Rise Together: Social Capital, Collective Governance, and the Sustainability of Community Market Innovation in Semi-Urban Lampung, Indonesia
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.55927/ijar.v5i6.16696Keywords:
Social Innovation, Community Market, Social Capital, Collective Governance, Semi-Urban Indonesia, Sustainability, Payungi, LampungAbstract
Over 70 percent of community-based initiatives in developing countries are either stagnant or regress within three to five years of their inception, especially once initial funding structures are no longer available. But Pasar Yosomulyo Pelangi, or Payungi as it is known locally, is an outlier to this tendency. Payungi has been running since October 2018 in Kelurahan Yosomulyo, Kota Metro, Lampung, without the support of structured government programs or sustained external donor funding. Now entering its seventh year of operations, Payungi is estimated to have an annual market turnover of nearly Rp 4.8 billion across 20 business units, while at the same time bringing about measurable improvements in social cohesion, cultural preservation, and the economic position of traders, who are predominantly women in a multi-ethnic setting. This paper examines the specific mechanisms explaining this trajectory. The analysis identifies three mechanisms: (1) Payungi’s founders drew concrete lessons from the failure of a previous initiative, the Damraman project, and translated them into specific institutional design inputs rather than treating such lessons as abstract reflections; (2) Payungi built three sources of legitimacy in parallel, namely grassroots, cultural, and political legitimacy, so that no single source became a fragile point of collapse; (3) Payungi developed a social capital architecture that purposely constructed and maintained bonding, bridging and linking capital in a mutually reinforcing rather than competing configuration. The paper ends with the identification of principles that might be transferable to other semi-urban communities, and with policy implications for the Indonesian context.
Downloads
References
Antlov, H., Wetterberg, A., & Dharmawan, L. (2016). Village Governance, Community Life, and the 2014 Village Law in Indonesia. Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies, 52(2), 161–183.
BPS Kota Metro. (2023). Metro Dalam Angka 2023. Badan Pusat Statistik Kota Metro.
Cajaiba-Santana, G. (2014). Social Innovation: Moving the Field Forward. A Conceptual Framework. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 82, 42–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2013.05.008
Crossan, M. M., Lane, H. W., & White, R. E. (1999). An Organizational Learning Framework: From Intuition to Institution. Academy of Management Review, 24(3), 522–537. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1999.2202135
Dasgupta, A., & Beard, V. A. (2007). Community Driven Development, Collective Action and Elite Capture in Indonesia. Development and Change, 38(2), 229–249. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7660.2007.00410.x
Dees, J. G., Anderson, B. B., & Wei-Skillern, J. (2004). Scaling Social Impact. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 1(4), 24–32.
Hulgard, L., & Ferreira, S. (2019). Social Entrepreneurship and Social Innovation: A Conceptual Distinction. In A. Mehmood (Ed.), Handbook of Social Innovation (pp. 1–20). Edward Elgar.
Moulaert, F., MacCallum, D., Mehmood, A., & Hamdouch, A. (2013). The International Handbook on Social Innovation. Edward Elgar.
Murray, R., Caulier-Grice, J., & Mulgan, G. (2010). The Open Book of Social Innovation. NESTA and The Young Foundation.
Nicholls, A., Simon, J., & Gabriel, M. (2015). New Frontiers in Social Innovation Research. Palgrave Macmillan.
North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, Institutional Change, and Economic Performance. Cambridge University Press.
Pel, B., Haxeltine, A., Avelino, F., Dumitru, A., Kemp, R., Bauler, T., & Jorgensen, M. S. (2020). Towards a Theory of Transformative Social Innovation. Research Policy, 49(8), 104080.
Phills, J. A., Deiglmeier, K., & Miller, D. T. (2008). Rediscovering Social Innovation. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 6(4), 34–43.
Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. Simon and Schuster.
Putnam, R. D. (2007). E Pluribus Unum: Diversity and Community in the Twenty-First Century. Scandinavian Political Studies, 30(2), 137–174. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x
Stake, R. E. (1995). The Art of Case Study Research. Sage Publications.
Stoker, G. (1998). Governance as Theory: Five Propositions. International Social Science Journal, 50(155), 17–28. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2451.00106
Stoker, G. (2006). Public Value Management: A New Narrative for Networked Governance? American Review of Public Administration, 36(1), 41–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074005282583
Tacoli, C. (2003). The Links Between Urban and Rural Development. Environment and Urbanization, 15(1), 3–12.
Tacoli, C., Chakrabarti, S., & Revi, A. (2015). Urban Development and Rural-Urban Migration. International Institute for Environment and Development.
Tracey, P., & Stott, N. (2017). Social Innovation: A Window on Alternative Ways of Organizing and Innovating. Innovation: Management, Policy & Practice, 19(1), 51–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/14479338.2016.1268924
Woolcock, M. (2001). The Place of Social Capital in Understanding Social and Economic Outcomes. ISUMA: Canadian Journal of Policy Research, 2(1), 11–17.
Woolcock, M., & Narayan, D. (2000). Social Capital: Implications for Development Theory, Research, and Policy. The World Bank Research Observer, 15(2), 225–249. https://doi.org/10.1093/wbro/15.2.225
Yin, R. K. (2018). Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods (6th ed.). Sage Publications.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Mulyadi, Hartoyo, Handi Mulyaningsih

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.






























