten Lingga sebagai Bunda Tanah Melayu Provinsi Kepulauan Riau. Student Scientific Creativity Journal, 2(5), 264-288. https://doi.org/10.55606/sscj-amik.v2i5.4097
Waterton, E., & Smith, L. (2010). The recognition and misrecognition of community heritage. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 16(1-2), 4-15. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527250903441671
Wijaya, D. P., Laila, N., & Amiroh, W. A. (2025). Evaluation of the performance of the Malang City Regional Government in the implementation of the Government Agency Performance Accountability System (SAKIP). Journal Governance Society, 2(3), 149-162. https://doi.org/10.69812/jgs.v2i3.192
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Lamidi Lamidi, Natasya Gieserren Tivany
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- ShareAlike — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
