1

THE EFFECTS OF SOCIAL SYSTEMS ON BATIK CLUSTER INSTITUTIONALISATION IN

SURAKARTA MUNICIPALITY: A REVIEW OF LOCAL CLUSTER POLICY

Prihadi Nugroho

Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Diponegoro University

Faculty of Spatial Planning, Technische Universität Dortmund

Abstract

Cluster policies implemented in Indonesia for the past decades look still far from its primary goal to

improve regional competitiveness nationwide. Although cluster approach is promising theoretically,

its practicalities rely on responsiveness variations of local industries and communities to actualise it.

As a result, conflicts are likely to occur when uniform cluster policies applied on different localities.

Local institutional framework, however, plays an important role in directing cluster growth. It carries

out a set of social norms, formal and informal rules, and organisations in a society required for

supporting cluster activities. Substantially, it forms local capabilities in accumulating stakeholders,

types of industries, and resources available to promoting cluster competence and performance. In

this paper I would like to examine how different configuration of local institutions of similar cluster

organisations may result in different pathways to grow. By taking up two case studies of batik cluster

in Kampung Batik Laweyan and Kampung Batik Kauman – both in Surakarta Municipality – in

comparison, I have found that normative social construction and historical values persisting in each

kampung (urban village) strongly determine whether respective cluster policy can be adapted or not.

In the case of Kampung Batik Laweyan government’s cluster-related programs often fails to be

executed easily due to high resistence of local cluster and community members. Its social structure

was made up by a plenty of juragan besar batik (large batik entrepreneurs) which carried out anti-

government dominance in nature. They created elitic group network which has been ruling in both

social and economic life of Kampung Batik Laweyan. In contrast, the social structure of Kampung

Batik Kauman has inherited traditional Javanese Monarchy patronage (Kraton Solo) combined with

Islamic values preference, which created aristocratic-styled governance. As a result, the strong

influences of charismatic leader are useful to nurturing community cooperation and empowerment.

Therefore, it can be concluded that local institutional pattern, leadership style, and voluntary

collective action are determinants for building up successful batik cluster institutionalisation to

support local cluster policy.

Keywords: cluster policy, batik industry, local institutions, social construction, Surakarta Municipality

I. INTRODUCTION

For the past decades cluster policy has been panacea for both central and local governments

in Indonesia to boost economic growth. On one hand, many experts and practitioners including the

governments are confident with its reliability to increasing national and regional competitiveness.

This refers to Porter’s thesis which promotes the concentration of inter-industrial functional linkages

2

in certain locations in order to increase total productivity and innovation. Through open competition

supported by collective cooperation, firms and institutions within cluster are capable of producing

national and/or regional competitiveness. The key point is the alliance of firms and stakeholders

within certain industry will unleash competitive accumulation entirely (Asheim, Cooke and Martin,

2006; Belussi, 2006). On the other hand, cluster approach is prescribed for enhancing domestic

industrial restructuring. As we have already concerned, one of the classical problems of Indonesia’s

industrial development since 1970s is footlose industry phenomenon. Following the endorsement of

Laws No. 1 Year 1967 about Foreign Capital Investment, many multinational companies contributed

to national economy through foreign direct investments (FDI). Regardless of their positive impacts

on economic growth, they have created missing domestic inter-industrial linkages. The situation has

got worsened with industrialisation policies during New Order era (1967 – 1998) which encouraged

broad-based spectrum and outward-looking oriented industries, through which large manufacturing

industries (LIs) were more favourable to raise export growth (Siahaan, 2000).

Now the question is whether cluster policy suitable to Indonesian context. Actually there are

many conditions that may impede its implementation. First, the composition of manufacturing

industry in Indonesia is dominated by small and medium industries (SMIs). According to Ministry of

Industry or Kemenperin (2010), until 2009 the number of SMIs was 3.7 million firms (99.9%)

compared to LIs with 2.8 thousand firms (0.1%). In terms of employment structure, SMIs absorbed

more than eight million workers (57.7%) while LIs was about 5.9 million workers (42.3%). In contrast,

the output comparison between SMIs and LIs showed Rp 140 billion (25%) and Rp 420 billion (75%).

Such situation tells us about intra-industrial discrepancy in labour productivity. Second, the

locational distribution of firms is uneven and concentrated in Java-Bali Islands. Around 75% of firms

are located in this area and dominated by capital intensive and service industries. On the contrary,

the outer Java-Bali areas mostly comprise extractive industries of cash crop plantation and mining.

Apparently, Java-Bali has remained attractive for investment and job creation in manufacturing

industries since the late 1960s. Third, infrastructure provisions for industrial development are

unequal and vary across the nation. Even in Java Island there is a gap between northern and

southern regions, particularly the level of service of road, electricity, telecommunication, port and

terminal. The northern part is more well-equipped and accessible than the opposite. Fourth, the lack

of local institutional capacity remains problematic to support industrial development. Obstacles in

bureaucratic services, regulations, entrepreneurships, and human resources upgrading are still not

overcome satisfactorily. Concerned with all those situations, the implementation of cluster policies

at both central and local levels needs to be questioned, however, particularly related to the creation

of inter-industrial linkages horizontally and vertically as well as inter-regional linkages.

Porterian cluster theory requires transportation and communication access sufficiency. It

comes from assumption that the working of free market mechanism needs open channels for

ensuring easy flows of information, skilled workers, resources, and trade transactions. For example,

at global level cluster works on high technology industries such as automotives, biotechnology, and

information technology. At national level it also works the case of Sillicon Valley (US) and Emilia-

Romagna (Italy). But when it will be adopted into local level, the accessibility requirement is often

not fulfiled yet. In Indonesia unequal infrastructure provisions have become the major obstacle for

industrial cluster development. In addition, regional variations are quite high in terms of geographic,

demographic, economic and sociocultural conditions. Hence, the good understanding on such a

differentiation must be done first to modify cluster concept suitable to local context. In this sense,

local institutional framework plays a significant role in shaping regional performance. It deals not

3

only with bureaucratic issues, regulations and local government capacity, but also traditional values

and social norms which underpin the establisment of rules of the game and interactions among

industrial stakeholders and related institutions.

This paper aims to examine cluster policy practice at local level with focus on cluster

community responsiveness. Two case studies are selected i.e. Kampung Batik Laweyan and Kampung

Batik Kauman, both located in Surakarta Municipality. The study was undertaken for four months

from December 2011 to April 2012 and utilising qualitative approach. A series of interview, direct

observation and questionnaire completed for data collection, involving 26 respondents (interview)

and 40 firms (questionnaire). Both cases feature traditional batik cluster based on SMIs and cottage

industries (CIs) and each located in the old kampung (urban village settlement) with long-standing

historical values and traditions. Both kampung-based batik clusters were originated from typical

socioeconomic traditions of society which have naturally existed since 1500s (Kampung Batik

Laweyan) and 1800s (Kampung Batik Kauman). However, as Surakarta Government recognised them

into public policy – Kampung Batik Laweyan in 2004 and Kampung Batik Kauman in 2006 – many

conflicts have emerged to (re-)direct further developments. On government side, the tensions come

from misinterpretations between government agencies to actualise cluster approach and the

prevailing project-oriented style of policy making process. On cluster community side, the potential

conflicts are created from skeptical perspectives in society against cluster development programs.

Therefore, the roles of community-based organisations and social institutions are pivotal to

determining cluster development. The lessons gained from the field are expected to feedback cluster

policy formulation at both central and local levels.

II. KAMPUNG-BASED BATIK CLUSTER POLICY IN SURAKARTA MUNICIPALITY

The introduction of batik cluster policy in Surakarta Municipality started gradually and did

not directly focus on cluster actualisation. Formally, Kampung Batik Laweyan was introduced in 2004

while Kampung Batik Kauman in 2006. At the first time the government promoted both kampung as

conserved cultural heritage sites instead of cluster areas. They present a rich historical architecture

manifested into old buildings and traditional kampung nuance. Despite their similarities, the social

background underlying in their existence is very different creating distinguished foundations for local

institutional pattern making.

Initially, the legal basis for Kampung Laweyan as cultural heritage site was Mayor Decree No.

646/116/I/1997 dated 31st November 1997 about the Endorsement of Old Historical Buildings and

Sites in Surakarta Municipality. This regulation was backed up with Ministerial Regulation of the

Ministry of Culture and Tourism No. PM.03/PW.007/MKP/2010 about the Endorsement of Laweyan

Site as Conserved Cultural Materials, Sites or Areas. These regulations emphasized on protected

cultural asset rather than socioeconomic potentials as batik production centre. Physical protection

and revitalization has been encouraged more than batik industry potentials. After seven years

Kampung Laweyan was introduced by Surakarta Government as batik cluster area on 25th September

2004 with focus on batik tourism promotion while Kampung Kauman in 2006. Such cluster policy

relates to the long-term local development vision and mission which promote Surakarta Municipality

as cultural city of Javanese civilization centre, as formalized in Local Government Regulation No. 2

Year 2010 about Long-Term Development Plan of Surakarta Municipality Year 2005 – 2025. Hence,

Surakarta now has two leading batik clusters separated only 2.7 kms on distance (Figure 1).

4

As government attention to batik promotion intensifies along with greater enthusiasms from

the public, in fact there are no integrated policies and programs for enhancing kampung-based batik

cluster development. So far the government has undertaken kampung improvement and community

empowerment programs. For example, the government has spent for the building of site signage,

information board, street lighting and road improvement in each kampung. Such attempt is directed

to beautify kampung appearance as attractive tourism destination. The community empowerment

was realised through the creation of independent community-based organization (CBO). In Kampung

Batik Laweyan there is Forum Pengembangan Kampung Batik Laweyan (FPKBL) while in Kampung

Figure 1.

Location of Kampung Batik Laweyan and Kampung Batik Kauman

5

Batik Kauman is Paguyuban Kampung Wisata Batik Kauman (PKWBK). Moreover, a number of

government agencies have also allocated sectoral programs to support both batik clusters as the

pilot areas of prospective tourism destination (Table 1).

Table 1.

Local Government Programs Related to Batik Cluster Development in

Kampung Batik Laweyan dan Kampung Batik Kauman

No. Agency Programs Remarks

1. Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Daerah or BAPPEDA (Local Planning Authority)

Establishment of Forum for Economic Development and Employment Promotion (FEDEP)

Trainings on natural dyeing materials

Formed under Mayor Decree No. 500.05/02 – E/I/2009 as a government’s think tank responsible to policy formulation, including batik cluster development

Organised by Unit Pengelola Teknis Daerah or UPTD (Technical Management Unit) Solo Techno Park under coordination of Research and Development Division

2. Dinas Tata Ruang Kota or DTRK (Spatial Planning Agency)

Site revitalisation Aimed at improving cultural heritage site physically

3. Dinas Perindustrian dan Perdagangan or Disperindag (Industry and Trade Agency)

Providing batik production equipments

Trainings on industrial skills

Encouraging firms‘ participation in exhibition

Allocated regularly based on needs assessment

4. Dinas Koperasi dan UMKM (Cooperatives, Micro, Small and Medium Businesses Agency)

Trainings on entrepreneurship skills

Allocated regularly based on needs assessment

5. Dinas Kebudayaan dan Pariwisata or Disbudpar (Culture and Tourism Agency)

Promoting cultural events including batik festival

Facilitating the development of (new) tourism destinations

The programs are routinely coordinated with ASITA (travel bureau association), PHRI (hotel and restaurant owners association), event organizer, and other tourism stakeholders

6. Badan Lingkungan Hidup or BLH (Environmental Management Agency)

Promoting green production technology

Providing communal liquid waste facility (IPAL)

The provision of IPAL funded by GTZ Pro LH

Source: Analysis (2012)

6

Unfortunately, those programs above are executed partially showing individual sectoral

programs instead of integrated ones. Based on interviews with those agencies’ senior officers, they

all complained about missing understanding and coordination on batik cluster development. Each

agency perceived cluster concept differently and treated it by matching their routine programs with

committed cluster development objectives. This means that cluster policy does not work to integrate

varying government programs with cluster’s needs assessment. For example, Dinas Koperasi dan

UMKM classifies cluster as Kelompok Usaha Bersama (KUB) or Collective Business Group focusing on

business development support; Badan Lingkungan Hidup (BLH) considers sentra industri (industrial

district) because of production similarities; and Dinas Perindustrian dan Perdagangan justifies

cluster with one village one product (OVOP) concept. Such different perceptions among public

agencies create difficulties in understanding what cluster should be and how it could be better

developed. Coordination meetings inside the government cannot be expected to result in consensus

on cluster development. Even though each agency commits to support it, in fact they promote their

own routine duties and programs as business as usual. As a result, many programs are overlapping,

poorly managed, and unsustained for enhancing cluster activities.

Testimonies from business players are more shocking. Based on interviews taken from batik

producers and traders, they raised long-standing issues and problems criticizing on government

performance. First, they behave skeptical towards government roles on batik cluster development.

This can be understood from some expressions as follows:

Batik players‘ survival capacity is determined by their own hard-working and preserverance

attitude rather than having government backups;

Government agencies are viewed self-oriented because they tend to prioritise their own

routine programs to meet organisational performance;

Government programs are often not transparent, off targets, and unsustained because of

ineffective monitoring and evaluation;

Incomplete public participation ranging from planning to evaluation phases causes

government programs incompliance with actual needs.

Second, business players do not care about any government proposals to advance batik

cluster. Cluster, OVOP, and the likes are buzzwords without significant meanings if it cannot meet

their profit-oriented behaviour and business sustainability. In fact, they will participate and support

government programs as long as they can obtain concrete impacts on their livelihood upgrading.

Third, business players expect government incentives to ease their business activities. Some

issues underlined here are:

Tax deduction, especially Pajak Bumi dan Bangunan (PBB) or building/property ownership

tax. This problem is often raised by the old building owners. As cultural heritage site

endorsement applies, residents in both Kampung Batik Laweyan and Kampung Batik Kauman

are exerted to preserve their old buildings. This policy makes them to spend extra money for

building maintenance and higher PBB charge;

Interest rate reduction of banking loans. More than 90% batik players in Surakarta come

from SMIs. They are always complaining about bank conditionalities which put on high

interest rate of loans and collateral. Ironically, when they propose their old buildings as

collateral, these buildings are undervalued compared to higher PBB charge;

More public facilities to support batik tourism promotion. More parking areas and public

showroom are required nowadays to support batik cluster development. Originated as old

kampung settlements, both Kampung Batik Laweyan and Kampung Batik Kauman have very

7

limited road access and densely populated buildings. This makes the building owners who

are batik producers and traders are unable to provide adequate parking services to visitors.

Thus, public showroom is also required to accelerate batik promotion and marketing

especially for those whose shops or workshops are less accessible;

Limited lands for harvesting natural dyeing plants. As market demand for environmental

friendly batik products increases, batik producers are facing difficulties to collect natural

dyeing materials due to limited supplies. Some large producers build up their own plantation

while the rest keeps using synthetic colouring liquids. To overcome this, they have urged the

government to provide cultivation lands for natural dyeing plantation.

Such circumstance demonstrates that batik cluster policy formulation has not been prepared

properly. It was introduced to the public reflecting a government jargon rather than a sound policy.

In fact, there is no cluster specific policy documents. Even government’s routine development plans,

either BAPPEDA’s comprehensive plans or Dinas‘ sectoral plans, have not explained much in details

about cluster development direction. In other words, cluster concept has been discussed broadly but

it has never been actualised seriously into public policy. Actually along with Kampung Batik Laweyan

and Kampung Batik Kauman there are some batik production centres in Surakarta which are

potentially developed as kampung-based batik cluster such as Kampung Sondakan and Kampung

Bumi. Dealing with such richness of batik cluster potentials, cluster approach needs to be prepared

carefully not only in terms of integrated policy making, but also the policy itself should accomodate

sociocultural uniqueness of each batik cluster. Because the value chains of batik industry cannot be

separated from the influences of local norms and traditions and the practice of informal economy

called ekonomi kerakyatan (society-based economy). In the following sections I will discuss my

preliminary findings focusing on local institutional patterns in both Kampung Batik Laweyan and

Kampung Batik Kauman.

III. THE INSTITUTIONAL PATTERN OF KAMPUNG BATIK LAWEYAN CLUSTER

The main feature of batik cluster in Kampung Laweyan is predominantly shaped by juragan

besar (large entrepreneurs) community. The contemporary social construction exists in Kampung

Laweyan carries out a legacy of long-lasting pride and the greatness of ancestors since the 19th

century. The influences of powerful bourgeois group in the past have persisted until now, creating a

strongly independent and individualistic behaviour inside Laweyan society. Therefore, Laweyan

society is often viewed exclusive, arrogant, and closed from ordinary people.

According to local historian Soedarmono (1987), the social system of Laweyan is formed by

large-scale merchants and middle-class society. The existence of this group deviates from common

Javanese feudalistic social order which classifies society into three groups: priyayi (aristocrat), santri

(Islamic technocrat), and wong cilik (proletarian people). Under this system priyayi group takes the

highest rank in society as the ruling class. The santri group takes the second class and usually works

for the rulers to spread Islamic teachings – under Kraton hegemony (Surakarta Monarchy) this role is

assigned to abdi dalem (the loyal staff) of the King. Wong cilik group takes the lowest class in society

with limited rights and responsibilities. The existence of large-scale batik merchants in Laweyan has

given distinguished influences into the existing social system through the spread of democratic

values, Islam abangan traditions (moderate Islamic principles), and gender equality insights. In

Laweyan the role of women in batik industry is dominant not only work as buruh batik (batik makers)

8

– in batik industry most pembatik tulis (handwritten batik makers with canting equipment) is female

while pembatik cap (stamping batik makers) is male – but also takes control in batik production and

trading.

Both individual and social relations that are prevailing in Laweyan are strongly determined

by gender-biased division of labour in batik production. The role of Mbok Mase – the title given to

female large-scale merchant – takes the highest rank in batik production and trading (public affairs)

and household‘s financial decision making (domestic affairs). Even though men are still regarded as

household leader and get involved at most in social events, their role is symbolic under the shadows

of wife’s control. In batik production the role of husband, called as Mas Nganten, is to prepare and

supervise batik production and trading following his wife direction. At present time even though

most business owners are men, the control and influences of Mbok Mase remain significant

indirectly (Soedarmono, 1987; Ristianti, 2010).

Such social system has implied on the establishment of current dynamic institutional pattern

in Kampung Batik Laweyan. The highly individualism levels shared between business players have

made the decision making power distributed across a number of prominent actors. Conflicts of

interests are frequently occured and decision making process is hardly to achieve consensus. The

government intervention is often ignored and refused because of local resistence over corrupted

practices of government-driven developments. This relates to religious values embedded deeply into

Laweyan society even though they are classified as moderate Islamic followers. Consequently, it is

very often that the role of FPKBL is being trapped in-between continuing individual conflicts, through

which negotiation process is very difficult to complete.

Deadlock situation is commonly brought into the elderly group whose function as a catalyst

for local development initiatives. Hence, the role of elderly group in Laweyan is beneficial to assist

FPKBL in intermediating public aspirations. Another important feature of local institutions in

Laweyan is the working of social control. In spite of the absence of written rules, social norms are

running quite effectively. Even though reward-and-punishment mechanisms are never been stated

Figure 2.

The Distribution of Batik Entrepreneurs in Kampung Batik Laweyan

Kampung Batik Laweyan Boundaries

9

out clearly, those who break up these norms will be excluded socially. Even under competitive

market nowadays, none has behaved deceitfully as indicated by the absence of batik motifs stealing

and skilled workers hijacking, for example. Each entrepreneur is able to build up particular market

segments and networks (Table 2).

Table 2.

The Institutional Pattern of Kampung Laweyan Batik Cluster

No. Elements Prevailing Norms

1. Power structure Elitic group whose power spread into several prominent actors

2. Leadership model The elderly group functions as a catalyst for mediating different interest groups and the role of selected community leaders is to facilitate and execute public consensus

3. Decision making process Open dialogue to pursue public consensus

4. Participatory model Voluntary and individualistic

5. Social relations type Based on family relationships

6. Control mechanism Unwritten social control

7. Cooperation nature Tends to be passive depending on pioneership and prospective benefits that might be collected individually

8. Competition behaviour Highly market segmentation and product differentiation

9. Innovation ability Free expressions on batik motifs and techniques and low product design imitation

10. Normative foundation Islamic teachings and gender equality principles

Source: Analysis (2012)

IV. THE INSTITUTIONAL PATTERN OF KAMPUNG BATIK KAUMAN

In general Kampung Kauman is characterised by kampung santri and batik merchants rather

than batik producers. The origin of batik making is inherited from Kraton Surakarta traditions to abdi

dalem and their wives. Compared to Kampung Laweyan batik products segmented for sandang

rakyat (clothings for ordinary people), the Kampung Kauman ones originated for Kraton’s fashion

demand exclusively. Later the products are marketable for ordinary people too. Until now Kampung

Kauman product design is dominated by traditional batik motifs in compliance with Kraton’s rules. It

is not surprising because the establishment of Kampung Kauman was associated with the placement

of abdi dalem pamethakan (Islamic missionarist) assigned for spreading out Islamic teachings to the

public – this abdi dalem is also known as penghulu (Moslem leader). Penghulu settled closely to

Masjid Agung Surakarta (the Great Mosque of Surakarta), which was built by King Paku Buwono III in

1757. The major role of penghulu is representing the King in spreading out Islamic teachings to the

public – the King is privileged not only as the Great Ruler but also the Great Islamic Leader for the

people, from which he got royal title as Sayyidin Panatagama Khalifatullah. Therefore, the social

construction of local entrepreneurs and society in Kampung Kauman is still determined by mixed

feudalistic system and Islamic teachings, on which paternalistic culture remains existed strongly in

society. The social class of Kampung Kauman creates intermediate group responsible to bridging the

King (the ruler) and the people (Pusponegoro, Soim & Muttaqin, 2007; Andriesna, 2010).

10

The presence of dichotomic role between Mbok Mase and Mas Nganten can also be found in

Kampung Kauman but the power relations and labour division differs from Kampung Laweyan. In

Kauman the female entrepreneurs used to make batik during spare times while waiting for husbands

– the abdi dalem – returned from teaching Islamic materials in mosque. As time changes and so as

the market demand for batik products, Kauman’s Mbok Mase attracted to enter commerciable batik

making in order to gain additional income. This is because the salary of abdi dalem was very small

inadequate to fulfill their daily needs. However, Kauman’s Mbok Mase could not switch easily to

become batik traders without permission from their husbands. This was not only because of the

Figure 3.Distribution of Batik Entrepreneurs in Kampung Batik Kauman

Kampung Batik Kauman Boundaries

11

practices of strong Islamic values and Javanese paternalistic system, but also that the trading license

of batik products in Kauman was privileged to the husbands from the King. Hence, the female

entrepreneurs needed to ask their husbands for getting this license. As a result, the role of Mbok

Mase has greatly relied on Mas Nganten socially and economically. Both in public and domestic

affairs the role of men remains dominating as women’s leader in religious and daily life until now.

Such men-women relational adjustment is in line with both Islamic teachings and Javanese traditions

which suggest women submission to their men in all aspects of life.

With such social system the local institutional pattern of batik cluster in Kampung Kauman is

relatively easier to build coordinated structure since the social power tends to be concentrated onto

certain public figure. Usually this figure is a role model in society and not necessarily come from

elderly group. In Kampung Kauman the Head of PKWBK is a young batik entrepreneur, the successor

of his parents‘ family business, who has royal blood line. His pioneership to advance Kampung

Kauman combined with his family prominence are likely to be the determinants for PKWBK

movements. However, his leadership role is not absolute and encourages democratic togetherness

in nature. Social mobilisation and cooperation between batik players and local residents are easier

to complete due to the positive effects of paternalistic culture. The decision making process can be

executed easily to achieve public consensus because of persisting collectivity values in social order.

This situation leads to peacefully conflict resolution following high solidarity and social cohesion

between stakeholders in Kampung Kauman.

Such circumstance can be observed visually from settlement layout and social interaction

pattern in Kampung Kauman. It is formed with densely populated housing and narrowed road access

connecting entire area. Business cooperation between batik players emerges competitively as

similar batik products are sold in many places at once. This means that product segmentation and

differentation in Kampung Kauman are low, which is sensitive to price fluctuation and opportunistic

behaviour. For those who come from real batik lovers group, this situation is likely to downgrade the

prestigeous values of Kauman‘ batik products (Table 3).

Table 3.

The Institutional Pattern of Kampung Kauman Batik Cluster

No. Elements Prevailing Norms

1. Power structure Concentrated onto public figure

2. Leadership model Selected leader takes full control and coordination

3. Decision making process Open dialogue with mutual consensus

4. Participatory model Voluntary and collective

5. Social relations type Family kinship with dominant paternalistic culture

6. Control mechanism Unwritten social control

7. Cooperation nature Actively following the leader’s coordination

8. Competition behaviour Low product segmentation and differentiation with potentially destructive opportunistic behaviour

9. Innovation ability Traditional-styled batik expressions subject to Kraton rules

10. Normative foundation Mixed Islamic teachings and Javanese feudalistic model

Source: Analysis (2012)

12

V. CONCLUSION

Learning from the cases of Kampung Laweyan and Kampung Kauman, it can be found that

the influences of local values heritage are determining the existence of batik cluster institutional

pattern. The differences between these two are so obvious even though they are separated less

than 3 kms. On one hand, this situation shows that the legacy of batik making traditions, including

the following social order, is able to last for long period and each kampung can possess its unique

batik traditions and motifs. Kampung Laweyan carries out free-style batik traditions, while Kampung

Kauman is identical to traditional Kraton style. This has proven that batik is a media for expressing

typical social order in particular time and place. On the other hand, these local values are also

influential to direct cluster dynamics. This can be observed from the patterns of cooperation,

competition, and innovation shared across the cluster. Even though Kampung Laweyan batik cluster

has emerged and famously recognised earlier, its internal capacity to grow is likely to deal with many

internal conflicts than Kampung Kauman. The immediate obstacle of creating collective cooperation

should be resolved to advance cluster development.

Such distinct local institutional setting should be understood by government agencies for

incorporating cluster concept into public policy domain. The historical record of batik industry

development in each kampung should be recognised and examined carefully before the government

introduces particular cluster policies/programs. The prevailing informal institutional pattern

embedded in each kampung’s social construction cannot be dismissed anyway. It must be

accommodated properly as endogenous factor which determines cluster growth. This means that

any market forces and government interventions cannot be urged for replacing the existing rooted

institutional pattern. One of important variables in the making of local institutional pattern is

leadership style. In both kampung leadership factor still plays great influences in enhancing cluster

development. Therefore, the government should involve local (informal) leaders in formulating

cluster development policy by giving more power in decision making process.

REFERENCES

Andriesna, JM (2010). Keutuhan ruang budaya Kampung Kauman, Surakarta. Tugas Akhir. Semarang:

Jurusan Perencanaan Wilayah dan Kota Universitas Diponegoro.

Asheim, B, Cooke, P. & Martin, R. (2006). The rise of the cluster concept in regional analysis and

policy: A critical assessment. Dalam B. Asheim, P. Cooke & R. Martin (Eds.), Clusters and

regional development: Critical reflections and explorations (pp. 1-29). London: Routledge.

Belussi, F. (2006). In search of a useful theory of spatial clustering: Agglomeration versus active

clustering. Dalam B. Asheim, P. Cooke & R. Martin (Eds.), Clusters and regional development:

Critical reflections and explorations (pp. 69-89). London: Routledge.

Kementerian Perindustrian (2010). Rencana strategis Kementerian Perindustrian tahun 2010 – 2014.

Jakarta: Kementerian Perindustrian.

Pusponegoro, M, Soim, M. & Muttaqin, H. (2007). Kauman: Religi, tradisi & seni. Surakarta:

Paguyuban Kampung Wisata Batik Kauman.

Ristianti, NS (2010). Indikasi penilaian signifikansi budaya kawasan bersejarah, bangunan bersejarah

dan aktivitas bersejarah di Kampung Batik Laweyan. Tugas Akhir. Semarang: Jurusan

Perencanaan Wilayah dan Kota Universitas Diponegoro.

13

Siahaan, B. (2000). Industrialisasi di Indonesia: Sejak periode rehabilitasi sampai awal reformasi.

Bandung: Penerbit ITB.

Soedarmono (1987). Munculnya kelompok pengusaha batik di Laweyan pada awal abad XX. Tesis.

Yogyakarta: Fakultas Pasca Sarjana Universitas Gadjah Mada.