Public Response To The Government's COVID 19 Mitigation Policy: 2020 National Online Qualitative Survey

The success of the COVID19 mitigation policy depends on many things, the most important of which is the performance of the government and the trust between fellow citizens in one state entity. This study aims to see people's perceptions of the government's response to the handling of COVID 19. The method used is an online qualitative survey. This national online qualitative survey represents respondents from 6 (six) major islands in Indonesia, namely Sumatra, Java, Kalimantan, Sulawesi, Bali and Papua. The results of this research survey are First, 53.4% of respondents expressed dissatisfaction with the government's performance in handling the COVID 19 Pandemic. Second, 50.2% of respondents stated that Anies Baswedan was the governor whose most responsive governor was the COVID 19 Pandemic. Third, 51.1% of respondents stated that the DKI Jakarta Regional Government is considered to be the most responsive local government to COVID 19. Fourth, 46.7% of respondents chose the provision of massive rapid test kits at Puskesmas as the main thing that must be done by the government for better handling of COVID 19. Fifth, 55.9% of respondents stated that the National Government vis a vis BNPN-the Task Force for the Acceleration of Handling Corona Virus (COVID 19) as the most authorized institution in handling COVID 19.


Introduction
COVID 19 steals the spotlight of the world, not only about its spread which causes paralysis of the world but also its genetic code which is still mysterious. Although in some time a COVID 19 vaccine may soon be found. The various responses made by governments around the world to the spread of COVID 19 have resulted in at least several categories, governments that have efficient and inefficient policies in minimizing the rate of spread of COVID 19. New Zealand, Vietnam and South Korea are governments with policies that are quite efficient in blocking the spread of COVID 19 in their countries. Meanwhile, the United States and Britain are examples of countries where the handling of government policies is in a bad category. How about Indonesia? Various surveys were conducted both by domestic pollsters and assessments conducted by foreign institutions. Oxford University, for example, puts the capacity of the Indonesian Government in a bad category.
The University of Oxford in the UK provides an index value of 43.91 for Indonesia. A value below 50 means that there is still less or equal to the D value for handling the coronavirus in the country. The value of 43.91 puts Indonesia the lowest among ASEAN countries, even Indonesia's score is far behind Cambodia.
On the other hand, the addition of positive cases in Indonesia reached 100,303 cases on July 27, 2020, placing Indonesia in 24th place among 215 countries and 9th in the Asian region. The number of death cases in Indonesia has also increased by 57. Thus, the total death cases due to COVID-19 is 4,838. This number makes Indonesia occupy the 5th position in the Asian region (HealthGrid, 2020).
Some time ago, Political Indicators, for example, issued survey results regarding public satisfaction with the handling of COVID 19. The Indonesian Political Indicator survey institute recorded that public satisfaction with the government in handling COVID 19 decreased drastically. In February 2020, Indicators noted that 70.8% of respondents said they were satisfied with the government's performance in handling corona cases. However, in the latest survey in May the figure decreased to 56.4%. Meanwhile, public satisfaction with Jokowi's performance in February was 69.5%, in May it fell to 66.5% (Katadata, 2020) The success of the mitigation policy regarding COVID19 greatly depends on many things, among which the most important is the matter of government performance and mutual trust in one state entity.
This study aims to look at people's perceptions of the Government's policies on handling COVID 19. This research will generate new insights because the method is carried out with online qualitative surveys and that the updates we offer in this study.
According to Lenvine's opinion in Dwiyanto (2005: 147) "The product of public service delivery in a democratic country must have at least three indicators, namely: responsiveness, responsibility and accountability". First, Responsiveness or responsiveness is the responsiveness of service providers to the hopes, desires, aspirations and demands of service users.
Second, Responsibility or responsibility is a measure showing how far the process of providing public services is carried out under correct and predetermined principles or administrative and organizational provisions. Finally, accountability is a measure showing and how much service delivery is following the interests of stakeholders and the norms that develop in society. The responsiveness aspect becomes very important to assess because it is related to how the government responds to unprecedented incidents.
About this research, we identified several studies that were closely related Darmastuti, Warganegara and Maulida, Public Response to The Government's COVID 19 Mitigation Policy: 2020 National Online Qualitative Survey 147 to COVID 19. In the context of COVID 19 and the government's response, we have not found a study that tries to assess the government's response using a qualitative survey perspective. Rizaldi and Harihah's research (2020), for example, provides an assessment of the response to state policies in dealing with the COVID 19 Pandemic in Indonesia. Rizaldi and Hariha's results provide an overview of several COVID 19 mitigation policies issued by the Indonesian Government.
Furthermore, another study conducted by Suherman (2020) provides an assessment of the rational response of government policies in dealing with the COVID 19 Pandemic. The results show that there are 5 subject elements or stakeholders that are important in overcoming the spread of COVID 19, namely academics, entrepreneurs, society, government and mass media. In certain cases, the five stakeholders have their respective roles following their fields.
Meanwhile, Greer et al. (2020Greer et al. ( , p. 1413 have argued the need for a policy and political perspective in looking at pandemic diseases. Based on their assessment, they have proposed four areas that need to be considered in understanding the pandemic responses. Those areas are "social policies to crisis management as well as recovery, regime type (democracy or autocracy), formal political institutions (federalism, presidentialism), and state capacity (control over health care systems and public administration)".
Globally, there are various discussions and debates related to how a particular government responds to the COVID 19 pandemic. For example, research has been done by , who discussed the impact of the global pandemic upon the local government performance in the US. Dzigbede et al. have argued that policy innovation is needed when it comes to deal with biological disasters.
The result of this research also shows that incapable of local government will also impact the lack of capability to respond appropriately to the spreading of COVID 19. This study has also suggested that the strategy used by the local government, it needs to be based on proper coordination to all level of government.
However, the Brazilian government takes a different response. Ortega and Orsini (2020) have explained that Bolsonaro is such kind of an antiscience leader when it comes to deal with COVID 19 pandemic. They have argued that the need for collaborative work among the stakeholders to ensure the effectiveness of the policy taken. Ortega and Orsini have argued that the case of how the Brazilian Government responds to COVID 19 is an example of a lack of democratic governance.
Further, Italy is one of the countries in Europe that occurs "a hardest hit" and having a slow of responding to eliminate the spread of the COVID 19. Research by Sebastiani, Massa, and Riboli (2020) has revealed that situation. The slow response of the government in responding to the COVID 19 pandemic, has resulted in an increasing number of infectious people.
According to that case, the Italian Government has taken a different approach, applying a high-level alert policy and implementing strict control over the spreading of COVID 19, it was successful to decrease the number of fatalities in Italy.
It is quite different from Italy and Brazil. The case of Singapore in dealing with COVID 19, has provided good learning for the global community. The case of COVID 19 in Singapore shows that the excellent public healthcare system is an important key to deal with COVID 19.
By applying a proper tracking and tracing policy taken by the government, therefore, can reduce the number of fatalities in Singapore. Woo (2020) argued that the capability of Singapore to reduce the number of fatalities relies on the facilities provided in the time of the SARS crisis. Meanwhile, this research contributes to the study of the role of the government, especially the responsiveness aspect of a problem in this case , which is the first thing that the community assesses the government's capacity to handle the spread of COVID-19. The government as the provider of public services must be responsive in providing services to the community.
The government's responsiveness to COVID-19 is seen from the hopes, desires and aspirations of the community as service recipients and the government as service providers. The difference between this study and previous research is that the research method used in previous studies did not use a national survey and the respondents of this study came from six major islands in Indonesia. The six major islands in Indonesia are Sumatra, Java, Kalimantan, Sulawesi, Bali and Papua. The contribution of this research is to emphasize more on the government's response to COVID-19 and to analyze public perceptions of the policies for handling COVID 19 carried out by the Government through local government policies.

Methods
We have applied the online qualitative survey nationally. There were 5 (five) questions we asked the respondents. The respondent profile in our qualitative survey consisted of 518 respondents divided into 58.7% women and 41.3% men. This survey was conducted nationally meaning that the response was given by respondents representing 6 major islands in Indonesia, including those represented by islands outside the six major islands (Sumatra, Java, Kalimantan, Sulawesi, Bali and Papua).

Result and Discussion
To provide a qualitative assessment of the role of the government and the public's response to the government's COVID 19 mitigation policies. We gave 5 (five) brief questions to 518 respondents, these questions consisted of respondents' satisfaction with the government's performance in handling COVID 19, also asking whom the Governor has the most responsive policy towards COVID 19, which local government is the most responsive to COVID 19, what which should ideally be fulfilled by the government for better handling of COVID 19 and asking questions in the spatial context, coordination and policy of which Darmastuti,Warganegara and Maulida,Public Response to The Government's COVID 19 Mitigation Policy: 2020 National Online Qualitative Survey 149 government institutions should ideally be given more authority over the handling of COVID 19?
The first question: are you satisfied with the performance of the National Government in dealing with the COVID 19 Pandemic? (500)

Figure 1 Public Satisfaction with National Government Performance
Source: Processed by Researchers (2020) Figure 1. Public satisfaction with the performance of the National Government above shows that as many as 53.4% of respondents were dissatisfied with the government's performance in handling the COVID Pandemic 19. Meanwhile, 46.5% of respondents were satisfied with the government's performance in handling the COVID Pandemic 19. The percentage in the picture above It can be concluded that most of the respondents were not satisfied with the government's performance in dealing with the pandemic.
Are you satisfied with the performance of the National Government in dealing with the COVID 19 pandemic?

Not Satisfied
Second question: Who is the Governor who has the most responsive policy towards the COVID 19 Pandemic? (500)

Figure 2 Most Responsive Governor to the COVID 19 Pandemic
Source: Processed by Researchers (2020) Source: Processed by Researchers (2020) Figure 2. The Governor most Responsive to the COVID 19 Pandemic above, shows that 50.2% of respondents chose Anis Baswedan as the Governor most responsive to the COVID 19 pandemic, then 19.4% Ridwan Kamil, 16.9% Ganjar Pranowo 10.3 other% and 3.2% Khofifah Indar Prawansa. The highest percentage is the Governor of DKI Jakarta as the government that has the most responsive policies to the COVID 19 pandemic, of course, the respondents chose Anies Baswedan, and it is due to several factors. Several factors have become the benchmarks of respondents in assessing each regional head in dealing with the COVID 19 pandemic. District head. DKI Jakarta Governor Anies Baswedan was the first governor who was aggressively voicing the dangers of COVID 19. In the early days of the emergence of COVID 19 Jakarta was the area most affected by the coronavirus. Anies Baswedan as soon as possible decided on the steps taken by the DKI Jakarta Provincial Government to overcome this problem. Anies Baswedan also declared a lockdown in Jakarta Which Governor has the most responsive policy concerning COVID 19 pandemic?

Responses
Ganjar Prannowo Anies Baswedan Ridwan Kamil Khofifah Indar Parawansa Others Darmastuti,Warganegara and Maulida,Public Response to The Government's COVID 19 Mitigation Policy: 2020 National Online Qualitative Survey 151 because the number of positive cases had increased drastically. Although this decision was rejected by the National Government, Anies then implemented the PSBB as an alternative to the National Government's policy (SuaraCom, 2020). Third question: Which local government is responsive in dealing with the COVID 19 Pandemic Pandemic above shows that the DKI Jakarta regional government is the most responsive area in overcoming the COVID 19 Pandemic with a percentage of 51.1%. Furthermore, 18.4% West Java, 14% Central Java, 11.6% others and 4.9% East Java. Based on the percentage in the picture above, it can be concluded that the DKI Jakarta Regional Government is more responsive than the other three regions.
Many factors become respondents' assessments in assessing the responsiveness of the Regional Government in overcoming the COVID 19 Pandemic. One of them is the policy chosen by the government to prevent the transmission of the virus as well as government policies for people who are severely affected by COVID 19. DKI Jakarta is the province with the highest number of positive cases in Indonesia and the number of cases increasing every day is always increasing. Various decisions and policies have been taken, namely limiting the operation of public transportation, Work from Home for several jobs that are possible to do at home, eliminating Friday prayers in Jakarta and prohibiting going out of Jakarta (Suara.com, 2020  Source: Processed by Researchers (2020) Figure 4. Things that must be fulfilled by the Government for better handling of COVID 19 above shows that 46.7% of respondents chose the provision of massive rapid tests at Puskesmas as the main thing that must be done by the government to better handle COVID 19, Next 18, 2% for the provision and facilities of online shopping by the government, another 13.3%. Respondents also considered that providing free quota for the community to support work and learning from home, providing free disinfectants for households and schools did not burden students with much homework (PR) were other things that the respondent wanted to fulfill by the government.
Respondents prioritized the Government to carry out massive rapid tests at Puskesmas as an effort to accelerate the handling of the coronavirus pandemic and to prevent transmission of the virus from spreading further. Massive tests using rapid tests are an effective way to minimize the death rate. The rapid test is carried out using a blood sample, then if the swab test results show positive there will be further tests and steps. The social distancing policy, which is the government's decision to suppress the spread of the virus and avoiding social What things must be fulfilled by the National Government and Regional Governments for better handling of COVID 19? (Choose "one" the most priority according to you) Provision of free disinfectant for households Provision of free internet quota to support work and learning from home Provision and facilities for online groceries shopping Children are not burdened with much homework from school Provision of massive rapid tests at the Community Health Center Others Darmastuti,Warganegara and Maulida,Public Response to The Government's COVID 19 Mitigation Policy: 2020 National Online Qualitative Survey crowds, makes it difficult for people to meet basic needs. The transition from offline shopping to online is something people should do to avoid spreading the virus. The provision of online shopping facilities is ranked second in the handling that must be carried out by the government to help people more easily get their basic needs. In addition to social distancing policies, the government also enforces Work from Home and online learning for students as an effort to reduce the spread of the coronavirus. The consequence is that the government must provide facilities such as gadgets that not all parents have the facility to study online and internet quota for employees who work from home. The coronavirus has had a huge impact on the economy of the community, some have been laid off from work and reduced income has made the community unable to provide facilities for their children to learn from home. Not only physically can people contract the coronavirus, but the mental health of children can also be disturbed by the too much homework burden given by the teacher. The homework burden given by the teacher can decrease the body's immunity which can easily catch the virus. Xx% chose children not to be burdened with homework as a form of response from the community in handling the COVID 19 pandemic. In your opinion, in the context of spatial, coordination and policy, which government institution should be given more authority in handling COVID 19? National Government/BNPBa task force to accelerate the handling of covid-19 Provincial Government District and City governments Force for the Acceleration of Handling Corona Virus as the institution authorized to handle COVID 19.31.7% for Regency Governments and the city further 12.4% of respondents chose the Provincial Government as the institution authorized to handle COVID 19. Based on the percentage in the picture above shows that the community trusts the National Government in handling the COVID 19 case.
Discussing public policies is always synonymous with political dynamics, especially those related to public services. In the Indonesian context, political intervention is more dominant than the interests of the general public in the realm of the public policy formulation process. Pilkada makes bureaucracy often intervened by elite political interests, considering that the current bureaucratic task is very vital in state administration and public services, bureaucratic professionalism is the spirit, pace, and step of every bureaucratic apparatus. The politicization of the bureaucracy in the realm of practical politics for a moment damaged the professional bureaucratic order that was ideally argued by Firnas (2016: 165). The impact of a capitalcentric political system that ultimately gave birth to the construction of oligarchism in the realm of power.
This intervention is felt when we discuss public policies and how the government makes policy formulations for the COVID 19 mitigation process. Maintaining a balance between safety and economic growth is a matter of concern for the government. In general, the government has done several things that are deemed necessary, for example implementing a policy of staying at home, social restrictions, physical restrictions, use of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), maintaining personal hygiene, working and studying at home, delaying all activities that gather large numbers of people, restrictions Large-Scale Social Affairs (PSBB) until the implementation of the new normal policy. Besides, the government has also implemented social assistance and social protection policies to ensure that the community can survive Tuwu (2019: 267). In this case, (Potrafke, 2010, p.1) stated in his research that there was political intervention in the context of providing health support facilities and funds, therefore Potrafke suggested: The results suggest that incumbents behaved opportunistically and increased the growth of public health expenditures in election years. Government ideology did not have an influence. These findings indicate (1) the importance of public health in policy debates before elections and (2) the political pressure towards re-organizing public health policy platforms especially in times of demographic change.
If you look at Table 1 of the distribution of the COVID 19 pandemic as of September 3, 2020, in general, there is an increasing trend of COVID 19 infections. Table 2 also provides an overview of the islands of Java, Sumatra and Sulawesi which are the three islands with the highest number of COVID-19 infections. This is very common because the three islands are the most populous in Indonesia.  There are several allegations about the inefficiency of the government's COVID 19 mitigation policies, the problem is that the decentralized national government structure causes the bureaucratic structure to not run quickly and coordinate. Ideally, decentralization of public services (public services) must have characteristics that generally cannot choose customer, roles limited by legislation, politics institutionalize conflict, complex accountability, very open to security, action must be justified, and objectives-outputs difficult to state/measure (Simanjuntak, 2015: 128). The difference in political color between the national and regional governments is another thing that causes the problem of bureaucratic inefficiency to become a trigger factor or a driving factor for the inefficiency.
One of the respondents gave an open answer that supports the view of the bureaucratic inefficiency that occurs, this was disclosed to us as follows: "Yes, it seems slow. National and regional government coordination is lacking. So that the local government must take the initiative first in taking action. If they should wait for the National government it will be taking too long. The Minister of Health was absent. Only the spokesmen kept showing up. Less equipment for health workers. Life gets harder for the poor. We are asked for PSBB or stay at home but there was not enough compensation (INT1)".
Other respondents also gave similar answers to us, noting the slow performance of the bureaucracy in responding to the COVID 19 pandemic "It was too slow in making decisions, because before the announcement of the first case in Indonesia, the national government underestimated this epidemic and there was no preparation for dealing with it (INT2)".
On the other hand, inefficiency is a fundamental weakness of the bureaucracy, which so far has often 'approached' the bureaucracy, both national and regional governments.
The case of the PSBB which was carried out by the Governor of DKI Jakarta Anies Baswedan last, for example, gave a signal about the disharmony of the COVID 19 mitigation policies between the national and regional governments. Anis Baswedan informed the media through a press conference that: "In principle, starting Monday, September 14, non-essential office activities are required to be carried out from home, working from home, not the business has stopped but working in the office which is eliminated. Business activities continue, office activities continue, but offices in the building are not allowed to operate" (Newsdetik, 2020).
However, Anies' policy was not approved by Airlangga, Chairman of the Committee for Handling COVID-19 and National Economic Recovery (KPCPEN) regarding the application of PSBB for office employees. This is because offices apply flexible working hours. This means that some continue to work in the office at certain hours, and some work from home at certain hours.
This disharmony may occur due to political differences between the two political groups. The Jokowi and Pro Anies groups have different political backgrounds. On the other hand, our qualitative survey results also show that the Governor of DKI Jakarta, Anies Baswedan, is considered the respondent as the regional head who is most responsive in handling COVID 19. Statistically, 50.2% of respondents gave a response, Anies Baswedan was the Governor who was most responsive to handling pandemic COVID 19, followed by Ridwan Kamil with 19.4%, Ganjar Pranowo received Darmastuti, Warganegara and Maulida, Public Response to The Government's COVID 19 Mitigation Policy: 2020 National Online Qualitative Survey 159 16.9%, 10.3% chose other regional heads and 3.2% for Khofifah Indar Prawansa.
If analyzed qualitatively, both of these data, between respondents' satisfaction with national government policies and the figure of the regional head who is considered the most responsive, have some relevance. Dissatisfaction with the national government which is at 53.4% and the satisfaction of respondents who chose Anies Baswedan as the most responsive regional head with a figure reaching 50.2% shows that respondents are divided into two political groups. The divergence of respondents towards these two groups causes the problem of inequality of perceptions between the national and local governments in handling the COVID 19 issue.
One of our respondents in an open question gave his opinion, "As far as I know Anies Baswedan is the first public official to express awareness of Corona to the public where at that time the national government still seemed to underestimate (INT3)". Other respondents gave similar statements: "It is known that he as the Regional Head of DKI Jakarta Province first responded in a structured, systematic, and massive manner to the COVID-19 Pandemic compared to the National Government or other Regional Governments (INT4)".
The response of the DKI Jakarta Government to COVID-19 which first implemented the PSBB at the beginning of the COVID-19 spread. PSBB has been implemented in DKI Jakarta before, namely from April 10, 2020, to April 23, 2020. The DKI Jakarta Government issued Governor Regulation Number 33 of 2020 concerning PSBB which consists of 28 articles to regulate activities in Jakarta ranging from the economic sector, education to educational religious activities (Kompas, 2020).
Data on satisfaction with the performance of DKI Jakarta can also be seen from our third question, DKI Jakarta Province is the most responsive area for the COVID 19 pandemic with a figure of 51.1% followed by 18.4% for West Java Province, Central Java Province getting 14%, 11, 6% other regions and 4.9% East Java. Respondents' answers to this also appear in-line with the respondent's satisfaction rate on the performance of DKI Jakarta. This data shows that even though respondents come from various islands in Indonesia, the response is shown by respondents by choosing DKI Jakarta and Anies Baswedan as the most responsive regional governments and governors shows that the performance made by the DKI Jakarta Regional Government towards COVID 19 mitigation is indirectly appreciated by the public. Even though this data needs further assessment and analysis, whether quantitatively, whether this is influenced by more massive media exposure to the DKI Jakarta Regional Government and Anies Baswedan compared to other governors and local governments in Indonesia?
Meanwhile 18.4% of respondents chose West Java Regional Government as the responsive Regional Government after DKI Jakarta also provides an additional argument for the role of media exposure. Erina in Suherman (2020: 59) "In terms of the PSBB policy, the role of the media is not only supporting the policies made by the government, but also supporting the information needed by the public regarding the development of COVID-19 and the media must provide more broadcasts that have an educational element. Schools are closed and children are learning from home". In line with the above statement, Syaipudin (2020: 32) in his research stated that "The role of mass media or mass communication is needed as a solution to solving the effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic. With close communication, it is hoped that it can minimize the impact caused by the spread of COVID-19 which has become a global disaster and made history in human life ". Apart from DKI Jakarta, the West Java Regional Government through Governor Ridwan Kamil is also considered a public official who is often exposed to the media. Parts of West Java bordering DKI Jakarta make the flow of mobilization one another very influential and influenced, for example the model of the trend of the spread of COVID 19 between DKI Jakarta and West Java is considered relatively the same. One of the respondents chose the Regional Government of West Java as the most responsive area on the grounds "Because it is responsive in determining the status of a certain state of the Corona / COVID 19 disease outbreak (INT5)".
If you look at some of the respondents' statements about the performance and responsiveness of government policies in handling COVID 19, two keywords are always expressed by respondents, namely speed and responsiveness in responding to disasters. These two things are not seen in the context of the National Government. On the other hand, media exposure is more certainly accepted by the DKI Jakarta Regional Government and Anies Baswedan. As the nation's capital, DKI Jakarta has the most strategic role as a barometer of handling the COVID 19 case in Indonesia, although, in several aspects, the policy for handling COVID 19 in DKI Jakarta looks a little different from that carried out by the National Government.
If we compare the level of satisfaction with the national government which is only at 46.5%, the public choice of Anies Baswedan's performance which made Anies selected as the most responsive regional head touched 50.2%, this indicates that the public felt that Anies' policies were considered more popular compared to national government policies, although this is preliminary data and needs to be explored quantitatively.
In another part, when we asked respondents about their hopes for the COVID 19 mitigation policy. Mostly, 46.7% wanted the availability of a rapid test kit at the Puskesmas so that it could be easily accessed by anyone who needed it, while 18.2% of respondents expected the availability of purchasing facilities groceries online. process. The local government also obtained quite a large amount, as many as 31.7% of respondents expected that the authority of the COVID 19 mitigation policy would be given to the Regency and City Governments. Qualitatively, this figure shows that there is great support given by respondents so that the handling of this pandemic can be decentralized in the future. Technically, the decentralization of authority associated with this will certainly make the policy response process less long and chaotic in the future.

Conclusion
This qualitative survey conducted nationally provides a general picture, although the available data cannot be used as a generalization in concluding. At least this qualitative survey provides an overview of the COVID 19 mitigation policy carried out by the government that is still far from ideal. The main problem is about the inefficiency of bureaucratic work, centralization of authority and communication patterns between the bureaucratic substructures. On the other hand, massive media exposure has provided space for the DKI Jakarta Regional Government and Anies Baswedan has received relatively good public appreciation compared to the performance of the National Government in handling COVID 19.
In the context of research, the study we conducted has made a new contribution to seeing the public's response to the COVID 19 mitigation policy. The national qualitative survey that we conducted can at least map the response and response of the public to the COVID 19 mitigation policies implemented by the Government. The study we conducted also opens opportunities for further discussion regarding the decentralization of the authority for the COVID mitigation policy 19. The slow process of national government performance provides a chance for providing opportunities for decentralized disaster mitigation policies to Regional Governments. Theoretically, decentralization provides opportunities for better services (Muriisa 2008).

About Authors
Ari Darmastuti