The Hybrid Decentralization Paradox in Mining Governance: Authority, Responsibility, and Accountability Misalignment in Pohuwato, Indonesia

Abstract

The evolving relationship between decentralization and recentralization poses fresh challenges for natural resource governance, especially as the power to extract strategic resources is increasingly centralized at a higher level of governance, while the social, economic, and ecological consequences remain at the local level. This study examines how the configuration of the mining authority within the framework of recentralization generates a hybrid governance pattern through the relationship between authority, responsibility and accountability. This study used a qualitative case study method to study the governance of mining in Gunung Pani, Pohuwato Regency, Indonesia. Data were collected through in-depth interviews, document analysis, field observation, and data to support public perception. The results of the study reveal four main mechanisms in the Hybrid Decentralization Paradox. The first is mismatched authorities, where the strategic authority of mining is at a higher level of government, while local governments are still confronted with community demands. Second, uneven benefits tell us that mining creates economic opportunities but that benefits are not shared equally. Third, participation asymmetry shows that formal participation spaces haven’t always had a substantive influence on strategic decisions. Fourth, accountability displacement implies that local governments are under accountability pressures even when they have limited control authority. This research contributes to the development of the Hybrid Decentralization Paradox concept, which refers to the condition when the strategic authority is transferred to a higher level, while responsibility and accountability remain situated at the local level. This idea extends the study of decentralization, recentralization and natural resource governance by explaining how the mismatch between authority, responsibility and accountability shapes governance dynamics in extractive areas.