1 A Boy Standing in Uniform in Front of Flag of Indonesia Hanging on a Pole (https://www.pexels.com)

i

A Report Written by Ambar Widaningrum Ario Wicaksono Fuji Riang Prastowo Alvi Syahrina Lutfi Untung Angga Laksana Arindha Nityasari Rizki Ardinanta Published by ii

Table of Contents ................................................................................................................................................ iii List of Tables ........................................................................................................................................................iv List of Figures ........................................................................................................................................................iv List of Box ……. ........................................................................................................................................................iv List of Abbreviations .......................................................................................................................................... v Preface …………...................................................................................................................................................... vii Executive Summary .........................................................................................................................................viii CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................... 1 1.1. Background.......................................................................................................................1 1.2. Purpose and Objectives...............................................................................................3 1.3. Literature Review..........................................................................................................3 1.3.1. Collaborative Governance.............................................................................3 1.3.2. Social Movement...............................................................................................6 1.3.3. Conceptual Framework..................................................................................8 1.4. Research Method Design............................................................................................9 CHAPTER II DYNAMICS OF GNRM IMPLEMENTATION ............................................................. 12 2.1. Evaluation and Analysis of the Legal Basis...................................................... 12 2.2. Viewing GNRM from Literature Review............................................................ 21 2.3. GNRM Parameters and Outcomes........................................................................ 23 CHAPTER III CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS OF GNRM PERFORMANCE IN THE REGIONS . 26 3.1. GNRM Confirmative Study between Regions.................................................. 27 3.1.1. GNRM Understanding.................................................................................. 27 3.1.2. GNRM Program Innovation....................................................................... 32 3.1.3. Helix Involvement and Engagement...................................................... 35 3.1.4. Collaborative Effectiveness....................................................................... 38 3.1.5. Ideal Model Expectations........................................................................... 40 3.2. GNRM Reflection Study between Regions........................................................ 43 3.2.1. Reflection on the Case of Bogor City...................................................... 43 3.2.2. Reflection on the Case of Lombok Barat Regency........................... 44 CHAPTER IV PENTAHELIX COLLABORATION ALTERNATIVE ................................................ 47 CHAPTER V CLOSING ................................................................................................................................... 51 5.1. Conclusions.................................................................................................................... 51 5.2. Policy Recommendations........................................................................................ 53 References ……….................................................................................................................................................. 55 iii

Table 2.1 Mapping of the GNRM Programs and Their Coordinators........................................... 14 Table 3.1 Program mapping relevant to GNRM in Lombok Barat................................................. 30 Figure 2.1 Relevance of the UUD 1945 with GNRM Implementation ...................................13 Figure 2.2 ICRM Parameter Concept .......................................................................................24 Figure 4.3 Proposed Collaborative Governance Model .........................................................47 Box 1 The Idea of Mental Revolution.......................................................................................................... 18 Box 2 GNRM evaluation and impact............................................................................................................ 24 Box 3 GNRM understanding........................................................................................................................... 28 Box 4 GNRM Program Mapping.................................................................................................................... 30 Box 5 Missing-link on GNRM Program Planning................................................................................... 35 Box 6 Meaning-making of GNRM.................................................................................................................. 37 Box 7 GNRM Integration with Thematic Community Service Program(KKN Tematik)...... 38 iv

APBD APBN APE Bakesbangpol Bappeda Basolia BNN BNPT BPIP BUMD BUMN CSR DITMAWA FGD FKUB FRI Gamak Gardu Jaket GeNus GNRM HAM IANP ICRM IKPD-IKS IKUB IPB IPK IPM : Anggaran Pendapatan Belanja Daerah /Regional Revenue Expenditure Budget : Anggaran Pendapatan Belanja Negara /State Revenue and Expenditure Budget : Alat Peraga Edukasi /Educational Teaching Aids : Badan Kesatuan Bangsa dan Politik /The National Unity, Politics, and Community Protection Agency : Badan Perencanaan dan Pembangunan Daerah /Regional Development Planning Agency : Badan Solidaritas Lintas Agama /Interfaith Solidarity Agency : Badan Narkotika Nasional /National Narcotics Board : Badan Nasional Penanggulangan Terorisme /National Counter Terrorism Agency : Badan Pembinaan Ideologi Pancasila /Pancasila Ideology Development Agency : Badan Usaha Milik Daerah /Regional owned enterprises : Badan Usaha Milik Negara /State-owned enterprises : Corporate Social Responsibility : Direktorat Kemahasiswaan /Directorate of Student Affairs : Focus Group Discussion : Forum Kerukunan Umat Beragama /Inter-Religious Harmony Forum : Forum Rektor Indonesia /Indonesian Rectors Forum : Gerakan Anti Marariq Kodek(pencegahan pernikahan dini) /Child Marriage Prevention Movement : Gerakan Terpadu Kejar Paket /Formal School Equivalency Examination Integrated Movement : Gebyar Nusantara : Gerakan Nasional Revolusi Mental /National Movement of Mental Revolution : Hak Asasi Manusia /Human Rights : Indeks Aktualisasi Nilai Pancasila /Actualization of Pancasila Values Index : Indeks Capaian Revolusi Mental /Mental Revolution Achievement Index : Indeks Karakter Peserta Didik dan Indeks Karakter Siswa /Learner Character Index and Student Character Index : Indeks Kerukunan Umat Beragama /Religious Harmony Index : Institut Pertanian Bogor : Indeks Persepsi Korupsi /Corruption Perceptions Index : Indeks Pembangunan Manusia /Human Development Index v

IPMas IPP IWO KemenkoPMK KKN KPWK Lakpesdam LP2M LSM Musrembang NBL NTB Ormas Pemkot Pemprov PKK Posyandu RPJMD RPJMN Selaras Sipeka Busiska Tupoksi UMKM USAID : Indeks Pembangunan Masyarakat/ Community Development Index : Indeks Pelayanan Publik /Public Service Index : Ikatan Wartawan Online /Association of Online Journalists : Kementerian Koordinator Bidang Pembangunan Manusia dan Kebudayaan /Coordinating Ministry for Human Development and Cultural Affairs : Kuliah Kerja Nyata /Community Service Program : Kader Penyuluh Wawasan Kebangsaan /National Insight Outreaching Cadres : Lembaga Kajian dan Pengembangan Sumber Daya Manusia /Institute for Human Resources Research and Development : Lembaga Penelitian dan Pengabdian kepada Masyarakat/ Institute for Research and Community Services : Lembaga Swadaya Masyarakat /Non-governmental organization : Musyawarah Perencanaan Pembangunan /Development Planning Conference : Nilai Budaya Literasi /Literacy Cultural Values : Nusa Tenggara Barat : Organisasi kemasyarakatan /Community-based organization : Pemerintah Kota /City Government : Pemerintah Provinsi /Provincial Government : Pemberdayaan Kesejahteraan Keluarga /Family Welfare Empowerment : Pos Pelayanan Terpadu /Integrated Services Post : Rencana Pembangunan Jangka Menengah Daerah /Regional Medium-Term Development Plan : Rencana Pembangunan Jangka Menengah Nasional /National Medium-Term Development Plan : Akselerasi Peningkatan Rata-Rata Lama Sekolah /Acceleration of Increase in Average Duration of School : Sistem Pemantauan Kesehatan Bayi Baru Lahir Berbasis Keluarga /Family Based Newborn Health Monitoring System : Tugas pokok dan fungsi /Main tasks and functions : Unit Usaha Mikro, Kecil, dan Menengah /Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises Units : United States Agency for International Development vi

Gerakan Nasional Revolusi Mental /National Movement of Mental Revolution(GNRM) was initiated in 2016 as a form of struggle for the values of mental revolution as the ideals of the Indonesian nation in achieving well-being, justice, and shared prosperity. To achieve this goal, GNRM optimizes the pentahelix model which involves all elements of society, namely academic, business, community, government(state administrators), and media(ABCGM), who work together under the coordination of Kementerian Koordinator Bidang Pembangunan Manusia dan Kebudayaan /Coordinating Ministry for Human Development and Cultural Affairs(KemenkoPMK) as the national program coordinator. In the research report titled"Development of a Participatory Engagement Model of Pentahelix Elements in the Implementation of the National Movement of Mental Revolution", we evaluate and develop a participatory engagement model of pentahelix elements in the implementation of GNRM. This research uses the desk study method and field studies in Bogor City and Lombok Barat Regency. Through the perspective of collaborative governance and social movements, we provide an overview of the dynamics that occur in the field and recommendations that can be implemented by stakeholders involved in the GNRM program. Through this final report, we hope that our research will contribute to the future development of GNRM, enabling it to achieve its goals more effectively as a national priority. We hope that this report help provide stakeholders with a deeper understanding of the implementation of the participatory engagement model involving pentahelix elements in GNRM. Team Leader vii

GNRM or Gerakan Nasional Revolusi Mental /National Movement of Mental Revolution is a national priority program that aims to change the perspective, way of thinking, attitude, behavior, and way of working of the Indonesian people through the involvement of various actors or what is called the pentahelix element involvement model. To support the implementation of GNRM, this study was conducted which aims to identify and review the complexity of the existing conditions for GNRM implementation and to develop a model for involving pentahelix elements in GNRM implementation. This study was conducted qualitatively using a case study approach and consisted of two stages, namely desk evaluation of documents and reports, and field evaluation by conducting FGDs and field studies in Bogor City and Lombok Barat Regency. The results of the study show that the GNRM movement has indications of success such as increasing public awareness, spreading positive messages, increasing the quality of human resources, and government support. However, the success of this movement is still limited and has not had a significant impact due to several factors such as uneven implementation of activities, lack of focus in implementing the movement, inability to change culture, and lack of measures of success. As a social movement, GNRM requires collaborative governance principles involving various actors/helix to strengthen its implementation. However, this study explains that the Pentahelix collaboration model has not been implemented optimally due to limited community participation allegedly because the community does not clearly understand what is meant by mental revolution, the benefits, and objectives of the program. From this study, we propose to consolidate the collaborative framework(pentahelix) within GNRM including:(1) strengthening shared understanding of the goals and values of GNRM, (2) stakeholder mapping,(3) forming a work team,(4) regular evaluation and monitoring, and(5) program sustainability by developing relevant materials and strengthening the role of the media in disseminating concrete and good examples. viii

ix

“…The mental revolution is a movement to galvanize Indonesian people to become new human beings, who have a white heart, steel will, spirit of an eagle, and a fiery soul.” President Sukarno, in his speech titled"A Year of Decision" on August 17, 1957. 1.1. Background Gerakan Nasional Revolusi Mental /National Movement of Mental Revolution (hereinafter abbreviated as GNRM) is a social movement initiated by the Indonesian government in 2016. GNRM was a government program during Joko Widodo's presidency. This initiative is part of Jokowi's nine reform programs known as Nawa Cita. Its main vision is to revolutionize and embody Pancasila values into the nation's character. Meanwhile, the main objective of this movement is to improve the behavior and mentality of the Indonesian people, with the hope of accelerating development in Indonesia. To achieve this, GNRM is translated into five main programs— movements—namely:(1) Serving Indonesia,(2) Clean Indonesia,(3) Orderly Indonesia,(4) Independent Indonesia, and(5) United Indonesia. This movement also consists of three core values, namely:(1) Integrity,(2) Work Ethic, and(3) Gotong Royong. Overall, GNRM represents a significant effort by the Indonesian government to address the country's social and economic challenges through collaborative governance and a shift towards a more positive and productive mindset. Nationally, GNRM is implemented based on Presidential Instruction(INPRES) Number 12 of 2016 concerning the National Movement of Mental Revolution(GNRM). This policy, among other things, mandates the establishment of a Task Force both at the level of ministries and agencies, as well as local governments(provincial, regency, and city), with the aim of ensuring the implementation of the movement. GNRM also adopts the pentahelix collaboration model which involves state administrators, education actors, communities, business actors, and media players. Each region is given space to develop its own program that refers to the five main programs and three core values, by providing flexibility and alignment with their respective political agendas(vision and mission of the regional head). The keyword is to encourage'mainstreaming' and internalizing the values of mental revolution of existing programs. As a movement initiated by the government, GNRM has its own challenges and is different from other social movements which are generally born from grounded empirical issues. Its utopian nature with the jargon of mental revolution causes a number of challenges in the context of building shared 1

understanding as the basis for collective action to achieve a common goal. This study then looks at the collaborative engagement model between sectors/helix which then needs to be studied in more depth. The pentahelix engagement model is basically an implementation of a collaborative governance approach. Collaborative governance is a key component of GNRM, because the government realizes that a successful movement requires active participation and synergistic collaboration of all stakeholders. GNRM encourages collaboration and partnerships among various stakeholders, in the belief that sharing knowledge, resources and expertise can result in more effective policies, and programs. Collaborative governance recognizes that a top-down approach to governance is not always effective or inclusive, and that involving multiple stakeholders in the policy-making process can yield better results. The pentahelix model as a collaborative governance model views the importance of synergizing different perspectives and expertise as a basis for encouraging innovation, creating more inclusive and effective solutions to address complex challenges that must be faced in the process of making and implementing policies that have high complexity such as GNRM. Cooperation between pentahelix actors in the implementation of GNRM must be carried out in a coordinative and integrative manner. The government needs to ensure that there is good coordination between all actors involved in GNRM. The government must provide adequate facilitation based on needs to support the implementation of the GNRM. Educational actors, the community, business actors, and media players play an active role by holding activities aimed at increasing public awareness. The world of education provides teaching about positive and participatory values in GNRM. The role of the media is also very important in disseminating information and educating the public, as a promoter of the importance of changing mindsets and culture in everyday life. The media also plays a role in strengthening positive values and reducing the influence of negative values in society. After seven years of operation, GNRM has produced various movements(innovation programs) organized by the central/regional government and Helix partners. The effectiveness of the GNRM can be measured using the Mental Revolution Achievement Index(ICRM) parameter which shows the 2018 results with a value of 67.01% to the 2024 target of 74.3%. However, there is still a gap in the level of awareness and broad involvement of the stakeholder component to practice and internalize the values of integrity, work ethic, and gotong royong(mutual cooperation). Various obstacles such as the lack of independent budgeting resources, the commitment to move voluntarily, and the lack of an effective platform to encourage collaboration of all elements have made GNRM not fully a joint change movement. An inclusive, participatory, deliberative, collaborative, and integrative model is needed, as well as continuous evaluation and monitoring to realize this achievement. Therefore, further studies are needed to in-depth validate the impact and implementation of GNRM, especially those related to aspects of the implementation of GNRM collaborative governance carried out through the pentahelix engagement 2

model. This study looks at two different regions(case studies) in Indonesia, namely: (1) Bogor City and(2) Lombok Barat Regency. Apart from being samples of best practices, these two regions are expected to represent rural-urban characteristics, and the balance between Java and outside Java. In this research, a study was conducted which was divided into two parts, namely a literature study and a field study. 1.2. Purpose and Objectives The purpose of this activity is to recommend alternative development models for participatory involvement of pentahelix elements in the implementation of GNRM. The objectives of this activity are: a) Identifying and reviewing the complexity of the existing condition of GNRM implementation; b) Development of an inclusive, participatory, deliberative, collaborative, and integrative model or platform for involving pentahelix elements in the implementation of GNRM; c) Application of the model that has been designed in limited communities, namely: in Bogor City(West Java) and Lombok Barat Regency(West Nusa Tenggara); d) Preparation of the module as an explanation of the"Participatory Engagement Model of Pentahelix Elements in the Implementation of the National Movement of Mental Revolution". 1.3. Literature Review The main goal of GNRM is to improve the behavior and mentality of the Indonesian people, with the hope that it can accelerate development in Indonesia(KemenkoPMK, 2021). As a movement involving multiple actors, collaborative governance is a key component. A successful social movement requires the active participation of all members of society, including government agencies, civil society organizations, the private sector, and individuals. Collaborative governance recognizes that a top-down approach to governance may not always be effective or inclusive, and that involving diverse stakeholders in the policy-making process can yield better results(Ansell& Gash, 2008; Emerson et al., 2012). Therefore, in a social movement, collaborative governance is a governance approach that involves participation and collaboration between various stakeholders in making decisions and managing shared resources. 1.3.1. Collaborative Governance The concept of collaboration and networking in modern management has not only been carried out by public authorities, but requires collective action from various parties, due to the increasingly complex dynamics of public problems(Ansell& Torfing, 2022). Stakeholders are faced with problems that are increasingly dynamic, complex and without clear definition of solutions(wicked problems)(Emerson& Nabatchi, 2015). This complexity must be managed through governance that unites actors in a joint forum that can be initiated by public institutions, involving non-state actors that present consensus in solving public policy and management issues, 3

hereinafter referred to as collaborative governance(Ansell& Gash, 2008). Collaborative governance is an approach that combines various stakeholders in decision making and program or policy implementation. This approach aims to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of programs or policies by involving the expertise and resources of various stakeholders. According to Ansell and Gash(2008), collaborative governance has five main characteristics, namely:(1) Diverse stakeholders,(2) Commitment to achieving common goals,(3) Mutually beneficial relationships,(4) Participatory processes, and (5) Complex contexts and resources. On the other hand, Emerson(2012) explains that collaborative governance involves four main elements, namely:(1) active involvement of various parties with the problem at hand,(2) a decision-making process that takes into account the interests and perspectives of all parties involved, (3) development of a joint action plan, and(4) continuous monitoring and evaluation of the joint action plan. Emerson's theory also describes the dynamics of the collaboration process as an integrative interaction cycle: principled engagement, shared motivation, and capacity for joint action. The dimensions of the collective agreement include ground rules, operating protocols, decision rules. The similarities of the two theories are as follows. In collaborative governance, decisions and actions are taken based on the consensus of all parties involved, so that the process can produce better and more sustainable solutions than top-down or competitive approaches. It also allows the parties involved to learn from each other, broaden their views, and strengthen the relationship between them. Furthermore, the two theories also identify several challenges that are a source of failure in collaboration, including: 1. Poor communication, which impedes the progress of cooperation with unsatisfactory results; 2. Differences in goals or disagreement about the goals of cooperation; 3. Lack of coordination between team members resulting in overlapping work or unfinished tasks; 4. Disagreements about responsibilities, which will result in confusion and a lack of accountability; 5. Differences in culture and work style resulting in difficulties in communicating and working together; 6. The inability to solve problems will result in deadlock and conflict in cooperation; 7. Lack of trust among team members can affect the productivity and effectiveness of collaboration; And 8. Lack of support from leaders or management causes team members to lose motivation. The main difference between the two theories lies in the format of the cooperation. Ansell and Gash theory emphasizes the importance of coordinated and structured collaboration. According to this theory, structured cooperation will help increase efficiency, effectiveness and accountability in the implementation of public policies. 4

On the other hand, Emerson et al.’s(2012) theory emphasizes the importance of unstructured cooperation in the context of innovation and creativity. According to this theory, unstructured and non-rigid cooperation can help generate new ideas and creative solutions to complex problems. Based on the results of the collaboration, these two theories are ideal when combined. The theory of Ansell and Gash(2008) emphasizes structured and coordinated cooperation to ensure the efficiency and effectiveness of policy/program implementation. Meanwhile, the theory of Emerson et al.(2012) emphasizes that unstructured cooperation will result in innovation and creative solutions to complex problems. As an affirmation of the concept of innovation in collaborative governance according to Emerson et al.(2012), the innovation aspect is also highly highlighted in the pentahelix collaboration model. Collaborative governance and pentahelix are two concepts that are closely related to the development of policies and public initiatives that involve various parties in a particular system or ecosystem(Carayannis& Campbell, 2010). Pentahelix is a development model of the concepts of Triple Helix and Quadruple Helix which are considered capable of being a trigger for innovation (Carayannis& Campbell, 2010; Mineiro, de Souza& de Castro, 2021). Pentahelix can also be seen as a framework for interdisciplinary analysis and transdisciplinary problem solving. The use of the Pentahelix collaboration model as a basis for collaborating on development and social change is very possible to create the sustainability of the social changes desired by society. This model promotes social innovation, offering a sustainable development perspective that brings together innovation, entrepreneurship, and democracy. Through stakeholder synergy, innovation and an innovation-based economy will grow(Sudiana et al., 2020). This is consistent with the concept carried out by the Coordinating Ministry for PMK in adopting the pentahelix model to develop the local potential of rural areas through a partnership pattern(KemenkoPMK, 2021). Furthermore, these social changes can also benefit the public at large, the surrounding environment, and the parties involved in the pentahelix scheme itself. Therefore, the synergy between Pentahelix actors can be the key to the continuity and sustainability of community development and positive social change desired by various parties. The Pentahelix collaboration involves five actors(sectors), namely government, academia, society, business, and media. Through this collaboration, each sector can contribute with its expertise and resources for common goals. The emphasis is on the important role of the media in facilitating collaboration between the other four actors/stakeholders and in increasing community participation in the innovation ecosystem. This model recognizes the importance of bringing together different perspectives and expertise to drive innovation and effective policy making. By leveraging the strengths and resources of each actor within pentahelix, and by involving multiple stakeholders in the policy-making process, it is possible to create more inclusive and effective solutions to complex challenges. Of the several advantages of this pentahelix model, there are several weaknesses of the model that need to be observed. One of the shortcomings of the pentahelix model 5

and also the biggest challenge is related to the different institutional structures between actors/helix, so that flexibility is less prominent, rigid and does not have enough space to act in coordination(Forss, Kottorp& Ramgard, 2021). This inflexibility can be attributed to the vertical structure of the governance model which does not have a tradition of working from a bottom-up perspective. Some organizations are not used to working from a bottom-up perspective, so they need to find constructive solutions to ensure program progress and find a balance in relation to their own organization. Another weakness is the large number of actors involved, a higher or tighter level of coordination is needed(Syafari, 2018). The character and organizational culture of each actor is different. Therefore, the collaborative process of the five helixes can run in a balanced or unequal manner, and slow down the process of the emergence of new innovations. In general, collaborative governance and the pentahelix are creative methods to the formulation of public policies and programs that encourage the involvement and participation of all stakeholders. Some of the challenges or weaknesses of cooperation between these different actors can be mitigated ahead of time by considering different perspectives and accommodating diverse interests in order to create policies and programs that are more inclusive and sustainable and improve the welfare of society as a whole. 1.3.2. Social Movement Macionis(1999) provides a limited definition that social movements are related to social agreements that encourage the birth of collective behavior. However, some thinkers consider that collective behavior has different forms from collective action, both of which are not necessarily related to the emergence of social movements (Crossley, 2002; Locher, 2002). Social movements make common goals a common direction, while collective action emphasizes common interests(Sukmana, 2016). Collective action itself is a study in the psychology family that only has common interests or public goods, and is not oriented towards the impact of creating awareness outside their group. Classical thinkers in Sociology such as Weber attach that symbolic meaning is the foundation of the birth of the collective action(Ritzer& Goodman, 2009). Tarrow’s(2011) study on power in movement shows that at first the study of social movements could be reflected in what Emile Durkheim thought about the condition of'anomie' or an abnormal situation of social problems. In responding to these anomalous conditions, there are at least three things that are the main spirit in social movements, namely(1) the existence of common purposes which are the basis for the affiliation of the movement;(2) the existence of social solidarity or social solidarity which is not only based on the mere similarity of interests, but also the existence of solidarity or deeper-rooted emotions; and(3) the aspect of sustainability that determines the style of the movement structure. Zanden(1988) has the view that collective behavior is related to ways of thinking, emotions, and actions that are based on common interests. This is because the history of human life is always associated with collective seizures, group outbursts with 6

certain idealists, mass delusions, and collective pathologies. The study of this collective behavior has existed in classic writings in 1841 which highlighted the birth of collective behavior under the title Charles Mackay's Extraordinary Popular and the Madness of Crowds. More explicitly, Locher(2002) reveals the difference between social movements and collective movements at several levels, such as crowds, riots, and rebellion, all three of which are seen from three different aspects, namely organizing, deliberation, or consideration, and also the resilience of the movement. First, in terms of organizing, social movement is an organized social activity, while collective behavior is generally unorganized. Second, in the consideration or deliberation aspect, social movements are related to considerations that give birth to issues in the movement, whereas collective behavior occurs without planning. Third, in terms of resilience or endurance, social movements generally last longer than collective behavior that arises because they are responsive. The point of emphasis that characterizes more organized social movements is that the aim of such collective activity is to'encourage or hinder social change'(Macionis, 1999). Broadly speaking, the study of social movements, especially in Indonesia, often refers to the mapping of the theoretical analytical framework of Singh(2001) which groups social movements into three classifications namely classical, neo-classical, and new social movements. Classical movements consist of collective behavior such as crowds (crowd), riots(riot), and defiance(rebel). However, neo-classical movements or old social movements are still connected to classical movements which are rooted in social class-based resistance such as the Marxist view. Meanwhile, the new social movements that were just born in the 1970s put forward several aspects of nonpolitical and class issues such as humanist aspects, cultural aspects, and other nonmaterialistic aspects which incidentally tended to be universalist rather than universalist perspectives. stuck in dogmatic class revolution, class struggle, and anticapitalist. In its movement, the new social movement is not tied to the formal bureaucratic-oriented movement organizational structure, but rather emphasizes the emergence of wider universal interests. It can also be said as a transnational awareness such as major global issues, namely the environment, human rights, feminism, sexuality identity, and so on(Nofrima& Qodir, 2021). Citing the arguments of Macionis(1999) and Locher(2002), there are four types of social movements, namely first, alternative social movements or alternative social movements, namely social movements with the aim of social change which are limited to only a small portion of the population. The second is the redemptive social movement or liberation social movement which has goals that are more rooted in changes in the individual. The third is a reformative social movement that is progressive in nature to change people's views with an advocative model. Fourth is the revolutionary social movement which is the most extreme in nature to change the roots of social change in society. Spencer(1982) mentions that based on their objectives, there are seven types of social movements, namely(1) revolutionary movements which are types of 7

movements with the aim of radical changes in the order of the social system with power or violence;(2) reform movement that aims to improve social issues and civil rights for a better future;(3) reactionary movements that specifically demand the return of the old order which is considered better than the current order;(4) a conservative movement that aims to maintain the values of a conservative group;(5) utopian movements with long-term goals want a new type of change in society;(6) religious movements, namely movements that have religious goals; and(7) ethnic or nationalistic movements or social movements based on ethnicity and nationalism. Referring to the opinion of Locher(2002), every time there is the birth of a social movement it is often accompanied by resistance or rejection, typologically there are four types of resistance such as ridicule, cooption, formal social control, and violence. Therefore, according to Locher, the factors that determine the success and sustainability of social movements are seen from several aspects such as leadership, positive image, strategic tactics, clear goals, and political and financial support. In this case, several stages of the emergence and decline of a social movement can be seen from the view of Macionis(1999) such as the emergence stage, the coalescence stage, the bureaucratization stage, and the decline stage. In a broader context, Wilkinson (1971) sees that social movements are also born as an effort to balance the sociopolitical conditions of a country. Purdue(2007) and Johnston(2014) see this social movement as part of the essence of civil society which contributes to filling in the gaps in the political structure of a country. 1.3.3. Conceptual Framework Cooperation between actors in the implementation of a social movement must be carried out in a coordinative and integrative manner. The Pentahelix collaboration model, which emphasizes innovative concepts, is assumed to strengthen the development of policies and public initiatives that involve various parties in a particular system or ecosystem. When social movements and collaborative governance are combined, an organizing model that is based on the active participation of various parties involved in the social movement will be formed. In this model, stakeholders work together to identify social problems to be solved, and design and implement solutions together. With the pentahelix partnership, it is assumed that social movements will become more integrative and sustainable, thus providing a greater positive impact on society. The dynamics of the pentahelix collaboration process as an integrative and innovative interaction cycle, includes: principled engagement, shared motivation, capacity for joint action. The dimensions of shared principles include ground rules, operating protocols, decision rules(Ansell& Gash, 2008; Emerson et al. 2012). By considering different perspectives and accommodating diverse interests, the pentahelix collaboration process can create policies and programs that are more inclusive and sustainable and improve the welfare of society as a whole(Carayannis& Campbell, 2010). Sequentially, the dynamics of the pentahelix collaboration process can be described and explained as follows: 8

1. Identification of"common interests". Stakeholders(actors) in Pentahelix have agreed-upon interests as common goals; 2. From the shared interests that have been agreed upon, identification of “common problems/issues” is then carried out. Common issues or problems can vary between contexts and between regions. The actors in Pentahelix have shared issues/problems that are agreed upon as problems that must be resolved through solutive programs/activities; 3. Identification of potential for problem solving/solution. Identification of this potential is very important to map the role of each actor, so that the contribution of each actor is clearly mapped. This potential map will determine the concrete steps and contributions of each actor; and 4. A clear map of the potential and contribution of each actor which includes general rules, protocols in activities, and guidelines for making decisions, will lead to joint decisions(policy) and at the same time determine agreements on appropriate activities. 1.4. Research Method Design The research method used is a qualitative method with a case study approach and uses a systematic workflow. This study combines various data collection methods to identify and map actors and their involvement in GNRM. Then, this study is continued with an analysis process which then becomes the basis for developing an ideal model for GNRM implementation as a study recommendation for future GNRM policies. This study began with evaluating the pentahelix engagement model in GNRM through the desk study evaluation method and continued with practice/field evaluations in two regency/city case studies, namely Bogor City and Lombok Barat Regency. At the desk study evaluation stage, the identification and mapping of pentahelix elements was carried out through documentary studies to be able to identify and map the helix that has a potential strategic role in GNRM in two selected regency/city case studies. Then, a practice/field evaluation is carried out by holding a Focus Group Discussion (FGD) combined with a field study. FGDs were carried out with representatives of community group partners, alumni of GNRM activities, academics, the business world, Regional Task Forces(GTD), movement coordinators at the national level, the media, and other strategic parties, to obtain more in-depth data related to the roles of each actor. Furthermore, this study was continued with a field study using the in-depth interview data collection method with various key informants involved in GNRM in the two study areas in order to obtain a more comprehensive picture of how GNRM was actually implemented at the regency/city level. Informants in the Bogor City case study included: Badan Perencanaan dan Pembangunan Daerah /Regional Development Planning Agency(Bappeda), Badan Kesatuan Bangsa dan Politik /The National Unity, Politics, and Community Protection Agency(Bakesbangpol), Institut Pertanian Bogor(IPB), Indonesian Rectors Forum (FRI), Inter-Religious Harmony Forum(FKUB) and Kader Penyuluh Wawasan Kebangsaan /National Insight Outreaching Cadres(KPWK). Meanwhile, in Lombok Barat Regency, the informants were Assistant 1 to the Regional Secretariat, Bappeda, 9

Bakesbangpol, Cooperatives and UMKM Service, Regional Research Council, UIN Mataram, Inter-Religious Harmony Forum(FKUB), and the director of NTBMall.com. From the entire series of interviews conducted, a complete illustration was obtained regarding the reality of GNRM implementation at two regency/city loci to then serve as a guideline for developing an ideal model for implementing GNRM. In the next stage, the data that has been obtained is then processed and compiled into a model including:(1) identification and mapping of pentahelix elements of existing activities in the case study area;(2) identification of alternative forms of collaboration of existing activities in the case study area;(3) preparation of recommendations for the ideal model of participatory involvement of pentahelix elements in the implementation of GNRM. This ideal model is then developed into a module that can be used as a common reference and guideline for all pentahelix elements in implementing and collaborating on GNRM. 10

11

2.1. Evaluation and Analysis of the Legal Basis In general, this section becomes an encyclopedia of policy analysis results related to GNRM, which contains the existing legal and regulatory basis, and is still valid today. The urgency of this section lies in the empirical position that the implementation of GNRM requires legitimacy support(in the form of policies) at the national and regional levels. These legitimating entities can be perceived as noble ideals to be achieved( das sollen) and are usually contained in development planning documents (RPJMN/RPJMD). This legal basis analysis is useful for finding the level of synchronization and harmonization of regulations that support GNRM. Therefore, this section is a normative introduction which aims to explain"what is to be achieved" from the GNRM. GNRM is implemented with reference to the legal and regulatory framework that is not contradictory and currently in force. The legal basis of GNRM is firmly rooted in: (1) The ideal foundation which originates from the basic values of Pancasila;(2) The constitutional basis which originates from the 1945 Constitution;(3) The conceptual foundation that originates from the Trisakti, namely political sovereignty, economy, and culturally appropriate personality; and(4) Operational basis based on development planning documents or relevant policy documents. The analytical approach used in this section focuses more on normative law, which means that the data collection method only involves tracing laws and regulations or other references as secondary data sources. The evaluation and analysis of the legal basis aims to find policy support that can legitimize the implementation of the GNRM. The initial stage in evaluating and analyzing the legal basis is to:(1) identify the aims and objectives of the general guideline document for GNRM(2021);(2) identify the relevance of laws and policies that support future program implementation; and(3) aligning these policies to achieve deliberation of meaning and create consistent legitimacy. Based on the results of the identification carried out, several policy frameworks were found that became the basis for legitimacy for the implementation of the GNRM, such as: First, the Instruction of the President of the Republic of Indonesia Number 12 of 2016 concerning the National Mental Revolution Movement; and Second, Regulation of the Coordinating Minister for Human Development and Culture of the Republic of Indonesia Number 6 of 2021 concerning General Guidelines for the National Movement of Mental Revolution(this regulation replaces the previous regulation namely, Regulation of the Coordinating Minister for Human Development and Culture 12

of the Republic of Indonesia Number 3 of 2017 concerning Road Map for the 20172019 National Movement of Mental Revolution and Regulation of the Coordinating Minister for Human Development and Culture of the Republic of Indonesia Number 4 of 2017 concerning General Guidelines for the National Movement of Mental Revolution. GNRM is a national program that aims to change mentality and behavior for the better. The principles held refer to the values of integrity, work ethic, and the spirit of gotongroyong /mutual cooperation. In the end, the lofty ideals of making Indonesia more dignified, advanced, prosperous, modern and prosperous will be realized. The policy that started in 2016 and is still running today, is not specifically regulated directly in the 1945 Constitution. However, several articles that have relevance to GNRM can be explained as follows(GNRM General Guidelines document, 2021): Article 27 paragraph(1) •"All citizens have the same position before law and government and are obliged to uphold that law and government without exception" Article 28c paragraph(1) •"Every person has the right to develop themselves through meeting their basic needs, has the right to education and to benefit from science and technology, arts and culture, in order to improve the quality of life and for the welfare of mankind" Article 31 paragraph(3) •"The government seeks and organizes a national education system that increases faith and piety as well as noble character in the framework of educating the nation's life which is regulated by law" Article 32 paragraph(2) •"The state promotes Indonesian national culture in the midst of world civilization by guaranteeing the freedom of the people to maintain and develop their cultural values" Article 33 paragraph(1) •"The economy is structured as a joint venture based on the principle of kinship" Figure 2.1 Relevance of the UUD 1945 with GNRM Implementation Source: GNRM General Guidelines(2021) document The translation of the constitutional basis above is listed in the Presidential Instruction of the Republic of Indonesia Number 12 of 2016 concerning the National Movement of Mental Revolution. The important points of this policy explain the five GNRM programs, such as:(1) Indonesia Serving;(2) Clean Indonesia; (3) Orderly Indonesia;(4) Independent Indonesia; and(5) United Indonesia. GNRM implementation is integrated with national development programs(RPJMN) and regional development(RPJMD). The following are movements as program foundations that can be adopted in development planning documents(Second Dictum of Presidential Instruction No. 12 of 2016). 13

Table 2.1 Mapping of the GNRM Programs and Their Coordinators No. GNRM Values GNRM program Coordinator 1 Indonesia Serving, a) Increasing the capacity of the Minister of State which teaches the Human Resources of the State Civil Apparatus importance of Apparatus; Empowerment service in every b) Enhancing the enforcement of and Bureaucratic aspect of life. discipline by Government Reform Apparatuses and Law Enforcers; c) Improving service standards and innovative service systems(egovernment); d) Improving the performance-based management system of the State Civil Apparatus; e) Improving the behavior of public services that are fast, transparent, accountable, and responsive; f) Completion of laws and regulations (deregulation); g) Simplification of bureaucratic services(debureaucratization); h) Increasing the provision of facilities and infrastructure that support public services; i) Enhancing law enforcement and regulations in the field of public services; and j) Implementation of a system of rewards and sanctions along with exemplary leadership. 2 Clean Indonesia, a) Improving clean and healthy living Coordinating which emphasizes behavior in the family Ministry for the importance of environment, educational unit, Maritime Affairs environmental work unit, and community; and Investment cleanliness, health b) Increased synergy in the provision and morals in of facilities and infrastructure that shaping the nation's supports clean, and healthy living character. behavior; c) Development of a holistic and integrated waste management system including clean rivers, public service facilities, and infrastructure; d) Completion of laws and regulations (deregulation); e) Provision of facilities for companies/private companies/institutions that carry out waste management; 14

No. GNRM Values GNRM program f) Prioritizing community participation in supporting clean and healthy behavior; and g) Increased law enforcement in the field of environmental hygiene and health. 3 Orderly Indonesia, a) Increased orderly behavior in the which teaches the use of public spaces; importance of b) Increased orderly behavior in the discipline and order management of complaints; in every aspect of c) Increased orderly behavior in life. population administration; d) Increased traffic orderly behavior; e) Increased orderly behavior in queuing; f) Increased synergy in the provision of facilities and infrastructure to support orderly behavior; g) Increased law enforcement against orderly behavior; and h) The establishment of a family environment, educational units, work units, and a community that is friendly and free from violence. 4 Independent a) Increased behavior that supports Indonesia, which the achievement of national emphasizes the independence in various sectors of importance of life; independence and b) Increased behavior that supports creativity in facing the growth of entrepreneurship challenges and and the creative economy; advancing the c) Increased role of cooperatives and nation. MSMEs in the national economy; d) Increasing appreciation of art, creativity of cultural works, and cultural heritage; e) Increased behavior that supports the achievement of economic equity and the potential development of underdeveloped areas; f) Increased behavior that supports the maximum use of domestic products and components; g) Increased capacity and competency of the workforce; Coordinator Coordinating Minister for Politics, Law, and Security Coordinating Minister for Economic Affairs 15

No. GNRM Values GNRM program Coordinator h) Increased research and development in the economic, food, and energy sectors; i) Increased synergy in the provision of facilities and infrastructure that support independence in the economic, food, and energy sectors; j) Increased use of domestic research and technology development results; k) Providing convenience for domestic individuals or companies to register and maintain Intellectual Property Rights; l) Increased internalization of fair business competition values; m) Increasing recognition and providing support for the work or achievements of the nation's children; n) Completion of laws and regulations (deregulation); And o) Increasing law enforcement against perpetrators of Intellectual Property Rights violations and unhealthy business behavior. 5 United Indonesia, a) Increased behavior that supports Minister of Home which teaches the the life of Pancasila democracy; Affairs importance of unity b) Increased tolerant behavior and and oneness in harmony within and between building a nation religious communities; that is advanced and c) Increased behavior that supports highly competitive awareness of nationalism, in the international patriotism and social solidarity; world. d) Increasing policies that support the unity and oneness of the nation; e) Increased behavior that provides recognition and protection for minorities, marginalized, and those with special needs; f) Increased support for community initiatives and roles in development; g) Increased cooperative behavior between and within institutions, 16

No. GNRM Values GNRM program community components and across sectors; h) Increased law enforcement against perpetrators of criminal acts that disrupt the unity and oneness of the nation; i) Organizing religious education that teaches diversity, tolerance, and ethics; and j) Increasing the role of religious institutions, families and the mass media in fostering ethical values, tolerance, and living in harmony. Source: Presidential Instruction No. 12 of 2016 Coordinator The government through the ministries appointed as coordinators are responsible for coordinating and facilitating the implementation of the GNRM(both from the central level to the regional level through the establishment and determination of the GNRM Task Force). This includes evaluating the results achieved periodically(four months a year or at any time if necessary). More specifically, the additional task(as the Fifth Dictum of Presidential Instruction No. 12 of 2016) given by the President to the Coordinating Minister for Human Development and Culture and the Minister of Home Affairs is a fundamental factor in the implementation and achievement of GNRM. The Coordinating Minister for Human Development and Culture was given the mandate to carry out the functions of the POSDCORB(Gulick, L.,& Urwick, L., 1937):(1) planning(preparation of general guidelines as a GNRM road map);(2) organizing(forming a National Task Force at the ministry and agency level);(3) Staffing(facilitating the capacity building of human resources who are the main actors of GNRM, such as education and training);(4) directing(advocating GNRM to the community and building pentahelix synergies in supporting GNRM);(5) coordinating(coordinating at the level of State Ministries/Agencies and local governments);(6) reporting(reporting the results of the GNRM implementation); and(7) budgeting(consultative in nature related to the GNRM budget). Meanwhile, the task carried out by the Minister of Home Affairs is to coordinate the formation, implementation, development, and reporting of Regional Task Forces(GTD) in each province and regency/city(under the duties and functions of the National Unity and Political Agency). As the Seventh Dictum of Presidential Instruction No. 12 of 2016, the budget impact arising from the GNRM program(input, process and output) becomes the burden on the State Budget, Regional Budget, or other legal sources in accordance with statutory provisions. The Instruction of the President of the Republic of Indonesia Number 12 of 2016 concerning the National Movement of Mental Revolution provides direction and basis for the implementation of GNRM, so that it is expected to have a positive impact on the development of the character and mentality of the Indonesian people. 17

Regulation of the Coordinating Minister for Human Development and Culture of the Republic of Indonesia Number 6 of 2021 concerning General Guidelines for the National Movement of Mental Revolution is a manifestation of Presidential Instruction Number 12 of 2016. This policy is more operational and concrete in nature as a reference document for planning and implementing GNRM. The principles that must be considered in the preparation of the GNRM planning document are planned, integrated, coordinated, and synergized. Box 1 The Idea of Mental Revolution “…Mental Revolution is a change in the way of thinking to respond, act, and work. The basic idea of the Mental Revolution is to build a nation's spirit, namely the spirit of independence, the spirit of freedom to achieve progress. The spirit of the Mental Revolution is to continue the great struggle to fill the promise of independence.” Source: stated for the first time by President Soekarno on 17 August 1957 The GNRM General Guidelines(2021) document clearly explains that the purposes of the GNRM are as follows: 1. Raising awareness and building an optimistic attitude in looking at Indonesia's future as a country with great power, for high achievement and productivity so that it becomes an advanced and modern nation; 2. Changing perspectives, ways of thinking, attitudes, behavior and ways of working that are oriented towards progress and modernity so that Indonesia becomes a big and competitive nation, and is able to compete with other nations; and 3. Realizing an Indonesia that is sovereign in politics, independent in the economy and has personality in culture through the formation of superior new Indonesian people. GNRM has eight principles that are placed as fundamental to ensure consolidation and synergy in the implementation of the GNRM program. These principles include (GNRM General Guidelines Document, 2021): 1. A social and cultural movement to promote Indonesia's progress; 2. The values developed aim to regulate social life and public morality, not private morality; 3. Starting with a trigger program(value attack) to change the behavior of all parties quickly and concretely; 4. Movement programs are designed to be user-friendly, popular and become part of the lifestyle; 5. Cross-sectoral and cross-target in nature; 6. Collaborative in nature which provides space for participation for state administrators, education actors, the public, business actors and media players; 7. State administrators guarantee the continuity of the implementation of the GNRM; And 8. Measurable achievements/impacts. 18

There are several keywords as the main stream in the eight principles, such as:(1) Changes in character, personality and behavior;(2) Multi-stakeholder collaboration; (3) Program sustainability; and(4) Measurable achievements/impacts. This movement was carried out by a Task Force coordinated by the Coordinating Minister for Human Development and Culture(at the central government level) and the Minister of Home Affairs(at the local government level). In addition to the Task Force(at the central and regional levels), there are several stakeholder ecosystems as agents of GNRM change, including:(1) State administrators(executive, legislative, and judiciary);(2) academics(or educational actors);(3) the community(including community leaders, traditional leaders, religious leaders, community leaders, etc.); (4) business actors(private, MSME, business); and(5) media actors. The GNRM General Guidelines(2021) document explains the division of roles of GNRM stakeholders as follows: 1. State Administrators: are all State Apparatuses. It is necessary to inculcate the values of integrity, work ethic, gotong royong /mutual cooperation among state administrators and cultivate a culture of friendly, fast, effective, efficient, and reliable public service work; 2. Educational Actors: including educators(teachers, lecturers), academics, and students. It is necessary to inculcate the values of integrity, work ethic, and gotong royong /mutual cooperation in students and educational institutions and develop the values of integrity, work ethic, and gotong royong /mutual cooperation as objects of scientific study in Higher Education; 3. Society: among others cultural figures and artists, religious leaders, political figures, community leaders, youth leaders, women leaders and traditional leaders. It is necessary to develop socio-cultural life that reflects the values of integrity, work ethic, and gotong royong /mutual cooperation, and strengthen the role and capacity of civil society to become an activator in society; 4. Business Actors: consisting of cooperatives, MSMEs, State-Owned Enterprises (BUMN) and Regional-Owned Enterprises(BUMD), Corporate Social Responsibility(CSR) and business associations. It is necessary to develop a model of people's economy(cooperatives) by the State, business practices that are based on the values of integrity, work ethic, gotong royong/mutual cooperation and strengthening the role of the business world in fostering entrepreneurship and in realizing socio-cultural life that reflects the values of integrity, work ethic, and gotong royong/mutual cooperation through CSR; And 5. Media Actors: including media leaders, journalists, cyber activists, and the media community. It is necessary to strengthen the values of integrity, work ethic, and gotong royong/mutual cooperation among media personnel and enrich community literacy as forming collective values related to integrity, work ethic, and gotong royong/mutual cooperation through mass media and social media. The collaboration is designed with the concept of collaborative governance in the form of a pentahelix. The concept of collaborative governance(Ansell& Gash, 2007) 19

can be interpreted as a process for:(1) creating governance that is more inclusive and democratic in increasing citizen participation;(2) more deliberative policy making (convergence of preferences among both government and non-government actors) (Innes, J. E.,& Booher, D. E., 2000); and(3) collaboration between the government and non-government actors will provide and deliver better(effective and efficient) public services. Collaborative governance can be a strategy for increasing the participation of interest actors in supporting the implementation of GNRM. The implications of the collaborative government paradigm will fade the barriers of interest actors from various levels. Another implication stated by Amsler(2016), collaborative governance requires a synthesis between management, politics, and law. Therefore, citing the opinion of Emerson et al.(2011), collaborative governance is“the processes and structures of public policy decision making and management that engage people constructively across the boundaries of public agencies, levels of government, and/or the public, private and civic spheres in order to carry out a public purpose that could not otherwise be accomplished”. This view includes a more complete definition of the emerging forms of governance that are cross-border and encompass the broader and more complex issues of public sector management. It can be said that collaborative governance is the beginning of a shift in perspective from strong government to governance, which demands better governance. The common thread of regulations that can strengthen the legal and policy legitimacy of GNRM is the 2020-2024 RPJMN stipulated in Presidential Regulation Number 18 of 2020. The 2020-2024 RPJMN is a continuum from the 2005-2025 RPJPN, with the stages"Creating an independent Indonesian society, advanced, just and prosperous through accelerating development in various fields by emphasizing the development of a solid economic structure based on competitive advantage in various regions supported by quality and competitive human resources”. GNRM as a supporting policy for achieving the vision, mission, and objectives of the President and Vice President for 2020-2024. As is known, the vision of the President and Vice President for 2020-2024 is"The realization of an advanced Indonesia that is sovereign, independent and has personality, based on mutual cooperation". Then, the vision was sharpened into nine Missions, namely: 1. Improving the quality of Indonesian people; 2. Productive, independent and competitive economic structure; 3. Equitable and just development; 4. Achieving a sustainable living environment; 5. Cultural progress that reflects the nation's personality; 6. Upholding a legal system that is free of corruption, dignified and reliable; 7. Protection for all nations and provide a sense of security to all citizens; 8. Clean, effective and reliable government management; and 9. Regional Government Synergy within the framework of the Unitary State. The relevance of the GNRM program to the 2020-2024 RPJMN is formulated into two pillars(of the four pillars) of development, namely:(1) Increasing community 20

welfare; and(2) an increasingly advanced and robust economic structure. These two pillars are then translated into the GNRM agenda which has causality as priority programs, priority activities, and priority projects, as follows(Perpres Number 18 of 2020): 1. Strengthening economic resilience for quality growth. This condition is carried out through increasing innovation and investment quality which is the main capital to encourage higher, sustainable and prosperous economic growth in a fair and equitable manner; 2. Improving quality and competitive human resources through human development is the main capital of national development towards inclusive and equitable development in all regions; and 3. Building national culture and character which is carried out through the development of national culture and character has a central position in the framework of national development to create a nation-state that is advanced, modern, superior, competitive and able to compete with other nations. 2.2. Viewing GNRM from Literature Review Based on the results of previous studies(Haris, 2017; Hastangka, 2020; Kautsari et al., 2022; Laksono& Noor, 2020; Lesmana et al., 2020; Nawir& Zultan, 2018; Nawir, Nugroho,& Zultan, 2019; Sumajadi, 2019; Yahya et al., 2022), and document studies (Kemenag NTB, 2019; KemenkoPMK, 2021, 2022), the success and failure of GNRM implementation is still the subject of debate. Behavioral, mental, and cultural changes are a long process and require a long time(Koentjaraningrat, 2010). Even though there have been some successes, there are still some aspects that need to be improved to make this movement more effective in achieving its goals. Some indications that show the success of this movement include: 1. Awareness raising. This movement has relatively increased public awareness of the importance of positive behavior and mentality changes. This can be seen from the increasing participation of the community in the activities of this movement; 2. Spread positive messages. This movement has been relatively successful in spreading positive messages about the importance of values in everyday life, such as mutual cooperation, honesty, discipline, hard work, and mutual respect; 3. Improving the quality of human resources. Through this movement, people began to appreciate education and began to focus on self-development, especially improving skills and expertise. Entrepreneurial spirit and innovation, for example, began to emerge along with increased skills and expertise that opened up opportunities for entrepreneurship and innovation; and 4. Full government support, especially from the central government through various forms of stimulus, contributed greatly to making this movement a success. 21

However, this movement has not had a significant impact. This is caused by several factors, including: 1. Implementation is not optimal. Even though this movement has been launched since 2016, the implementation of this movement is still limited and not evenly distributed throughout Indonesia. Not all regions have a GNRM task force(GTD), and even if there is, there is no clear role for the GTD; 2. Lack of focus. This movement is too general in scope and lacks focus on concrete things that must be changed in society. Generally, this movement takes advantage of existing programs in local government or other helixes, or is not in the form of a dedicated program that is concrete and sustainable. This shows that the definition and interpretation of GNRM is left to each helix which has implications for the wide variety of action programs; and 3. There is no measure(parameter) of success. There are no clear indicators or parameters to measure the success of this movement. The Mental Revolution Achievement Index(ICRM) is only a proxy which measures the success of other programs that are considered to have direct or indirect links with GNRM. Based on the principles of collaborative governance of a movement or activity, it is assumed that the pentahelix model will strengthen the implementation of GNRM. However, in previous studies related to several GNRM initiatives that have been implemented, the pentahelix collaboration model has not been implemented optimally for various reasons as follows: 1. Lack of support and participation from the community and other helix actors. GNRM requires active participation and changes in mindset and behavior. However, if people do not respond well to or are not interested in the movement, it will be difficult for the movement to succeed; 2. Although many good initiatives have been carried out, GNRM in particular is poorly understood for its purpose and benefits. Therefore, sufficient support becomes less; 3. There is no coordination and consistency in implementation. GNRM involves many institutions and individuals who must work together and coordinate. Good initiatives that arise from various institutions, both government and non-government, tend to run separately, as part of the existing activities of the institution concerned. Different institutional structures between actors/helix reduce flexibility and do not provide enough space to act collaboratively and synergistically. The difficulty of coordination is also caused by differences in the character and organizational culture of each actor/helix so that the collaborative process of the actor/helix cannot run in a balanced or unequal manner. In turn, the collaboration process can be burdensome to one party, resulting in slowing down the process of emerging new innovations. If there is no good coordination or consistency in execution, the movement will lose its momentum for success; and 4. GNRM monitoring and evaluation(Monev) is inadequate. The GNRM reports were more administrative in nature, for example regarding changes 22

in the number of Regional Task Forces(GTD), and not on the substance of the movement. In addition, ICRM is a proxy and the Mental Revolution Award is a verification of incoming claims/suggestions. This resulted in the monitoring and evaluation being conducted to feel piecemeal activities oriented and less comprehensive. Therefore, it is difficult to know what aspects are successful and not successful in this movement and what critical improvement or feedback is needed. 2.3. GNRM Parameters and Outcomes “…Basic and long-lasting social and behavioral changes require a very long (process) time, so to get(better) changes requires intervention and a series of actions. Sometimes the evaluation methods used in recording change activities are not always perfect to be able to identify very important chain of events.”(Pawson, 2013). GNRM does not have a single parameter in assessing achievements or impacts and tends to use proxy indicators. The main indicator used so far is the Mental Revolution Achievement Indicator(or hereinafter referred to as ICRM) and other parameters that"can" be used to assess impact are(GNRM General Guidelines Document, 2021): (1) Learner Character Index(IKPD) and Student Character Index(IKS),(2) Family Development Index(GPA),(3) Pancasila Value Actualization Index(IANP),(4) Community Development Index(IPMas),(5) Corruption Perceptions Index(GPA),(6) Human Development Index(IPM),(7) Religious Harmony Index(IKUB),(8) Literacy Cultural Values(NBL),(9) Public Service Index(IPP), and other indices that have achievement measures that are synergistic with the development of the Mental Revolution. Sometimes if the program tends to be experimental and complex, evaluation is difficult(Chen, H. T., 2017). This logic is related to Pawson’s(2013) quote above, that program/activity evaluation can work well in certain sections, but is not used effectively to explain the connections of that section. Therefore, evaluation must be designed from the start of planning or before the policy is legitimized(ex ante) and after the policy is implemented(ex post)(Rossi et al., 2004). On the other hand, evaluation can also be carried out while the policy is in progress, usually called formative evaluation(Guba, E. G.,& Lincoln, Y. S., 2005; Scriven, 2005). This is what happens in the GNRM parameter, namely ICRM. ICRM as a form of parameters born from the composite results of the implementation of the five GNRM programs which have a complex nature. ICRM properties calculate(quantitatively) simultaneously from five GNRM programs. The five GNRM programs can be analogized as an overview of the"parts" being evaluated. While the connectivity between these parts cannot be explained directly as factors influencing the failure/success of GNRM. 23

Box 2 GNRM evaluation and impact "...The outcome of successful implementation of GNRM programs/activities must be able to provide maximum benefits by strengthening the Mental Revolution and Pancasila Ideology Development to strengthen cultural resilience." Source: GNRM General Guidelines(2021) document The following is an overview related to the basic concept of forming ICRM parameters taken from the draft ICRM measurement concept by Statistics Indonesia in 2020. Figure 2.2 ICRM Parameter Concept Source: GNRM General Guidelines(2021) document(translated) The results of the GNRM evaluation using the ICRM parameters in 2018 showed the number 67.01, which has an indication that the development of the mental revolution is still not running optimally. The evaluation was carried out again in 2021 with a result of 70.47. There was an increase in score of 4.46 points when compared to the ICRM results in 2018. The final target for achieving mental revolution development in 2024 is 74.30 according to the 2020-2024 RPJMN document. 24

25

With regard to implementation, GNRM as a social movement initiated by the central government and coordinated by KemenkoPMK has challenges in implementation in the regions. An internet news source that was officially released on the kemenko.go.id page stated that one indicator of the success of the GNRM was the formation of a Regional Task Force(GTD). KemenkoPMK(2022) mentions in an article entitled "KemenkoPMK Speeds Up the Formation of the GNRM Regional Task Force" quoting a statement from the Coordinating Ministry for Human Development and Cultural Affairs Muhadjir Effendy who explained that according to the report of the Ministry of Home Affairs as of September 2022, 75% of GTD in Indonesia had been formed or 383 of 514 regencies/cities(Widhoroso, 2022). However, what will become the next vital work is the implementation of the movement. As reviewed in the official release, the existence of GTD is stated to have a vital function in several functions such as(1) formulating policies and strategies for implementing GNRM in the regions,(2) realizing collaborative pentahelix cooperation which includes regional apparatuses, academics, community groups, groups business world, and the media. Reflecting on the news that was officially released on the government's website, in this section the researchers attempted to carry out an analysis based on empirical data in the field, namely through in-depth interviews with a number of stakeholders. This study is confirmatory on the implementation of GNRM at the regional level, and this study's efforts to strengthen this movement through alternatives that have not been read as new opportunities in mainstreaming the mental revolution. This chapter is a milestone in the analysis to see the performance of the Regional Government in an effort to implement the GNRM. The approach used is contextual analysis. This means that indicators are built based on the occurring phenomena in the field. The locus that becomes the unit of analysis for the study is an area that represents the rural-urban character and the balance between Java and outside Java. The city of Bogor was chosen as a representation of an urban character and is located in Java, while Lombok Barat Regency is an area that describes a rural character and is located outside Java. The analysis of this section uses the perspectives of:(1) Understanding of GNRM;(2) Program innovation;(3) Engagement and helix engagement;(4) Collaborative effectiveness; and(5) Expectations of the ideal model. 26

3.1. GNRM Confirmative Study between Regions 3.1.1. GNRM Understanding The level of understanding of the essence, values, and concrete forms of GNRM varies widely. Meanwhile, each helix is given the freedom to interpret and translate policies into action programs. On the one hand, this provides flexibility, but can potentially lead to disorientation. The last thing is especially evident from the pragmatism of Helix to simply claim compatibility of existing programs/activities with GNRM. Bogor City In the context of Bogor City, there are only three helix elements that play a role in GNRM namely: government actors, academics and the community. Unfortunately, each element has a different understanding of GNRM so that the movements carried out lack synergy between one another. According to the Bakesbangpol Bogor City as an element of the government that was given the mandate to handle GNRM, Bakesbangpol's understanding of GNRM tends to be limited to one aspect, namely the United Indonesia Movement. GNRM is understood as a movement that revitalizes national values and nationalism at the community level. Because of this, GNRM then focuses on educational movements targeting the younger generation, both children and adolescents, to apply the values of Pancasila and the 1945 Constitution in everyday life. From the perspective of Bappeda which incidentally deals with program and activity planning, GNRM is understood as a value that is indirectly attached to planning activities such as the human rights-based RPJMD and various thematic Musrembang (inclusive, gender, etc.). GNRM is then not understood as a priority program that has its own nomenclature but is linked to existing programs that are felt to be closest to the goals of the GNRM itself. Just like Bappeda, which has the term"infrastructure development for mental change", meaning that the programs are made to remain biased towards infrastructure development which is then claimed as one of the elements that change people's behavior. This behavior change is then considered as an indicator of the success of mental change at the community level. Furthermore, from elements of higher education, especially the Institut Pertanian Bogor(IPB) actually has the most comprehensive understanding of GNRM. This can be seen from the massive student activities linked to GNRM. The Directorate of Student Affairs(Ditmawa) is the spearhead in overseeing the implementation of GNRM within IPB. GNRM was then understood as a reference for changing student habits and was embodied into a leadership training package called"7 habits for students". In addition, IPB also made GNRM the basis for group assignments for new students when carrying out campus orientation activities and made it one of the major themes to be referred to by student organizations as a guide in designing its activities. This happened because IPB received resource support in the form of grants from the Coordinating Ministry for PMK through the Indonesian Rectors Forum(FRI), where at the same time the Rector of IPB was the Chair of the FRI. Therefore, indirectly GNRM became one of the Rector's priority programs entrusted to Ditmawa. 27

Then, in elements of society such as the Inter-Religious Harmony Forum(FKUB), the Interfaith Solidarity Agency(Basolia), and the National Insight Outreaching Cadres (KPWK), GNRM is understood as a solidarity movement to build a community mentality to become more tolerant, aware of development, and has high nationalism. This understanding however runs partially, where the understanding is formed from who this organization partners with. this is the same as FKUB and Basolia which linked GNRM with religious tolerance movements to improve the tolerance index in the city of Bogor. However, it is different from the KPWK which incidentally is a forum for community leaders under Bakesbangpol. Therefore, understanding related to GNRM is limited to the level of national insight in society. In the end it can be seen that the understanding of GNRM by some of the elements involved is low or out of sync between one element and another. This could be due to the lack of collaboration carried out by the elements involved and the movements carried out also tended to be partial. For example, IPB, which is considered progressive in implementing GNRM, only focuses on the internal campus environment without making collaborative efforts with the Bogor City Government. In addition, one of the dominant factors causing this lack of understanding of GNRM is the absence of concrete commitment from the Bogor City Government in the form of regulations or the Task Force that specifically regulates and manages the implementation of GNRM in Bogor City. GNRM is then only linked to existing programs that are claimed to be GNRM programs. Lombok Barat Regency Before carrying out the implementation of the GNRM program, the Regional Government and Helix need to have an understanding of the mental revolution and of this movement itself. The same understanding of mental revolution can be interpreted as a mutual agreement regarding the goals, values, and principles that form the basis of the mental revolution movement. Without this understanding, each party may have different interpretations of the mental revolution movement, resulting in actions that are not coordinated and not in the same direction. Box 3 GNRM understanding "...we understand this movement as part of increasing nationalism, especially for the younger generation in Lombok Barat"(Head of Bakesbangpol Lombok Barat, February 2023)” “… this movement is too broad in meaning, changing behavior is a long-term investment”(Head of Bappeda Lombok Barat, February 2023) “…stunting and early marriage are the most deeply rooted problems in Lombok, if you want a mental revolution, start from the change in mindset that causes these two problems”(District Head of Narmada, November 2022) From some of the interview excerpts above which were conducted empirically in this study, it shows the diversity of understandings epistemologically about what is meant by a mental revolution, especially contextualization in the regions of Lombok Barat. 28

Bakesbangpol Lombok Barat said that nationalism is the main spirit in carrying out this mental revolution, especially with regard to youth awareness in Lombok Barat in strengthening the values of nationalism as Indonesian youth, one of which is represented by love for the motherland and defending the country. According to Lombok Barat Bakesbangpol, since the mental revolution was announced as a national program by the central government, the fundamental issue that has become a priority for the implementation of this movement is collaborating with educational institutions, especially at the school level. However, this specific implementation also encounters several challenges, such as: 1. The jurisdiction of Bakesbangpol, like other regions in Indonesia, only has the authority to cooperate with elementary schools(SD) and junior high schools (SMP), while the authority for senior high schools(SMA) is in the province. This made it difficult for Lombok Barat Bakesbangpol to coordinate program initiation in these three education elements; 2. The area of authority of Bakesbangpol as the implementing unit has limitations on main tasks and budget allocations. This is considered very vital according to Bakesbangpol because the limited duties and functions of only being an implementing unit means that planning cannot be fully carried out, even though in essence the Bakesbangpol Regional Task Force is a vital coordinator in GNRM. In its implementation in Lombok Barat, Bakesbangpol can only perform a number of functions such as delivering reminders of several program priorities that have been proposed at Bappeda or conveying program discourse that has not been designed at Bappeda related to the mental revolution; and 3. Another deeply rooted problem of a cultural nature is the stigmatization that is common in Indonesia which often attaches Bakesbangpol as an'outcast institution' for bureaucrats in the regions, so that culturally navigating at the level of coordination between regional apparatus organizations is difficult. Furthermore, citing the statement from the Head of the Lombok Barat Bappeda above, the very broad meaning of causing a mental revolution needs to be considered as a long-term investment. What is meant by this long-term investment is to understand the mental revolution not only as a programmatic program that is purely political in the short span of the presidential administration, but to see that the mental revolution should be mainstreamed between lines of government institutions. Bappeda then said that in the absence of strict instructions from the central government in efforts to mainstream this movement, the understanding became very broad in terms of policy design. 29

Box 4 GNRM Program Mapping “... we have actually mapped out any policy planning at Bappeda Lombok Barat that can be categorized as a mental revolution, we think a lot of what we have done can be nomenclature as a mental revolution. However, because there were no instructive documents from the central government, we were confused. In fact, this program itself specifically mentions a mental revolution, or it can claim that several programs in Bappeda are a mental revolution. We also just found out (this year-ed.), that we are included in the Regional Task Force Decree, I think it is important to see the continuation of the decree”(Head of Bappeda Lombok Barat, February 2023). The efforts that have been made by the Lombok Barat Bappeda in mapping activities relevant to the GNRM are strengthened by the following data: Table 3.1 Program mapping relevant to GNRM in Lombok Barat No. Title 1 Contribution of Regional Original Income (PAD) to Lombok Barat Regency Income 2 study of Tobacco Products Industry Centers Towards Tobacco Products Areas(KIHT) Lombok Barat Regency 3 Rapid Assessment of Economic, Social, Cultural, and Psychological Impacts of COVID-19 4 Community Satisfaction Survey of Lombok Barat Regency Public Services 5 Study of the Impact of the Implementation of the Regulation on the Use of Local Products on the Economy of Salt Farmers in Sekotong District 6 The Socio-Economic Impact of People's Mining in Sekotong District, Lombok Barat Regency 7 Community Satisfaction Survey of Lombok Barat Regency Public Services 8 Analysis of the Influence of Transfers and Position Promotions on Employee Career Development in the Lombok Barat Regency Government 9 Legal Breakthrough Advancing Regional Owned Enterprises in Lombok Barat Regency 10 Study of the Influence of the Work Force who did not finish elementary school on the IPM of Lombok Barat Regency Procurement Year 2022 2022 2020 2019 2018 2018 2018 2017 2017 2016 GNRM Program Independent Indonesia Movement Program Independent Indonesia Movement Program Independent Indonesia Movement Program Indonesia Serving Movement Program Indonesia Serving Movement Program Independent Indonesia Movement Program Indonesia Serving Movement Program Indonesia Serving Movement Program Indonesia Serving Movement Program Independent Indonesia 30

No. Title 11 Study of the Influence of Traditional Markets on the Distribution of Community Income in Lombok Barat Regency 12 Public Satisfaction Survey of Public Services in Lombok Barat Regency 13 The Work of Compiling a Public Satisfaction Survey Study of Lombok Barat Regency Government Services 14 Acceleration of Quality Improvement in Vocational High Schools(SMK) and Relevance of Graduates to Competitive Conditions in Lombok Barat Regency 15 Budget Allocation Study on SKPD Performance in Lombok Barat Regency in 2015 16 Regional Tourism Development Master Plan(RIPARDA) Lombok Barat Regency 17 Study of Investment Promotion Strategic Action in the Fisheries Sector of Lombok Barat Regency 18 Potential and Profile of Leading Commodity Investment in Lombok Barat Regency 19 Preparation of the Lombok Barat Regency Creative Economy Development Action Plan Source: Lombok Barat Bappeda, 2023 Procurement Year 2016 2016 2015 2015 2015 2014 2014 2014 2014 GNRM Program Movement Program Independent Indonesia Movement Program Indonesia Serving Movement Program Indonesia Serving Movement Program Indonesia Serving Movement Program Indonesia Serving Movement Program Independent Indonesia Movement Program Independent Indonesia Movement Program Independent Indonesia Movement Program Independent Indonesia Movement Program Meanwhile, one of the opinions obtained by this study by the Head of Narmada District in Lombok Barat Regency sees one practical and realistic form of mental revolution is to bring this issue closer to the most basic problems currently being experienced by Lombok, namely stunting and early marriage. The two statements from this empirical study show a very contrasting understanding at the level of policy planners and policy implementers in the regions. Citing the opinion of Assistant I for Government and People's Welfare Secretariat of the Province of West Nusa Tenggara, through the official website KemenkoPMK.go.id, the existence of intensive coordination meetings in accelerating the formation of a regional task force in NTB serves to root the view that GNRM is not a mere project of the government. center, but as mainstreaming which has actually been carried out by the local government but has not been framed as part of the mental revolution movement(KemenkoPMK, 2022). In this case, it is necessary to synchronize cooperation at the central government level, namely the Ministry of Home Affairs, 31

which can provide guidance until there is an understanding of technical tutorials for GTD implementation. In this case, it is important to have the same mental revolution understanding in the implementation of GNRM, one of which is to ensure good coordination between parties. With the same understanding of mental revolution, every party involved in GNRM will have the same understanding of the goals and values to be achieved. This will facilitate coordination between parties, so that the actions taken will be consistent and mutually supportive. Understanding the same mental revolution will also help all parties to focus on the same goal, namely changing the behavior and mentality of the Indonesian people towards a better direction. In addition, the same understanding will also ensure consistency in the actions taken by all parties. Several field findings in this study indicate that the understanding of mental revolution is still different in the institutions concerned. This can happen because there is still a lack of coordination and communication between parties. Effective and transparent communication can help increase understanding and minimize differences in interpretation of the GNRM. The concrete thing that can be done by the central government in strengthening the alignment of understanding of this mental revolution movement as a policy direction is by having formal instructions and operational documents from the central government which include this movement as a priority in the draft of the regional RPJMD as deep-rooted mainstreaming. 3.1.2. GNRM Program Innovation Several program innovations deserve appreciation. Innovative programs dedicated to the success of GNRM need to be encouraged and appreciated more. Bogor City One of the most obvious implementations of GNRM in Bogor City is the“National Insight Outreaching Cadres(KPWK)” program which is an initiative of the Bogor City Political and National Unity Agency(Bakesbangpol). KPWK, which is the flagship program of GNRM in Bogor City, has the intention of increasing understanding of Pancasila ideology, national insight, and character building. Technically, there are 136 selected cadres who will conduct outreach to 68 different sub-districts throughout Bogor City. The counseling material includes the values of Pancasila, terrorism and its countermeasures, as well as drug issues. In preparing the module, Bogor City Bakesbangpol also cooperates with the National Counter Terrorism Agency(BNPT) and the National Narcotics Board(BNN). In selecting cadres, Bakesbangpol Bogor City plays a role in disseminating information to Village Chiefs regarding the cadre selection process. Then, the Village Chiefs proposed four names each to Bakesbangpol Bogor City. The main condition for proposing names is that prospective cadres are not allowed to be affiliated with any political party. Meanwhile, in terms of age and gender, there are no specific restrictions as long as they are at least 17 years old. This makes the KPWK program guarantee the inclusiveness of implementing the GNRM program. After that, hundreds of prospective cadres were selected through an election process held by the Bogor 32

City Bakesbangpol. The series of selections included written tests and interviews regarding character, nationalism, and Pancasila values. Through a ranking system, two out of each of the 68 sub-districts were selected to become KPWK cadres. As an incentive for the 136 cadres, they received a certificate from the Head of the Bakesbangpol, which, with the approval of the Mayor of Bogor, allowed the reduction of funding for the welfare of the said cadres to be allocated from the Bogor City Regional Revenue and Expenditure Budget(APBD). Each cadre is required to conduct a minimum of four counseling sessions each month. Each business trip is supported by funding of IDR 105,000. Thus, each cadre gets IDR 420,000 per month as a stimulant to run KPWK. Even though there are funding incentives, according to the Head of Ideology who directly supervises the program, KPWK is still based on more volunteer aspects. In practice, KPWK cadres not only conduct counseling four times each month, but more. Then, the KPWK cadres also procured a lot of Educational Teaching Aids(APE) whose value could exceed the incentives provided by the Bogor City Government. On the other hand, KPWK cadres are also not bound by a contract, in which cadres are freed to continue running the KPWK program until those concerned have had enough. Most active cadres are currently aged 40 and over. Most of them are also cadres at the Integrated Services Post(Posyandu) in the Family Welfare Empowerment(PKK) program. However, according to Mr. Aep's statement, KPWK cadres are not necessarily dominated by women. However, the number of women and men as KPWK cadres is relatively balanced. This also proves the existence of aspects of gender equality in the flagship GNRM program in Bogor City. Although the KPWK program is considered quite mature as one of the programs that support the implementation of GNRM in Bogor City, its implementation is not without obstacles. First, Bogor City Bakesbangpol feels overwhelmed to manage the KPWK program due to a lack of human resources. Second, there is continuity with the aspect of a lack of human resources, namely the lack of a budget. Thus, Bogor City Bakesbangpol has limited space to innovate further to realize programs related to GNRM. If indeed the central government—in this case the Coordinating Ministry for Human Development and Culture(KemenkoPMK), is committed to supporting the implementation of programs in the regions to realize GNRM, then it is necessary to provide financial support as well. With financial support, Bogor City Bakesbangpol can help solve the problem of lack of human resources by employing people on a program-based contract basis. The third obstacle is the lack of involvement of academics, the business world and the media in the execution of the KPWK program. In terms of module design, Bogor City Bakesbangpol hopes to work with universities inside and outside Bogor City. In addition, the business world has yet to see its role in carrying out KPWK. In fact, the helix of the business world can provide financial and human resource support through their Corporate Social Responsibility(CSR) program. For the media, Bakesbangpol Bogor City has collaborated on coverage with the Association of Online Journalists(IWO). However, the cooperation was halted because the main contact 33

between the IWO and the Bogor City Bakesbangpol resigned from their jobs at the IWO. Therefore, Bogor City Bakesbangpol has not cooperated with the media crew for now. The KPWK program innovation initiated by Bakesbangpol Bogor City inspired Bakesbangpol of other cities and regencies in Indonesia to implement it. This is evidenced by several comparative studies conducted at Bakesbangpol Bogor City to replicate the KPWK in other areas. However, despite its great potential to support GNRM—particularly the United Indonesia Movement, KPWK can still be refined further with a few notes:(1) Material support from KemenkoPMK;(2) Helix involvement of academia, the business world, and the media to strengthen the KPWK program and develop other innovations in the future; and(3) preparation of achievement indicators. Even though KPWK was lined up as a program to increase national insight, character and values of Pancasila, there are no indicators of achievement yet. An example is a benchmark for a society that has character, has national insight, and is of Pancasila value. Lombok Barat Regency GNRM has many types of programs with a broad scope of focus. Initially, PermenkoPMK Number 3 of 2017 stated that GNRM had an action plan focused on 5 movements namely,(1) Clean Indonesia Movement,(2) Serving Indonesia Movement, (3) Independent Indonesia Movement,(4) United Indonesia Movement, and(5) Orderly Indonesian Movement. Then in the GNRM General Guidelines contained in the 2020-2024 RPJMN, priority activities for the Mental Revolution then expand to become(1) Mental Revolution in the Education system,(2) Mental Revolution in governance,(3) Mental Revolution in the social system,(4)) Strengthening the centers of change,(5) Developing and cultivating a populist economic system based on Pancasila,(6) Fostering the Pancasila Ideology, civics education, national insight and defending the country. Due to its wide scope, the programs carried out are quite numerous and varied. This is a challenge for bureaucratic elements in local governments to translate these abstract ideas into policy directions in the regions. Moreover, in the absence of implemented technical documents, the many types of movement names only become jargon embedded in existing programs and/or become the basis for claims on programs that have been implemented. This study observes that the absence of a more contextual translation has caused each sector to have different interpretations of the various types of movement. 34

Box 5 Missing-link on GNRM Program Planning “… so far there has been no document from the center that technically explains the details of this mental revolution national movement. Furthermore, if this is indeed a national priority program for which there are clear formal instructions, then we in the regions will definitely include this movement as the mainstream when preparing plans at Bappeda, but unfortunately there are no documents so far, so we are here just matching the programs. what has been designed and carried out in Lombok Barat is in accordance with the movement”(Lombok Barat Bappeda, February 2023). The GNRM program often relies on programs that are the responsibility of other institutions. For example, in the focus of the mental revolution program on the education system, the main organizer is the Ministry of Education and Culture. The same thing happened to the mental revolution in governance, where the main organizer was KemenpanRB. Situations like this can make it difficult to determine the cause-and-effect relationship of the interventions that have been carried out. When there is a change in the index, it will be difficult to determine whether the change is caused by the GNRM program or other factors outside the program. Therefore, there is a need for strong coordination and synergy between the agencies involved in implementing the GNRM program to ensure program effectiveness and success. 3.1.3. Helix Involvement and Engagement From the perspective of government actors, GTD does not function optimally other than just compiling programs/activities related to GNRM. Coordination function does not work. It is necessary to consider placing Bappeda in a more essential portion of the GTD to ensure that the spirit of GNRM is integrated into various development planning documents. Non-government actors seem to play little role because they tend to be more wait-and-see at the invitation of government actors. Bogor City As previously mentioned, in the context of Bogor City, there are only three helix elements that play a role in GNRM namely: government actors, universities, and the community. Other elements such as business entities and the mass media do not have a significant role in GNRM in Bogor City. The dominant government actor involved in GNRM is Bakesbangpol, where GNRM is linked to the affairs of one of the fields, namely the Ideology Sector. It is at this field level that Bakesbangpol involves various elements of the community such as FKUB and Basolia to support the implementation of GNRM and form KPWK as a concrete form of the program in order to encourage mental change in society. Bakesbangpol always actively involves elements of the community in GNRM activities through counseling conducted by KPWK. KPWK is given the freedom to carry out its programs organically through the innovations of its members. Counseling was carried out by involving other elements as well as organizations in the village(PKK, Dharma Wanita, etc.) and also involving schools within the KPWK cadres. 35

Furthermore, Bappeda, which is a program and activity planning think tank in Bogor City, implicitly stated that it would only take a role at the policy formulation stage, and was not willing to play a further technical role with the argument that matters regarding GNRM were the affairs of the technical OPD, namely Bakesbangpol. Therefore, it can be said that actually the role of Bappeda in GNRM in Bogor City is not significant. In fact, as the lead in terms of planning, Bappeda also needs to downstream GNRM values to OPD outside Bakesbangpol so that the movements carried out run more effectively and massively. From a higher education perspective, the Bogor Agricultural Institute independently has various programs related to GNRM. The target participants in the program implemented by IPB are limited to students and the community in the student environment. IPB takes advantage of existing learning/student programs by inserting messages of the Mental Revolution in them. In the case of IPB, the programs used for GNRM entry include the Student Talent Development Program, Gebyar Nusantara Week(GeNus), Synergy Project, IPB Teaching Class, and mangrove planting. Most of these programs are carried out independently by IPB students, although in practice they still collaborate with business entities through a sponsorship scheme and involve the Bogor City government as a medium for promoting activities. Finally, community involvement is limited to existing partnerships with government actors that have been carried out so far, such as through the Inter-Religious Harmony Forum(FKUB), the Interfaith Solidarity Agency(Basolia), child rights campaigns with the NGO Warga Upadaya and the Child Fund, as well as the civil village program through USAID Madani program. The last quite prominent initiative is citizen participation in becoming a National Insight Outreaching Cadres organized by Bakesbangpol. Lombok Barat Regency GNRM itself has a goal to form a pentahelix cooperation ecosystem, which involves academics, media, state officials, the business world, and the community. This collaboration model aims to bring together perspectives, expertise and resources owned by each helix, so that this program can run optimally and sustainably. However, in practice, there are deficiencies in the implementation of the cooperation model. One of these drawbacks is the lack of interaction between helixes in the implementation of GNRM. Several informants in Lombok Barat who were involved in the GNRM program stated that they still had a model of direct interaction with the Coordinating Ministry for Human Development and Culture(KemenkoPMK), not through a coordinator and had no interaction with other helixes. This indicates a lack of coordination between helix in the implementation of GNRM. Inter-helix coordination is very important in the implementation of the GNRM program, because each helix has a different role and has different resources. Academics can provide input in curriculum development and learning method development, the media can provide support in campaigns and dissemination of information related to GNRM, state administrators can provide support for 36

government regulations and programs, the business world can provide support for CSR programs, and the community is the main driver of GNRM. Good inter-helix coordination will enable the GNRM program to run more effectively and optimally. Therefore, there is a need for efforts from the government to improve coordination between helix in the implementation of GNRM. The government can hold regular meetings between coordinators and representatives from each helix, so that each helix can provide useful input and input for the implementation of GNRM. In addition, the government also needs to increase community involvement in implementing GNRM, so that GNRM can become a movement that truly involves all levels of society and can work more effectively in achieving its goals. In the early period of the birth of the mental revolution movement, one of the good practices that had been carried out by KemenkoPMK was collaborating with a number of stakeholder elements in disseminating information on the importance of the mental revolution. This needs to be reconstructed with several modifications of the approach. According to Pauzan's news coverage(2019) on timesindonesia.co.id, the dissemination of information on the mental revolution was carried out by collaborating with Institute for Human Resources Research and Development (Lakpesdam) NU in Mataram City and a number of Regencies in NTB. One of the real actions that can be taken is to involve religious and community leaders as a concrete manifestation of the mental revolution movement orientated towards changing the way of thinking and acting at the community level. Some of the programs included in the coverage include Zero Waste, fast services for extending driving licenses and vehicle registration certificates, population administration services from population and civil registration, health services, public service bazaars, and so on. This is an effort to support a common understanding of the mental revolution movement in accordance with Presidential Instruction No. 12 of 2016 as a guide in mental revolution at the national and regional levels. This is consistent with the opinion of the NTB Ministry of Religion(2019) which was released in the news, that the involvement of religious leaders is the right way to instill fundamental behavioral changes through religious values which are believed to be able to quickly reach all levels of society in terms of changing mindsets and work culture. In this case the InterReligious Harmony Forum(FKUB) is needed to support security stability in the context of inter-religious tolerance in NTB. The empirical study carried out also portrayed similar opinions from representatives of Hindu religious groups who live in the midst of a majority Muslim community on Lombok Island. Box 6 Meaning-making of GNRM “…tolerance and living in harmony among religious adherents are the most important in interpreting mental revolution. Hindu Krama (family) here in Lombok have been used to living side by side since long ago, because we are one family, Tat Twam Asi, according to the philosophy of Dharma. I am you, you are me, meaning that all of humanity is one family, it is easy to break up if you feel that you are most righteous”(Jro Mangku Pura Batu Bolong in Lombok Barat, November 2022). 37

So far, the collaboration that has been carried out from the results of field studies conducted by researchers is collaboration between the central government and regional governments as well as academia in the early days before the formation of the Regional Task Force. An example is through several empowering programs that have been carried out previously by UIN Mataram. Box 7 GNRM Integration with Thematic Community Service Program (KKN Tematik) “...what we worked on together with the Mental Revolution center team was the Thematic Community Service Program in the villages that have collaborated with UIN Mataram. Therefore, this is very tangible, we deploy students who live directly with the community, then carry out mapping and mentoring programs related to the mental revolution in tourist villages in Lombok Barat”(Head of LPPM UIN Mataram, February 2023). According to the narrative of the Head of LPPM UIN Mataram who during the in-depth interview was accompanied by several university officials, one of those involved was a member of the Regional Research Council from representatives of UIN Mataram academics, said that one of the good practices that could be continued in mainstreaming this mental revolution program was by collaborating again with academics, especially the involvement of activities that have deep roots such as the Thematic Community Service Program. So far, UIN Mataram and the Regional Research Council have also highlighted the lack of facilitation in terms of coordination between helix elements which has resulted in the Regional Task Force not running optimally, even though in its official release KemenkoPMK gave appreciation for the 100% achievement of the Regional Task Force in the Province of NTB. This collaboration was officially covered in the news on uinmataram.ac.id, where in 2018, the Chancellor of UIN Mataram attended a coordination meeting and signed a Memorandum of Understanding for the implementation of the 2018 Mental Revolution Community Service Program with 33 universities throughout Indonesia to create the Thematic Community Service program The program aims to encourage fundamental behavior changes at the community level, especially on issues of integrity, work ethic, and mutual cooperation through direct student deployment in the community(UIN Mataram, 2018). 3.1.4. Collaborative Effectiveness Collaboration cannot run optimally because apart from the absence of a leading sector, each helix operates with its own interests, interpretations, and programs/activities. Bogor City There are not many collaborative programs that occur in Bogor City. The Bogor City Government, as the main executor, still seems to be running their respective programs without any meaningful collaboration between each other. For example, Bappeda is the think tank of the Bogor City government as a whole. Bappeda has formulated various plans and work program strategies for Bogor City. Some of the 38

main issues of concern are eradicating extreme poverty, stunting, and empowering mothers. These three issues are carried out through an approach at the family level. Although they do not portray their plans, strategies, and work programs as part of the GNRM, Bogor City Bappeda believes that their programs have embodied the spirit of mental revolution itself. In handling these programs, Bogor City Bappeda cooperates a lot with several agencies at the domestic and international levels. An example is working with the United States Agency for International Development(USAID) and the Warga Upadaya Foundation in handling stunting. The implementation of the collaboration between the Bogor City Bappeda and their partners began with liaison by the West Java Provincial Government. West Java Provincial Government connects USAID with Bogor City Bappeda. Meanwhile, the partnership with the Warga Upadaya Foundation was established due to a grassroots initiative from the organization itself. Another example is the approach at the sub-district level which is carried out in a structured manner by cadres of the KPWK program made by the Bogor City Bakesbangpol. In this program, there is collaboration between government agencies and the public, between government agencies and the media, as well as collaboration between government agencies. First, collaboration between government agencies and the community occurred when the Bogor City Bakesbangpol recruited cadres from Bogor City residents who were spread across 68 urban villages. The selected cadres received matriculation and upgrading from the Bogor City Bakesbangpol to be able to disseminate the material they received to the general public in Bogor City through outreach activities. The position of the Bogor City Bakesbangpol which invites the community to be actively involved in the proposed work program is a form of collaboration between government agencies and the community. On the other hand, the KPWK program also embodies collaboration between the government and the media because in carrying out the selection and holding of counseling, the Bogor City Bakesbangpol also invited media crews—in this case the Bogor City Online Journalists Association(IWO)—to cover these activities. One of the implications of the announcement made by the Bogor City Bakesbangpol and IWO is that the KPWK program is increasingly known throughout Indonesia. Consequently, the Bogor City Bakesbangpol often receives visits from other regency/city Bakesbangpol who wish to duplicate similar activities in their respective areas. This comparative study from the Bakesbangpol for other regencies/cities shows that there is collaboration between government agencies. In addition, collaboration between government agencies was also seen when the Bakesbangpol Bogor City formulated materials for the extension module. In compiling the module, Bakesbangpol Bogor City consulted the National Narcotics Agency and BNPT, especially on material on identifying drugs and avoiding them as well as material on terrorism and efforts to prevent radical ideology and countermeasures. The two helixes of governance that promote collaborative governance demonstrate the effectiveness of collaboration itself. Referring to the sources of collaboration failure described by Ansell and Gash(2008) and Emerson(2012), there are not many 39

challenges faced by Bappeda and Bakesbangpol Bogor City. The results in the field actually show the opposite, that Bogor City has succeeded in facilitating collaboration with(1) good communication,(2) agreement on the goals of cooperation,(3) intensive coordination,(4) clear delegation of responsibilities,(5) culture and style relatively aligned work,(6) the ability to reach consensus in problem solving efforts, (7) inter-helix trust involved in these programs, and(8) support from the leadership, both the Head of the Agency and the Mayor. Although these forms of collaboration are deemed effective, they are still not sufficient to support GNRM holistically. The hope is that the collaboration that has become a work culture in Bogor City can be preserved and the intensity and innovations increased to be able to operate under the GNRM framework. Lombok Barat Regency Bakesbangpol is a government agency tasked with supervising and coordinating all activities related to security, order, and national unity. In order to carry out its duties, Bakesbangpol was formed into a Regional Task Force(GTD) which is responsible for implementing the National Mental Revolution Movement. However, in carrying out its duties, Bakesbangpol as a task force still has several shortcomings that need attention. First, based on findings in Lombok Barat, Bakesbangpol as a task force experienced limited instructions given by the central government regarding the implementation of the National Movement of Mental Revolution(GNRM). Even though Bakesbangpol as a task force already has a work program regulated in statutory regulations, the instructions given by the central government are often unclear and not firm. This makes it difficult for Bakesbangpol to understand the policy directions taken by the central government regarding GNRM, and it is difficult to take appropriate steps to carry out their duties. Second, Bakesbangpol has limited main tasks and functions(tupoksi) in carrying out their duties as a regional task force for GNRM. Although Bakesbangpol can act as coordinator and facilitator in implementing the GNRM program, Bakesbangpol does not have the authority to carry out direct monitoring and evaluation. Therefore, Bakesbangpol cannot take direct action on the implementation of the GNRM program in the regions and can only provide recommendations to local governments as a step for program development. Third, Bakesbangpol experienced a lack of financial support as a GTD. Most of the Lombok Barat regional government budget is more focused on the education and health sectors, so the budget allocated to Bakesbangpol is limited. This makes it difficult for Bakesbangpol to carry out their duties, innovate, and expand networks. 3.1.5. Ideal Model Expectations The ideal model as described in this section assumes that the key to effective collaboration begins, and must be restarted, from the common ground of the helix involved. 40

Bogor City Seeing that there is already a good cultural foundation for collaborative work in the City of Bogor, strengthening the intensity and innovation of further forms of collaboration is necessary, especially if GNRM is to be massively implemented in the City of Bogor. One approach that can be taken is to have a structured understanding from the center to the regions regarding the concept of GNRM and the procedures for implementing programs under GNRM. One form of the problem that occurs is when Helix, especially government agencies, are not aware of the existence of the GNRM program which is spearheaded by KemenkoPMK. This is as stated by the Head of the Administration and Human Development Division of the Bogor City Bappeda, Ms. Risna Widiastuti, who did not expect that the City of Bogor was one of the pilot projects and best-practice implementation of the GNRM version of the KemenkoPMK. This is similar to the ignorance of the Bogor City Bakesbangpol Ideology Head regarding the role of the Kesbangpol as a Regional Task Force(GTD), which is an extension of KemenkoPMK in implementing GNRM programs at the regional level. The lack of awareness about the GNRM program illustrates the absence of GNRM collaborative governance at the regional level which is suspected of causing the absence of common elements between KemenkoPMK both with local governments and with GTD. These shared elements include ground rules, operating protocols, decision rules as presented by Ansell and Gash(2008) and Emerson(2012). Thus, it is natural that Bappeda and the Bogor City Bakesbangpol refuse to label the implementation of programs such as stunting alleviation, increasing inter-religious tolerance, and KPWK as GNRM work programs even though these programs are aligned with the 5 Movements on GNRM and can be"adapted to become GNRM.” The weaknesses of the GNRM have made GNRM in Bogor City a bottom-up movement where what GNRM can do is identify existing programs and endorse them as part of the GNRM work program. This was done instead of a top-down effort where KemenkoPMK coordinated GTD to carry out GNRM-based activities in their respective regions according to instructions and procedures imposed by the center. If indeed there are efforts from the center to endorse social movements that have occurred at the regional level such as the Bogor City Upadaya initiative in handling stunting and the KPWK program, then special attention and resources from KemenkoPMK are needed such as reward and incentive mechanisms. As stated by the Head of the Bogor City Bappeda, Mr. Rudy Mashudi, one form of reward that can be given by the Coordinating Ministry for PMK to support the implementation of the GNRM is an invitation to communicate. Thus, people who have carried out actions that presumably overlap with the 5 GNRM can feel appreciated and receive support. In addition to moral support such as hearing efforts, material support is also needed, for example by placing additional human resources and funding for these actions. That way, the challenges and obstacles to implementing GNRM innovations will also be minimized because so far the community and local government institutions have lacked funds and human resources to facilitate the 41

continuation of these movements, such as the KPWK program, according to Mr. one of KPWK's obstacles is the lack of human resources. Closely related to the lack of human resources, Mr. Rudy proposed the existence of a new helix who served as an agent for accelerating a program. He named the Helix as an aggregator. He provided further information that this aggregator is specific. Who can become an aggregator according to the program being promoted. An example is the creative economy improvement program that requires young people who are agile and innovative to become aggregators. Thus, the ideal engagement model for Bogor City is pentahelix mainstreaming added with aggregators. However, Bogor City Bakesbangpol has a different view, namely maximizing the existing pentahelix and efforts to strengthen collaboration between these helixes. For example, Bogor City Bakesbangpol expects collaboration with other state institutions such as the BPIP, which incidentally oversees national affairs. Lombok Barat Regency In formulating activities in the regions, GNRM as a movement initiated by the central government needs to review the needs in the regions. This will determine how program coordination and program funding will be. Local governments generally already have priority mapping through planning documents such as the RPJMD. GNRM can align with regional activity priorities by adding values of mental revolution in it. In the opinion of the Deputy for Coordination of Mental Revolution, Promotion of Culture, and Sports Achievements in the official release of the KemenkoPMK news, in addition to efforts to calculate the GNRM Achievement Index at the end of each year, GTD GNRM is expected to be able to implement the mandate by consolidating relations between the center and the regions through several parts of the embodiment of real action(KemenkoPMK, 2022). The real action referred to in this case is contextualization with regional issues through"mapping the condition of the socio-cultural mentality" which encourages the birth of action activities based on good practices and the potential that exists in each respective region. In this case, it is mentioned in the release that several programs that form the basis of the'movement' are the Innovation and Public Service Program of the Indonesia Serving Movement in Lombok Barat Regency, the Acceleration Program to Increase the Average Length of School(Selaras), the Early Marriage Prevention Program or the Anti-Marariq Movement. Codek(Gamak), and the Family-Based Newborn Health Monitoring System Program(Sipeka Busiska). For example, in Lombok Barat there is a social movement born by the local government based on the context of regional problems called Gardu Jaket( Gerakan Terpadu Kejar Paket /Formal School Equivalency Examination Integrated Movement) which is politically supported by the presence of Lombok Barat Regency Regent Regulation Number 40 of 2021 concerning Acceleration of Increasing the Human Development Index Field of education. This movement stems from the Human Development Index in Lombok Barat which is still relatively low and the length of schooling is quite short. This program aims to accelerate the pursuit package program 42

for people who do not continue their education. All levels of society can play an active role by becoming the so-called"pioneers", whose job is to register and accompany people who will take part in the package chase activity. One group that is active as a pioneer is the principal and teachers. The school principal and teachers have a strategy, which is to collect data on parents of students at the time of registration and school activities. In this way, the Office of Education and Culture can quickly reach layers of society who need the formal school equivalency program. Given the importance of contextualizing action programs with regional needs, the leading sector(or task force) needs to actively include Bappeda, which has a planning function in the regions. One of the findings from the field in this study, Bappeda Lombok Barat Regency stated that they had just found out that they were recorded in the Lombok Barat Regency GNRM Work Certificate. The role of planners is very important, to determine priority areas, one of which is in terms of regional budgeting. 3.2. GNRM Reflection Study between Regions 3.2.1. Reflection on the Case of Bogor City From the city of Bogor, this study found that to some degree the pentahelix collaboration model has been implemented. However, its implementation has not met the ideal in the Mental Revolution policy text. As an illustration, GTD can be said to be barely functional. Bakesbangpol, which is expected to become the leading sector in GTD, tends to run on its own with its own initiative, namely by forming a National Insight Outreaching Cadres(KPWK). The cadres of two(2) persons per sub-district are recruited and managed independently through the Decree of the Head of Bakesbangpol. Their task is to disseminate information on Pancasila and national values in their respective environments, in which the information dissemination material includes material related to the Mental Revolution. The recruitment of volunteer cadres is also a good example of involving community participation. However, the issue of sustainability is a problem because this activity does not have a program'hook' with a higher program nomenclature at the central government level to be used as a reference. The city government's solution is to prepare a draft regional regulation(Raperda) on Pancasila and the National Insight to oversee this program in the future. Unfortunately, this program has not yet received adequate acknowledgment and support from the Coordinating Ministry for PMK and the Pancasila Ideology Development Agency(BPIP). Development of community organizations(ormas) is also carried out as part of the implementation of the Mental Revolution, although it cannot be denied that this has become Bakesbangpol's routine task. Beyond that, there is no visible role for the GTD/Bakesbangpol related to activities that directly carry the Mental Revolution nomenclature. As an illustration, in the Mental Revolution activities carried out by IPB, GTD/Bakesbangpol were not involved except to the extent of notifications and invitations. There was also a time when IPB had asked for communication support and information dissemination related to the activities they were carrying out, but this was IPB's initiative. 43

In other sectors, collaboration facilitation activities can actually be carried out by Bappeda and have indeed been carried out to a certain degree. So far, this has been done, among others, by utilizing various existing partnerships with various nongovernmental actors, for example with the Inter-Religious Harmony Forum(FKUB), the Interfaith Solidarity Agency(Basolia), child rights campaigns with the NGO Warga Upadaya and the Child Fund, as well as the civil village program through the USAID Madani program. The holding of the Suryakencana Festival which is held annually at every Chinese New Year is one of the manifestations of the collaboration that carries the spirit of diversity as the message of the Mental Revolution. In its role as a planning institution, Bappeda has also tried to incorporate the spirit of the Mental Revolution into development planning, such as in the human rights-based RPJMD text, organizing thematic Musrenbang and preparing new entries in the program dictionary. However, in the end, the development plan document remains biased towards infrastructure programs(with the argument:"infrastructure development is for mental change"). In the future, to ensure the sustainability of the program, support for the political commitment of the leadership, consistent regulations and funding support will be the keywords needed. The idea of including Mental Revolution indicators in the process of recruiting and measuring the performance of public officials can also be an alternative. In addition to the government's role, of course the role of government/community actors is needed. In the previous narrative, the role of community participation has been identified through involvement in KPWK. Moreover, mass organizations and NGOs as well as other elements of civil society have also been involved in the implementation of various programs that carry the spirit of the Mental Revolution. The role of higher education also needs to be highlighted and appreciated. However, like the descriptions in other roles of the helix, the involvement of higher education institutions only takes advantage of existing learning/student programs which then insert messages of the Mental Revolution into them. For the case of IPB, the programs used for GNRM entrance are such as the Student Talent Development Program, Gebyar Nusantara(GeNus) Week, Synergy Project, IPB Teaching Class, and mangrove planting. Even then IPB was moved to participate because in 2020 it became Chair of the Indonesian Rectors Forum(FRI) which initiated the FRI MoU with KemenkoPMK. In carrying out its role, IPB tends to move independently. From the description above, it can be concluded that in Bogor City there are only three helixes that play a role: government actors, the community, and universities. In carrying out their roles, the three helixes tend to walk independently and move according to the existing coordination pattern. Meanwhile, the role of entrepreneurs and the mass media in mental revolution programs is detected to be minimal, if not to say almost non-existent. 3.2.2. Reflection on the Case of Lombok Barat Regency GNRM implements the involvement of all elements of society, through a cooperative model called the pentahelix model, in which state administrators, academics, media, 44

business people, the community work together in coordinating the GNRM task force. However, there are still challenges to its implementation. Currently, the Lombok Barat Regency has not fully implemented the pentahelix collaboration. GNRM activities in Lombok Barat have so far only involved academics, government administrators and the community. One of them was the GNRM activity at UIN Mataram, where UIN Mataram held a Community Service Program(KKN) with the theme Mental Revolution. The Institute for Research and Community Service (LP2M) has received support from the Coordinating Ministry for PMK to organize KKN with the aim of developing a creative economy in MSMEs in the Lombok Barat region. The current partner/helix involvement model is in direct collaboration with KemenkoPMK, without any interaction with other partners. Meanwhile, the Regional Task Force has not carried out its function as coordinator and driving force for the implementation of the GNRM. According to the GNRM general guidelines, the task force is tasked with being the leading sector of the cooperation ecosystem at GNRM by building synergy and collaboration between pentahelix sectors. Based on the findings in Lombok Barat, there has been no clear coordination from the central government to regional Task Forces, which has resulted in the non-functioning of GTD in Lombok Barat, in this case the Lombok Barat Bakesbangpol. To become an organic and sustainable social movement, GNRM can focus on providing adequate incentives for actors and participants. Incentives in this case can be in the form of appreciation, appreciation or financial incentives that can motivate participants to continue to actively participate in social movements. By providing appropriate and appropriate incentives, participants can feel valued and continue to be motivated to continue their participation in social movements. In addition, adequate incentives can also improve the image and reputation of social movements in the eyes of society, so as to attract more participants and support. This provision of incentives has been implemented in GNRM, for example in the Mental Revolution Award and providing incentives for activities at universities through the Indonesian Rectors Forum. This needs to be continued by evaluating previous activities and setting more specific criteria for further incentives. The Regional Task Force(GTD) has a very important role in implementing the National Mental Revolution Movement(GNRM) program. However, if coordination between the Penta Helix sectors in GTD is not carried out properly, GTD can become a bottleneck or an obstacle in the implementation of the GNRM program in the regions. Therefore, it is important for each helix to form a task force or joint secretariat whose function is to be more focused and organized in carrying out their duties and responsibilities related to GNRM. This task force can help avoid overlapping or redundancy of tasks between sectors and increase the efficiency and effectiveness of the implementation of the GNRM program in the regions. In addition, through task forces, each helix can focus more on developing programs or activities that suit the needs and potential of the sector. Therefore, a more optimal contribution to the implementation of the GNRM program as a whole can be given. 45

46

This chapter aims to formulate and design a pentahelix collaboration model that can be applied to optimize GNRM. The basis of this design is an empirical reflection of the pentahelix collaboration model which was carried out in two case studies, namely in Lombok Barat Regency and Bogor City. In addition, this model is built based on the reading of secondary data documents as well as reflections on theoretical constructs departing from collaborative governance and social movement studies. Based on the findings from(theoretical) studies, mapping of various reports and documents, as well as findings in the field regarding the implementation of the GNRM in the last seven years, a collaborative governance model framework based on pentahelix is proposed as follows. The framework is based on the following principles: 1. Understanding that GNRM is basically a social movement that will achieve its highest effectiveness if it is inclusive and organic; 2. The basis of collaborative agreement on the distribution of roles and resources, which is preceded by seeking agreement(common ground) on the aspects of common interests, common problems, identification of potentials and only then leads to the formulation of agreements on what policies and programs will be implemented; Figure 4.3 Proposed Collaborative Governance Model Source: author a) Identification of"common interests". The actors in pentahelix must have an agreed interest as a common goal; b) From the shared interests that have been agreed upon, identification of “common problems/issues” is then carried out. Common issues or problems can vary between contexts and between regions. The actors in pentahelix have shared issues/problems that are agreed upon as 47

problems that must be resolved through integrative and solutive programs/activities; c) Identification of potential for solving problems/solutions. Identification of this potential is very important to map the roles and resources of each actor, so that the contribution of each actor is clearly mapped. This potential map will determine the concrete steps and contributions of each actor; and d) The clarity of the potential map and the contribution of each actor will lead to joint decisions(policy) and at the same time determine agreements on appropriate activities or movements. The third and fourth points are very closely related to the ability to carry out stakeholder mapping. 3. Policies and action programs essentially need to be dedicated, empirical and inclusive in their formulation and implementation. 4. Considering that GNRM needs to be seen and restored as a social movement, a balance between a structural approach(top down) and an organic approach (bottom up) is needed. The structural approach is a situation where government actors and all their resources play a dominant role, while the organic(bottom up) approach relies on non-government actors who have a strategic role in forming social awareness and solidarity voluntarily. Efforts to find a balance can be done through the initiation of programs that are also more incentive and facilitation in nature. The stimulant scheme that has been implemented so far can be continued and expanded not only to provide financial stimulus but also to other stimulants such as intellectual ones. As an illustration, giving research preparation grants or public campaign grants can be an alternative. 5. To create a collaborative, inclusive and organic pentahelix governance, the institutional form of the task force(GTD) needs to be reconstructed into the form of a joint task force or secretariat. Taking into account the narrative above, it can be said that the creation of a common ground is the key to an effective GNRM implementation. Before starting the movement, all parties who have been mapped and involved must clearly understand the goals and values of the GNRM. In the study of social movements, the existence of mutual agreement on the social issues faced can encourage the birth of social movements based on common goals. There are at least three main things as important aspects in social movements, namely the existence of a common goal, social solidarity, and a vision of sustainability. In relation to GNRM, this movement can be said to be a new social movement that puts more emphasis on fundamental changes in society such as behavior and ways of thinking. However, the new social movements are not oriented towards a formal bureaucracy, but rather prioritize common interests or issues that are more universal. The challenge faced in realizing GNRM as a deep-rooted movement is about the efforts that must be made jointly in translating the vision of this utopian movement into a revolutionary/reform movement. 48

In the study of public policy implementation, the ambiguity of policy content(starting from unclear interests, benefits, substance, and direction of policies, as well as availability of resources) and unpreparedness of policy context(interests and powers of implementing actors, institutional characteristics and political-administrative settings in general) will affect the achievement of objectives and policy performance. The function of the task force(GTD) then needs to be reconstructed so that it leads to business processes that adopt these collaborative governance principles, so as to avoid being merely a ceremonial function. In addition, it can be considered that GTD can function as a knowledge hub in the policy learning process which includes carrying out monitoring and evaluation functions in the context of ensuring the sustainability of the movement. 49

50

5.1. Conclusions The National Movement of Mental Revolution(GNRM) is a national initiative that aims to improve the values and ethics of the Indonesian people through changes in behavior and a more positive and proactive way of thinking. The movement launched in 2016 has produced several successes as well as failures. Some indications that show the success of this movement include: 1. Awareness raising. This movement has relatively increased public awareness of the importance of positive behavior and mentality changes. This can be seen from the increasing participation of the community in the activities of this movement. Many community members are starting to care about their surroundings and participate in social activities such as blood donations, social actions, and other activities; 2. Spreading positive messages. This movement has been relatively successful in spreading positive messages about the importance of values in everyday life, such as honesty, discipline, hard work, and mutual respect and intercultural tolerance. This movement has indirectly contributed to changing people's behavior and mindset to be more honest and with integrity, for example through anti-corruption movements; 3. Improving the quality of human resources. Through this movement, people began to appreciate education and began to focus on self-development and increasing skills and expertise. Entrepreneurial spirit and innovation, for example, began to emerge along with increased skills and expertise that opened up opportunities for entrepreneurship and innovation; and 4. Government support. This movement has the full support of the government and related institutions, especially at the central government level. This support is essential to make the movement a success. Although this movement has good goals, its success is still limited and has not had a significant impact. This is caused by several factors, including: 1. Uneven implementation of activities. Even though this movement has been launched since 2016, the implementation of this movement is still limited and not evenly distributed throughout Indonesia; 2. Lack of focus in the implementation of the movement. This movement is too general in scope and lacks focus on developing more concrete and sustainable programs/activities to improve social problems and behavior that must be changed in society; 51

3. Inability to change culture. This program is inadequate in providing solutions for the social and cultural changes needed, because changing culture requires time and effort that is large, systematic, and sustainable; and 4. There is no measure of success. GNRM requires a strong commitment from the government to ensure its success, by ensuring clear indicators or parameters to measure the success of this movement. However, the government, especially in the regions, has not taken this program seriously and is inconsistent in its implementation. Based on the principles of collaborative governance of a social movement, it is assumed that the pentahelix model involving various actors/helix will strengthen the implementation of GNRM. However, this study explains that the Pentahelix collaboration model has not been implemented optimally from the several GNRM initiatives that have been implemented. This is due to various reasons as follows: 1. Lack of community support and participation. GNRM requires active participation and changes in mindset and behavior. The limited participation of the community is suspected because the community does not clearly understand what is meant by mental revolution, the benefits, and objectives of the program. Therefore, if people do not respond well or are not interested in this movement, then this movement will be difficult to succeed. This is because the character of GNRM itself is different from other social movements which are generally born from grounded empirical issues; 2. Although many good initiatives have been carried out, GNRM, in particular, lacks understanding of the aims and benefits of this movement. The implication is a lack of trust in the program and its implementation. Communities may be skeptical of the program's effectiveness and not believe that the program will bring them any real benefit. Therefore, they will tend to be reluctant to provide sufficient support; 3. There is no coordination and consistency in implementation and disagreements about implementation responsibilities. GNRM involves many institutions and individuals who must work together and coordinate. Good initiatives that arise from various institutions, both government and non-government, tend to run separately, as part of the activities/movements of the institutions concerned. The institutional structure between actors/helix is different, so that flexibility is less prominent, and there is not enough space to act or there is confusion as well as a lack of accountability. The difficulty of coordination is due to the different character and organizational culture of each actor/helix, so that the collaborative process of the actors/helix cannot run in a balanced or unequal manner. In turn, the collaboration process can burden one party and unbalance the burden, as well as slow down the process of emerging new innovations. If there is no good coordination or consistency in implementation, then this movement will lose the momentum to achieve success. 4. GNRM monitoring and evaluation(monev) is inadequate. The GNRM reports were more administrative in nature, for example on the number of 52

Regional Task Forces(GTD), and not on the substance of the movement. Without adequate Monev, it is difficult to know what worked and did not work in the movement, and it is difficult to make the necessary improvements. Regarding the mechanism for measuring success, the Mental Revolution Achievement Index(ICRM) is also only a proxy which measures the success of other programs that are considered to have direct or indirect links with GNRM. 5.2. Policy Recommendations The National Movement of Mental Revolution(GNRM) has the goal of improving the welfare and quality of life of the Indonesian people. The government needs to strengthen communication and education about GNRM, strengthen coordination between sectors, overcome cultural challenges, increase support and budgets, and provide examples and motivate people to change mindsets and behavior gradually and sustainably. In addition, active participation and support from the community, educational/university institutions, private institutions, and the media are very important for the success of GNRM. Considering that this movement involves many stakeholders, it is necessary to develop and agree on an appropriate strategy by identifying various factors that influence the success of the program. To achieve this goal, collaboration between various parties is needed. The following is a proposed consolidation of the collaborative framework(pentahelix) within GNRM: 1. Strengthening shared understanding of the goals and values of GNRM. Before starting the movement, all parties involved must clearly understand the goals and values of GNRM; 2. Stakeholder mapping. Stakeholders in GNRM are very diverse, ranging from government, non-governmental organizations, communities, to individuals. Stakeholder mapping is carried out to find out who can contribute to GNRM and how they can collaborate; 3. Formation of a work team. As a continuation of stakeholder mapping, the work team formed is responsible for designing and implementing GNRM programs and designing the right communication model to facilitate coordination and minimize misunderstandings. To increase the significance of work teams, the role of the Regional Task Force(GTD) needs to be reconstructed by changing its institutional format into a"working group" or Pokja, which has a joint secretariat(Sekber) to facilitate coordination between related parties, make agreements regarding budget allocations and public awareness increasing activities; 4. Evaluation and monitoring are carried out periodically, so that mitigation can be carried out by identifying weaknesses and making the necessary improvements; and 5. Continuity of the program to ensure that the GNRM goals can be achieved. Efforts that can be made are to develop materials that are up to date and relevant and to strengthen the role of the media in disseminating concrete and good examples(best practices). 53

54

Amsler, L.B.(2016). Collaborative Governance: Integrating Management, Politics, and Law. Public Administration Review, Vol. 76(5), pp. 700–711. 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 Ansell, C.,& Torfing, J.(2022). Handbook on Theories of Governance: Second Edition. United Kingdom(UK): Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd. Retrieved February 25, 2023, from https://book4you.org/book/21300848/ac19ae Basri, Pauzan.(2019, September 8). Sosialisasi Revolusi Mental, KemenkoPMK RI Gandeng Lakpedam NU Mataram. Timesindonesia.co.id. Retrieved from https://timesindonesia.co.id/peristiwa-nasional/228277/sosialisasirevolusi-mental-KemenkoPMK-ri-gandeng-lakpedam-nu-mataram, diakses 9 April 2023. Carayannis, E. G.,& Campbell, D. F. J.(2010). Triple helix, Quadruple helix and Quintuple helix and how do Knowledge, Innovation and the Environment relate to Each other? a proposed framework for a trans-disciplinary analysis of sustainable development and social ecology. International Journal of Social Ecology and Sustainable Development, 1(1), 41–69. https://doi.org/10.4018/jsesd.2010010105 Chen, H. T.(2017). Theory-Driven Evaluation Science and its Role in Program Evaluation. New Directions for Evaluation, 2017(153), 13-24. Crossley, N.(2002). Making Sense of Social Movements. Philadelphia: Open University Press. Emerson, K.,& Nabatchi, T.(2015). Collaborative Governance Regimes. USA: Georgetown University Press. Retrieved February 25, 2023, from https://book4you.org/book/2853869/d737e1 Emerson, K., Nabatchi, T.,& Balogh, S.(2012). An Integrative Framework for Collaborative Governance. J ournal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 22(1), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mur011 Forss, K., Kottorp, A.& Ramgard, M.(2021) Collaborating in a penta-helix structure within a community based participatory research programme:“Wrestling with hierarchies and getting caught in isolated downpipes”. Arch Public Health 79: 27. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13690-021-00544-0 Guba, E. G.,& Lincoln, Y. S.(2005). Evaluation: A systematic approach(7th ed.). Educational Researcher, 34(8), 21–23. 55

Gulick, L.,& Urwick, L.(1937). Notes on the Theory of Organization. Institute of Public Administration of Canada, Ottawa. Haris, M(2017). Internalisasi Revolusi Mental. DAR EL-ILMI: Jurnal Stusi Keagaamaan, Pendidikan dan Humaniora, 4(1): 106-120. Innes, J. E.,& Booher, D. E.(2000). Collaborative dialogue as a policy-making strategy. Institute of Urban and Regional Development UC Berkeley. Johnston, H.(2014). What is a Social Movement. Cambridge: Polity Press. Kautsari, N., Rizkita, G., Budiman, F. A., Lestari, D. P.,& Sudirman, S.(2022). Edukasi Pencegahan dan Penularan Covid-19 di Desa Nijang melalui Program Revolusi Mental. KARYA: Jurnal Pengabdian Kepada Masyarakat, 2(1): 1-7 Kemenag NTB.(2019, April 10). Revolusi Mental Rubah Pola Pandang dan Cara Kerja. ntb.kemenag.go.id. Retrieved from https://ntb.kemenag.go.id/baca/1554899040/revolusi-mental-rubah-polapandang-dan-cara-kerja, diaskes 9 April 2023. KemenkoPMK.(2021). Pentahelix, Lima Unsur Kekuatan Dalam Pengembangan Potensi Desa dan Kawasan Perdesaan Kian Mendapatkan Respon Positif. https://www.KemenkoPMK.go.id/pentahelix-lima-unsur-kekuatan-dalampengembangan-potensi-desa-dan-kawasan-perdesaan-kian KemenkoPMK.(2022, 09 September). NTB 100% Terbentuk Gugus Tugas Daerah. KemenkoPMK.go.id. Retrieved from https://www.KemenkoPMK.go.id/ntb100-terbentuk-gugus-tugas-daerah, diakses 9 April 2023. Koentjaraningrat.(2010). Kebudayaan Mentalitas dan Pembangunan. Jakarta: PT. Gramedia. Laksono, MFH dan Noor, RAM(2020). Implementasi Nilai-nilai Kearifan Lokal sebagai Revolusi Mental. JAWI, 3(1): 83-100 Lesmana, H, dkk(2020). Pemberdayaan Masyarakat dalam Menciptakan Gerakan Bersih dan Mandiri Berbasis Revolusi Mental di Desa Balansiku. Journal of Community Engagement in Health, 3(2): 151-157. Locher, D. A.(2002). Collective Behavior. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Macionis, J. J.(1999). Sociology. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Mineiro, A. A. da C., de Souza, T. A.,& de Castro, C. C.(2021). The quadruple and quintuple helix in innovation environments(Incubators and science and technology parks). Innovation and Management Review, 18(3), 292–307. https://doi.org/10.1108/INMR-08-2019-0098 Nofrima, S& Qodir, Z.(2021). Gerakan Sosial Baru Indonesia: Studi Gerakan Gejayan Memanggil 2019. Jurnal Sosiologi Reflektif Vol. 16. No. 1. Pawson, Ray.(2013). The Science of Evaluation: A Realist Manifesto. London: Sage Publications. 56

Purdue, D.(Eds).(2007). Civil Societies and Social Movements: Potentials and Problems. London and New York: Routledge. Ritzer, G.,& Goodman, D. J.(2009). Teori Sosiologi: Dari Teori Sosiologi Klasik sampai Perkembangan Mutakhir Teori Sosial Postmodern. Yogyakarta: Kreasi Wacana. Rossi, P. H., Lipsey, M. W.,& Freeman, H. E.(2004). Evaluation: A systematic approach (7th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Scriven, M.(2005). Evaluation: A systematic approach(7th ed.). American Journal of Evaluation, 26(3), 378–381. Singh, R.(2001). S ocial Movements, Old and New: A Post-Modernist Critiqu e. New Delhi: SAGE publikations India, Ltd Spencer, M.(1982). Foundations of Modern Sociology. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc. Sukmajadi, Budi(2019). Peran Diklar Revolusi Mental terhadap Peningkatan Profesionalisme ASN dalam Pelayanan Publik di Lingkungan Pemerintah Provinsi DKI Jakarta. MONAS: Jurnal Inovasi Aparatur, 1(1):30-38 Sukmana.(2016). Konsep dan Teori Gerakan Sosial. Malang: Intrans Publishing. Syafari, M. R.(2018). Penta helix model in the community empowerment around coal mine in Maburai Village Tabalong Regency. International Conference on Business, Economic, Social Science and Humanities(ICOBEST 2018): 446-449. https://doi.org/10.2991/icobest-18.2018.98 Tarrow, S.(2011) Power in Movement: Social Movements and Contentious Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Uinmataram.(2018, March 28). Membangun Karakter Bangsa Melalui Gerakan Revolusi Mental. uinmataram.ac.id. Retrieved from https://uinmataram.ac.id/kabar-rektorat/2018/03/membangun-karakterbangsa-melalui-gerakan-revolusi-mental/, diakses 9 April 2023. Widhoroso.(2022, July 27). KemenkoPMK Kebut Tuntaskan Pembentukan Gugus Tugas Daerah GNRM. Media Indonesia. Retrieved from https://mediaindonesia.com/humaniora/510220/KemenkoPMK-kebuttuntaskan-pembentukan-gugus-tugas-daerah-gnrm Wilkinson, Paul.(1971). Social Movement. London: Pall Mall Press. Zanden, J. W. V.(1988). The Social Experience: An Introduction to Sociology. New York: Random House. Yahya, dkk(2022). Sosialisasi Gerakan Nasional Revolusi Mental 2022: Budayakan Gaya Hidup Hijau dan Bersih di SMAN 10 Bekasi. Jurnal Abdimas Perbanas, 3(2): 64-74. 57

Institute for Policy Development(PolDev) Department of Public Policy and Management Faculty of Social and Political Science Universitas Gadjah Mada Address: Building BC, 4 th Floor, Fisipol – UGM, Jalan Sosio – Yustisia, Bulaksumur, Sleman Yogyakrta, 55281 Phone:+62-274-563362 ext. 209 e-Mail: poldev.fisipol@ugm.ac.id| dep-mkp.fisipol@ugm.ac.id| Instagram: poldev_ugm| Twitter: poldev_ugm| LinkedIn: Institute for Policy and Development 58