AKUNTABILITAS TRACK ACCESS CHARGE PERKERETAAPIAN INDONESIA
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.51903/dinamika.v6i1.1092Keywords:
Public accountability, Track Access Charge, railway policy, public financial governance, service performanceAbstract
This article analyzes the accountability of the Track Access Charge (TAC) policy in Indonesia’s railway sector. The study employs a qualitative conceptual approach through policy document analysis. The analytical framework is grounded in Bovens’ theory of public accountability, enriched by Romzek and Dubnick’s concepts of bureaucratic and public financial accountability, as well as Behn’s notion of performance accountability. Data are derived from audit reports issued by the Audit Board of the Republic of Indonesia, statutory regulations governing TAC and Non-Tax State Revenue (PNBP), and relevant scholarly literature. The analysis focuses on identifying the relationships among policy actors, accountability mechanisms, and policy outcomes. The findings indicate that although the TAC policy is supported by a robust regulatory framework, its implementation continues to face major challenges, particularly limited transparency in cost calculation, fragmented oversight among actors, and tensions between fiscal objectives and the improvement of railway service performance. This article argues that TAC accountability should be understood as an instrument of public financial governance oriented toward performance and public value, rather than merely as a form of administrative compliance.
References
[1] M. Bovens, “Analysing and assessing accountability: A conceptual framework,” Eur. law J., vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 447–468, 2007, [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0386.2007.00378.x
[2] M. A. P. Bovens, R. E. Goodin, and T. Schillemans, The Oxford handbook public accountability. Oxford handbooks, 2014. [Online]. Available: https://books.google.co.id/books?id=pip8AwAAQBAJ&lpg=PP1&ots=ktisxu7e5T&dq=%5B2%5D M. Bovens%2C T. Schillemans%2C and R. E. Goodin%2C The Oxford Handbook of Public Accountability. Oxford%3A Oxford University Press%2C 2014.&lr&hl=id&pg=PP1#v=onepage&q=%5B2%5D M. Bovens, T. Schillemans, and R. E. Goodin, The Oxford Handbook of Public Accountability. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014.&f=false
[3] R. Mulgan, “‘Accountability’: an ever‐expanding concept?,” Public Adm., vol. 78, no. 3, pp. 555–573, 2000, [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9299.00218
[4] C. Pollitt and G. Bouckaert, Public management reform: A comparative analysis-into the age of austerity. Oxford university press, 2017.
[5] R. D. Behn, “Why measure performance? Different purposes require different measures,” Public Adm. Rev., vol. 63, no. 5, pp. 586–606, 2003, [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-6210.00322
[6] C. Hood, “A public management for all seasons?,” Public Adm., vol. 69, no. 1, pp. 3–19, 1991, [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.1991.tb00779.x
[7] J. V Denhardt and R. B. Denhardt, The new public service: Serving, not steering. Routledge, 2015.
[8] W. Bank, “Railway Reform : Toolkit for Improving Rail Sector Performance,” Street NW, Washington DC, 2017. [Online]. Available: http://www.worldbank.org/transport
[9] J. Nash, “Rail infrastructure charging and public accountability,” Transp. Policy, vol. 62, pp. 27–35, 2018.
[10] H. Radiansyah, “Analisa biaya perhitungan track access charge pada perkeretaapian Indonesia dengan metode marginal cost plus markup = Cost analysis of track access charge calculation on Indonesian railways with marginal cost plus markup method,” Fakultas Teknik Universitas Indonesia, 2014. [Online]. Available: https://lib.ui.ac.id/detail?id=20388133&lokasi=lokal
[11] M. A. Berawi, P. Miraj, A. R. B. Berawi, and J. Sumabrata, “Track access charge for Indonesian railways using full cost method: Improving industry competitiveness,” in MATEC Web of Conferences, EDP Sciences, 2017, p. 5002.
[12] C. Nash, Y. Crozet, H. Link, J.-E. Nilsson, and A. Smith, “Track access charges: reconciling conflicting objectives,” Report, Brussels: CERRE, 2018.
[13] S. Marschnig, “Innovative track access charges,” Transp. Res. Procedia, vol. 14, pp. 1884–1893, 2016.
[14] K. P. Indonesia, “Peraturan Menteri Perhubungan Nomor 62 Tahun 2013 tentang Pedoman Perhitungan Biaya Penggunaan Prasarana Perkeretaapian Milik Negara,” Jakarta, 2013. [Online]. Available: BN.2013/No.855, jdih.dephub.go.id : 7 hlm.
[15] K. P. Indonesia, “Peraturan Menteri Perhubungan Nomor 122 Tahun 2015 tentang Perubahan atas Peraturan Menteri Perhubungan Nomor PM 62 Tahun 2013 tentang Pedoman Perhitungan Biaya Penggunaan Prasarana Perkeretaapian,” Jakarta, 2015. [Online]. Available: https://peraturan.bpk.go.id/Details/103520/permenhub-no-122-tahun-2015
[16] P. P. Indonesia, “Peraturan Pemerintah (PP) Nomor 15 Tahun 2016 tentang Jenis dan Tarif atas Jenis Penerimaan Negara Bukan Pajak yang Berlaku pada Kementerian Perhubungan,” Jakarta, 2016. [Online]. Available: https://peraturan.bpk.go.id/Details/5736/pp-no-15-tahun-2016
[17] B. P. K. RI, “Laporan Hasil Pemeriksaan atas LK Kemenhub Tahun Anggaran 2017,” Jakarta, 2018.
[18] B. P. K. RI, “Laporan Hasil Pemeriksaan atas LK Kemenhub Tahun Anggaran 2018,” Jakarta, 2019.
[19] M. Weber, Teori Organisasi Sosial dan Ekonomi. New York: Free Press, 1947. [Online]. Available: https://www.scirp.org/reference/referencespapers?referenceid=2233914
[20] B. G. Peters, “The Politics of Bureaucracy: A Continuing Saga,” NISPAcee J. Public Adm. Policy, vol. 13, pp. 213–220, Dec. 2020, doi: 10.2478/nispa-2020-0021.
[21] J. G. S. Koppell, “Pathologies of accountability: ICANN and the challenge of ‘multiple accountabilities disorder,’” Public Adm. Rev., vol. 65, no. 1, pp. 94–108, 2005, [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2005.00434.x
[22] T. Schillemans, “The public accountability review,” A meta-analysis public Account. Res. six Acad. Discip., 2013.
[23] B. G. Peters, Advanced introduction to public policy. Edward Elgar Publishing, 2021.
[24] B. Romzek and M. Dubnick, “Accountability in the Public Sector: Lessons from the Challenger Tragedy,” Public Adm. Rev., vol. 47, pp. 227–238, May 1987, doi: 10.2307/975901.
[25] B. Romzek, K. M. LeRoux, J. Johnston, R. Kempf, and J. Piatak, “Hierarchical Differences within Collaborative Service Delivery Networks: The Role of Street‐Level Workers in Shaping Informal Accountability,” in APSA 2012 Annual Meeting Paper, 2012.
[26] M. Andrews, The limits of institutional reform in development: Changing rules for realistic solutions. Cambridge University Press, 2013.
[27] R. D. Behn, Rethinking democratic accountability. Globe Pequot Publishing Group Incorporated/Bloomsbury, 2001.
[28] H. Christopher and C. Hood, “Gaming in targetworld: The targets approach to managing British public services,” Public Adm. Rev., vol. 66, no. 4, pp. 515–521, 2006.
[29] D. P. Moynihan, The Dynamics of Performance Management: Constructing Information and Reform. in Public Management and Change series. Georgetown University Press, 2008. [Online]. Available: https://books.google.co.id/books?id=4-YZW-duoZ8C
[30] E. Sørensen and J. Torfing, “Collaborative innovation in the public sector,” Enhancing public Innov. by Transform. public Gov., pp. 115–116, 2016.
[31] R. A. W. Rhodes, Understanding governance: Policy networks, governance, reflexivity and accountability. Open University, 1997.
[32] J. Pierre and B. G. Peters, Governance, politics and the state. Bloomsbury Publishing, 2020.
[33] C. Ansell and J. Torfing, “How does collaborative governance scale?,” Policy Polit., vol. 43, no. 3, pp. 315–329, 2015.
[34] E. Ferlie, L. E. Lynn Jr, and C. Pollitt, The Oxford handbook of public management. Oxford University Press, 2005.
[35] L. A. Negara, “Sistem Akuntabilitas Kinerja Instansi Pemerintah,” Ed. Kedua) LAN RI, Jakarta, 2004.
[36] Mardiasmo, AKUNTANSI SEKTOR PUBLIK - Edisi Terbaru. Andi Offset, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://books.google.co.id/books?id=pBVCEAAAQBAJ
[37] Mahmudi, Manajemen Kinerja Sektor Publik. Yogyakarta: UPP STIM YKPN, 2019. [Online]. Available: https://opac.ut.ac.id/detail-opac?id=41858
[38] KemenPANRB, “Pedoman Evaluasi SAKIP,” Jakarta, 2022.
[39] J. W. Creswell and C. N. Poth, Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches. SAGE Publications, 2017. [Online]. Available: https://books.google.co.id/books?id=gX1ZDwAAQBAJ
[40] R. K. Yin, Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods. SAGE Publications, 2017. [Online]. Available: https://books.google.co.id/books?id=uX1ZDwAAQBAJ
[41] N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln, The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research. SAGE Publications, 2017. [Online]. Available: https://books.google.co.id/books?id=AmPgDQAAQBAJ
[42] R. Indonesia, “UNDANG-UNDANG REPUBLIK INDONESIA NOMOR 23 TAHUN 2007 TENTANG PERKERETAAPIAN,” Jakarta, 2007.
[43] P. P. Indonesia, “Peraturan Pemerintah (PP) Nomor 5 Tahun 2016 tentang Jenis Dan Tarif Atas Jenis Penerimaan Negara Bukan Pajak Yang Berlaku Pada Lembaga Administrasi Negara,” Jakarta, 2016. [Online]. Available: https://peraturan.bpk.go.id/Details/5726/pp-no-5-tahun-2016
[44] B. Kemenhub, “Kajian Track Access Charge,” Jakarta, 2019.
[45] M. Q. Patton, “Qualitative Research and Evaluation methods, 4th edn.(Thousand Oaks; London,” 2015, Sage Publications New Delhi.
[46] K. Krippendorff, Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Sage publications, 2018.
[47] D. Purnama, “Pertumbuhan PNBP sektor transportasi,” 2021.
[48] B. RI, “Ikhtisar Hasil Pemeriksaan Semester,” Jakarta, 2020.
[49] T. Schillemans and M. Busuioc, “Predicting public sector accountability: From agency drift to forum drift,” J. public Adm. Res. theory, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 191–215, 2015.
[50] B. S. Romzek, “Living accountability,” Public Adm. Rev., vol. 60, no. 1, pp. 21–32, 2000.
[51] M. Dubnick and H. G. Frederickson, “Public accountability: Performance measurement, the extended state, and the search for trust,” Natl. Acad. Public Adm. Kettering Found., 2011.
[52] R. Behn, “Performance accountability,” Public Adm. Rev., vol. 63, no. 5, pp. 586–606, 2003.
[53] C. Pollitt, Performance management 40 years on. Public Money & Management, 2013.
[54] E. Sørensen and J. Torfing, “The democratic anchorage of governance networks,” Scan. Polit. Stud., vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 195–218, 2005.
[55] OECD, OECD Public Integrity Handbook. OECD Publishing, Paris, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1787/ac8ed8e8-en
[56] W. Bank, “Infrastructure Governance Framework,” Infrastructure Governance Assessment Framework (InfraGov), Dec. 07, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/governance/brief/infrastructure-governance-framework
[57] Brussels, “COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING DECISION on the financing of the Connecting Europe Facility - Transport sector and the adoption of the work programme for 2021-2027,” in EUROPEAN COMMISSION, EUROPEAN COMMISSION, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://transport.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2023-09/c20215763-cef-financing.pdf
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Aurida Mahelvi, Dewi Casmiwati
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
