Pengaruh Bantuan Sosial terhadap Perilaku Memilih Petahana dalam Pemilihan Walikota Palangka Raya 2024
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.55606/jurrish.v5i2.7641Keywords:
2024 Palangka Raya Mayoral Election, PLS-SEM, Politics and Polarization, Social Assistance, Voter SupportAbstract
Social assistance programs are often a major concern during local elections. However, their impact on voter support for incumbents remains underexplored. This study analyzes how perceptions of social assistance influence voting behavior for incumbents in the 2024 Palangka Raya mayoral election. Using a sequential explanatory mixed methods design, the quantitative stage was conducted through a survey of 370 social assistance recipients and analyzed using PLS-SEM. The qualitative stage used 13 official documents and verified news reports to examine how social assistance was framed in the public sphere. The results show that perceptions of social assistance are the strongest predictor of the tendency to vote for incumbents, whereas political competition, demographic factors, and moderating effects are not significant. Qualitative analysis shows that social assistance issues are the most frequently mentioned theme in news reports and official documents, thereby reinforcing their relevance as a basis for evaluation by the beneficiaries. This study shows that voters tend to respond to the benefits of policies they perceive in determining their electoral choices, even within a public sphere that frequently raises issues of program politicization.
Downloads
References
Achmad, W. (2024). Politics and social welfare: Dynamics of social assistance programs on electability in Indonesia. JWP (Jurnal Wacana Politik), 9(2), 205. https://doi.org/10.24198/jwp.v9i2.53634
Barrientos, A. (2023). Social assistance expansion and political inclusion in Latin America. Journal of Politics in Latin America, 15(1), 25–46. https://doi.org/10.1177/1866802X221143141
BAWASLU Kabupaten Tuban. (2024, October 2). Konferensi pers Bawaslu Tuban sampaikan hasil dugaan pidana bansos dan netralitas perangkat desa Bawaslu.
Berenschot, W., & Aspinall, E. (2020). How clientelism varies: Comparing patronage democracies. Democratization, 27(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2019.1645129
Bernard, C. (2025). Political marketing dan preferensi politik pemilih dalam pemilihan kepala daerah Kota Palangka Raya tahun 2024. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.26851.46888/1
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications, Inc.
Danquah, M., & Ouattara, B. (2023). Aid and social cohesion. Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 87, 118–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.qref.2022.11.008
Dharma, F., Syakhroza, A., & Martani, D. (2022). Does the social assistance budget realization affect incumbents’ votes? (Study in Indonesia local election). International Journal of Professional Business Review, 7(6). https://doi.org/10.26668/businessreview/2022.v7i6.636
Fiorina, M. P. (1981). Retrospective voting in American national elections. Yale University Press.
Fossati, D. (2025). What drives voting behavior in Southeast Asia? Evidence from candidate choice experiments in five countries. Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs. https://doi.org/10.1177/18681034251334253
Fossati, D., Aspinall, E., Muhtadi, B., & Warburton, E. (2020). Ideological representation in clientelistic democracies: The Indonesian case. Electoral Studies, 63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2019.102111
Haridison, A., Sandi, J. R. A., Suprayitno, S., & Jaya, I. (2021). Regional election and COVID-19: Evidence in Central Kalimantan. Budapest International Research and Critics Institute (BIRCI)-Journal: Humanities and Social Sciences, 4(2), 1597–1606. https://doi.org/10.33258/birci.v4i2.1821
Hermawan, D., & Kurniawan, R. C. (2019). Distributive politics and manipulative policy in local election. Politik Indonesia: Indonesian Political Science Review, 4(2), 180–190. https://doi.org/10.15294/ipsr.v4i2.19122
Hicken, A., Aspinall, E., Weiss, M. L., & Muhtadi, B. (2022). Buying brokers electoral handouts beyond clientelism in a weak-party state. World Politics, 74(1), 77–120. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043887121000216
Hickey, S., Sen, K., & Bukenya, B. (2015). The politics of inclusive development. Oxford University Press. https://academic.oup.com/book/27629
Hirose, M., & Creswell, J. W. (2023). Applying core quality criteria of mixed methods research to an empirical study. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 17(1), 12–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/15586898221086346
Kelihu, A. (2022). Political clientelism, family power and conflict permanence in local elections: The case of Maluku. PCD Journal, 10(1).
Key, V. O., & Cummings, M. C. (1966). The responsible electorate: Rationality in presidential voting, 1936-1960. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Klingelhöfer, J. (2021). Competitive elections, incumbency advantage, and accountability. Economic Theory, 71(4), 1397–1428. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00199-021-01370-9
Kusworo, D. L., & Anggraini, T. (2024). Political corruption: Rise of social aid politicization by government in grassroots campaign 2024 elections. Jurisprudentie: Jurusan Ilmu Hukum Fakultas Syariah dan Hukum, 11(2), 152–168.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Jurnal Riset Rumpun Ilmu Sosial, Politik dan Humaniora
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
