JSP | Jurnal Studi Pemerintahan AFFILIATION: Airlangga University Indonesia CORRESPONDENCE: (ramaditya.rahardian-2018@fisip.unair.ac.id) DOI: https://doi.org/10.18196/jgp.111110 CITATION: Rahardian, R. et.al. (2020). Using the Advocacy Coalition Framework to Reject the Environmental Permit for Hazardous and Toxic Waste Processing: Resources and Strategy Used by Community of Lakardowo Village. Jurnal Studi Pemerintahan. 11(1). 24-41. ARTICLE HISTORY: Received: November 20th, 2019 Accepted: January 31st, 2020 USING THE ADVOCACY COALITION FRAMEWORK TO REJECT THE ENVIRONMENTAL PERMIT FOR HAZARDOUS AND TOXIC WASTE PROCESSING: RESOURCES AND STRATEGY USED BY COMMUNITY OF LAKARDOWO VILLAGE Ramaditya Rahardian1 Rizky Wijayanti2 Antun Mardiyanta3 ABSTRACT: This research aims to see how a set of policy advocacy carried out by a community of Penduduk Lakardowo Bangkit (Pendowo Bangkit) to reject the environtmental permit policy for Hazardous and Toxic Waste treatment in Lakardowo Village and close the waste company, which is considered to pollute the environment. Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) theory as the main analysis to observe the reality that occurs in the field that only sees resources in advocacy includes formal legal authorities to make a decision, develop a public opinion, information and data obtained, mobilize forces to carry out the pressure, finance, and the art of leadership. We use a qualitative research method with data collection techniques through in-depth interviews with several informants as well as digging documentation relating to the issue of policy advocacy occurred in Lakardowo Village. The number of informants in the research were four people, determined based on the purposive sampling technique. In checking the validity of the data, we use the triangulation of sources such as data reduction, data presentation, data condensation, drawing conclusions, and verification. The findings show that, in reality, the villagers through the Pendowo Bangkit community had used various resources and strategies in policy advocacy to reject the permit policy for Hazardous And Toxic Waste treatment in Lakardowo Village and demanded the closure of the industry. The results of the policy advocacy carried out have not succeeded in producing positive results in favor of the people of Lakardowo Village. Keywords: Policy Advocacy, Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF), Hazardous And Toxic Waste (B3). ABSTRAK: Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk melihat bagaimana rangkaian advokasi kebijakan yang dilakukan oleh komunitas Penduduk Lakardowo Bangkit (Pendowo Bangkit) untuk menolak kebijakan izin lingkungan untuk pengolahan Limbah Berbahaya dan Beracun di Desa Lakardowo dan upaya untuk menutup perusahaan limbah tersebut yang dianggap mencemari lingkungan. Teori Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) sebagai analisis utama untuk mengamati kenyataan yang terjadi di lapangan yang hanya melihat sumber daya dalam advokasi termasuk otoritas hukum formal untuk membuat keputusan, mengembangkan opini publik, informasi dan data yang diperoleh, mengerahkan kekuatan untuk melakukan penekanan, keuangan, seni kepemimpinan. Kami menggunakan metode penelitian kualitatif dengan teknik pengumpulan data melalui wawancara mendalam dengan beberapa informan serta menggali dokumentasi yang berkaitan dengan masalah advokasi kebijakan yang terjadi di Desa Lakardowo. Jumlah informan dalam penelitian berjumlah empat orang, kami menentukan informan berdasarkan teknik purposive sampling. Dalam memeriksa validitas data, kami menggunakan triangulasi sumber seperti reduksi data, penyajian data, kondensasi data, dan menarik kesimpulan serta verifikasi. Temuan yang kami dapatkan, pada kenyataannya, menunjukkan bahwa penduduk desa melalui komunitas Pendowo Bangkit telah menggunakan berbagai sumber daya dan strategi dalam advokasi kebijakan untuk menolak kebijakan izin lingkungan pengolahan Limbah Berbahaya Dan Beracun di Desa Lakardowo dan menuntut penutupan industri. Hasil advokasi kebijakan yang dilakukan belum berhasil membuahkan hasil positif yang menguntungkan masyarakat Desa Lakardowo. 24 mailto:ramaditya.rahardian-2018@fisip.unair.ac.id USING THE ADVOCACY COALITION FRAMEWORK TO REJECT THE ENVIRONMENTAL PERMIT FOR HAZARDOUS AND TOXIC WASTE PROCESSING: RESOURCES AND STRATEGY USED BY COMMUNITY OF LAKARDOWO VILLAGE JSP | Jurnal Studi Pemerintahan, Vol. 11, No. 1 / February 2020 | 25 INTRODUCTION Environmental problems tend to be very complicated. Human activities cause natural resources to be exploited and used, resulting in emissions and waste. Alteration in a physical and chemical aspect of environment generally affect other parts and interact with environmental complexity, increasing when complex human, social, technical, and economic interactions are taken into account (Stake, 2011). Social protests that lead to anarchism results in an expression for citizens awareness of the environment, where local government is required to truly move as an actor who must guarantee concern and maximum protection of the environmental rights of citizens, not only to exclude, eliminate, or even throw away their opportunities to enjoy the benefits of community constitutional rights (Hidayat, 2019). In Indonesia, conflicts between government, the private sector, and the community still occur in various fields, especially those relating to environmental aspects. One of them is the conflict occurred between the villagers of Lakardowo and PT. Putra Restu Ibu Abadi (PT. PRIA) together with the Mojokerto District government regarding the issue of the environmental permit of the waste processing granted to the company. This issue is essential to be studied in more depth considering the environmental problems always occur in various regions between governance actors, which give impacts to the community as marginalized actors. Lakardowo villagers who join the Lakardowo Bangkit community (Pendowo Bangkit) have reported and complained to various state institutions related to environmental pollution due to hazardous and toxic waste. To this day, however, the report still has not received a positive response while the practice of environmental damage continues. It is consistent with the facts in the field in 2016, when about 230 more children in Lakardowo Village suffered from dermatitis because well water contaminated with heavy metals, sulfates, and Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) content reached 2,000 ppm, which exceeded the quantity established by the Minister of Health Regulation (Mongabay, 2017). Furthermore, Lakardowo villagers also often experience itching, which is allegedly due to the establishment of the company by PT. Putra Restu Ibu Abadi (Dahwilani, 2018). The different statement expressed by the environmental agency (BLH) of Mojokerto stated that the waste processing company did not pollute the environment in Lakardowo Village. It is based on the results of laboratory tests of monitoring wells and community wells, which are conducted periodically, indicating that water quality is still appropriate as the standard. The same way was also expressed by the director of PT. PRIA who claimed that the technical processing and utilization of waste had met safety standards (Budianto, 2016). The dissent was sharpened increasingly over time, which resulted in an escalation of conflict between the government, private sector, and community regarding the existence of a hazardous and toxic waste processing plant (B3) in Lakardowo Village. This conflict resulted in disharmony and distrust in each group of actors involved in the circle of problems. Policy conflicts that occur as a result of injustice and openness encourage a community group incorporated in a unit to continue to get what they should get fairly. The community who have been living for more than ten years side by side with the waste company have complained and protested to the village head level, Mojokerto District Government, East Java Province Government, and the Central Government in Jakarta. USING THE ADVOCACY COALITION FRAMEWORK TO REJECT THE ENVIRONMENTAL PERMIT FOR HAZARDOUS AND TOXIC WASTE PROCESSING: RESOURCES AND STRATEGY USED BY COMMUNITY OF LAKARDOWO VILLAGE JSP | Jurnal Studi Pemerintahan, Vol. 11, No. 1 / February 2020 | 26 This paper discusses policy advocacy carried out by the villagers of Lakardowo who are members of the Pendowo Bangkit community using the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) theory as the tool of analysis. Studies applying ACF have been done by several researchers, for example, a research study by Pierce (2016) which discussed the strength of resources and strategies in an advocacy coalition in Colorado. The second study was conducted by Markard, Suter, & Ingold (2016) who tried to describe the gap between actors and coalitions in energy policy in Switzerland. The third research came from Arshanti, Kartodihardjo, & Khan (2017) which addressed a problem and certification policy of sustainable production forest management using the ACF. Furthermore, the fourth study came from Nwalie (2019) who focussed on discussing health sector reform in Nigeria between 2003 and 2014 using the lens of the theory of theoretical approaches from Sabatier and Weible in Advocacy Coalition Framework. The last is research conducted by Yagci (2018), which discussed the importance of a differential access mechanism to information. Information is more easily available for a group of companies that can act together to solve the problem of collective action. Research studies conducted by the previous studies illustrate that the Advocacy Coalition Framework is appropriate to use to study a group that seeks to incorporate the agenda of interests or policy change to suit the wishes of the urgent group. However, this study is different from the previous research that has been done because it focusses on how actors who advocate for policy use resources and strategies to make a policy change. The Advocacy Coalition Framework is used to look at the problem of environtmental licensing of a waste processing company in Lakardowo Village, Mojokerto District, which is detrimental to the community. This research aims to see how a series of policy advocacy carried out by a community of Lakardowo Bangkit (Pendowo Bangkit) to reject the permit policy for Hazardous and Toxic Waste processing in Lakardowo Village by implementing the Advocacy Coalition Framework approach. This approach is appropriate because this theoretical framework was created to see urgent public policy issues (Sabatier & Jenkins-Smith, 1999). This research focusses on how the coalition driven by the Pendowo Bangkit organization uses a variety of resources and strategies in conducting policy advocacy. Secondly, this research also intends to explore the demands of the community members of Pendowo Bangkit who are trying to close down the dangerous and toxic waste company in their village. This research contributes to the academic field through the concept of an Advocacy Coalition Framework as one of the most useful public policy frameworks by considering interactive dynamics in policy change. Meanwhile, this research provides practical contribution in understanding the dynamics of environmental politics that always exists, which results in conflicts between governance actors. LITERATURE REVIEW Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) The democratic governance is a system built on a shared learning process and decision making, involving various parties ranging from the voice of elites to minorities (Parra, Constanza, & Moulaert, 2016). In a democratic system, citizen involvement or participation in making decisions regarding the use of public resources and solving public problems for the development of the region are vital elements that should not be ignored (Sumarto, 2009). The issue about USING THE ADVOCACY COALITION FRAMEWORK TO REJECT THE ENVIRONMENTAL PERMIT FOR HAZARDOUS AND TOXIC WASTE PROCESSING: RESOURCES AND STRATEGY USED BY COMMUNITY OF LAKARDOWO VILLAGE JSP | Jurnal Studi Pemerintahan, Vol. 11, No. 1 / February 2020 | 27 democracy states often ignores many aspects of society in every public policy decision. The government’s role as the maker and executor of public policy does not always get a supportive response from the public; people who disagree will certainly do rejection and opposition to the policies that have been made (Rahardian & Haryanti, 2018). Refusing and fighting for a common interest is part of policy advocacy, referring to the understanding of policy advocacy as an attempt to influence or change public policies to follow the wishes and desires of the people or groups who press them (Topatimasang, 2016). Another opinion about policy advocacy is a series of processes involving political action and are carried out by organized citizens in groups to transform power relations. The purpose of advocacy is to be able to achieve policy changes that are beneficial for the public to be involved (Suharto, 2014, p. 124). One approach in the theory of policy change is Advocacy Coalition Framework. Dunn (2003, p. 78) stated that an advocacy coalition is a coalition using information built clearly with a policy argument that will be used in influencing policy agenda that will be made by the government. Finally, the Advocacy Coalition Framework helps to explain how ideas for policy change emerge from groups of people who are united in resolving a problem and trying to ensure that policies develop in a certain direction (Howlett & Mujherkee, 2017, p. 277). It is also supported by the statements (Hoppe & Peterse, 1993), which suggested that the Advocacy Coalition Framework lens is worth to use as a lens to understand and explain a belief and change in policy when there are a goal and technical disagreement from various public policy actors. The Advocacy Coalition Framework has at least four main premises, including (1) to understand the process of the policy change and the role of learning in it, which requires a perspective of a decade or more; (2) changes in policy within the timeframe are related to the policy subsystem, the interaction between actors from various organizations that participate in influencing the policy; (3) subsystems include existing intergovernmental dimensions; and (4) public policies can be conceptualized with a belief system, which is as a set of priority values and causal assumptions about how to realize them (Jenkins-Smith & Sabatier, 1994). One of the frameworks offered by policy scholar, Paul A. Sabatier, was an analytical model of the work process of policymaking to solve public problems involving many actors and many interests. This model intends to explain trust and policy changes if there are disagreements and technical debate involving many actors. Actors such as government, interest groups, research institutions, and private parties are described as being involved in the process of policy formulation and change. ACF is described as a “policy-making structure” consisting of several components, including: relatively stable parameters, policy subsystems (where the process of policymaking occurs), and external events outside the system. The policy subsystem has several components such as a belief system, an advocacy coalition, policy brokers, resources, venues, and policy change mechanisms. The policy subsystem is part of a large system of policymaking formed from an understanding of relatively stable parameters by various actors. This subsystem involves various levels of government, issues that are struggled (such as pro-development groups or conservatives), and hundreds of policy participants from diverse backgrounds and positions ranging from the central government, regional governments, business circles, researchers, interest groups, and the media (Fischer, 2007, p.123-131). The Advocacy Coalition Framework USING THE ADVOCACY COALITION FRAMEWORK TO REJECT THE ENVIRONMENTAL PERMIT FOR HAZARDOUS AND TOXIC WASTE PROCESSING: RESOURCES AND STRATEGY USED BY COMMUNITY OF LAKARDOWO VILLAGE JSP | Jurnal Studi Pemerintahan, Vol. 11, No. 1 / February 2020 | 28 (ACF) illustrates that individuals or groups use various resources at their disposal to develop strategies to influence or change public policies in various places. The resources in the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) include (1) formal legal authorities to make a decision, (2) develop public opinion, (3) information and data obtained, (4) mobilize forces to carry out the pressure, (5) finance in a coalition, (6) the art of leadership coalition (Sabatier & Weible., 2007, p.201-203). A relatively stable parameter is a set of parameters that tends to be fixed, usually more than 100 years old and influence how the policy of a place. This parameter consists of four aspects, including the basic characteristics of the related area, the distribution of natural resources in the region, the socio-cultural value and social structure of the region, and the basic legal regulations of the region. These aspects become the basis for understanding what kind of problems exist in the area where the policy will be made (Sabatier & Weible., 2007, p.199). Meanwhile, the last component is events outside the system. Sometimes in the policymaking process, some events outside the process can affect changes in beliefs and policies made. Sabatier and Weible (2007) mentioned that four things could influence, including large-scale socio-economic changes, changes in public opinion, coalition changes in government, and policy choices and influences from subsystems outside the policymaking system (Sabatier & Weible., 2007, p.199). The use of lens of Advocacy Coalition Framework in a policy conflict seeks to see how the policy subsystem that consists of various actors of members of an advocacy coalition who have the same policy beliefs and act together (Sabatier, 1987). ACF was created to look at the theory of causation in a policy process that is useful as an alternative to the existing heuristic stage with its limitations (Jenkins-Smith & Sabatier, 1994). ACF model from Sabatier discusses an approach existsing in the dominant heuristic that is implemented in public policymaking (Howllet, et. All, 2009). The advocacy coalition that has been formed will interact and try to produce policy programs following the advocacy group that urges it. The concept of advocacy coalition framework has indeed been proven to be one of the most useful public policy frameworks (Schalger, 1995), although in its criticism to Marten A Hajer, the Advocacy Coalition Framework considers it too analytically weak to adequately take account of the interactive dynamics of policy change. Furthermore, Marten A Hajer acknowledged that the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) identifies and explains important aspects of policy change. Despite that, Hajer believed that the main problem from a discourse perspective is that the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) cannot explain why and how public policy changes that happen (Fischer, 2003, p.101). Environmental Politics Concept Environment becomes a substantial component and need for life. Today, the life of civilization will never be separated from its environment, including the humans, animals, plants, and all interdependent on the environment. These days, the environment is always related and intersected with political aspects. The politics of the environment becomes important because in every environmental permit that is made everywhere, it always deals with politics in its making. Referring to the understanding of Michael Watts quoted in the work of Robbins (2012: 16), environmental politics is a step in understanding the complex relationship between society and USING THE ADVOCACY COALITION FRAMEWORK TO REJECT THE ENVIRONMENTAL PERMIT FOR HAZARDOUS AND TOXIC WASTE PROCESSING: RESOURCES AND STRATEGY USED BY COMMUNITY OF LAKARDOWO VILLAGE JSP | Jurnal Studi Pemerintahan, Vol. 11, No. 1 / February 2020 | 29 nature by analyzing what is called a form of access and control over various resources and their impacts on environmental health and sustainable living. Meanwhile, Lamont C Hampel said that political ecology is “a study of the interdependence of political units and the interrelationship between political units and an environment, all of which relate to the political consequences of environmental change. The aim is to explore and explain the levels that exist in the community and regional political movements in the global environment as a reaction to the degradation and scarcity of resources at the local and regional level” (Robbins, 2012, p. 16). Studies concerning various human interactions with the environment have a very long history in terms of various aspects of existing scientific disciplines. Environmental politics is an interdisciplinary approach in analyzing human relations with the environment as reviewed using a critical perspective. In general, the focus is on power inequality related to a change in the environment and the distribution of profits and losses. The main feature of environmental politics is the politicization of environmental problems. It means that environmental problems can be viewed from problems of distribution and implementation of political and economic forces, which are characterized by a conflict problem related to future alternatives and disputes over alternative values and imagination. Thus, in other words, the environment must be confronted politically and economically: democracy, ideology, economics, and others (Andreucci et all, 2016, p.5). LOGICAL FRAMEWORK This study seeks to look at the resources and strategies of a community group incorporated in the Penduduk Lakardowo Bangkit (Pendowo Bangkit) to continue to fight for healthy environmental rights by rejecting the existence of hazardous and toxic waste processing factory industries and demanding the revocation of environmental licenses contained in Mojokerto Regent Decree Number 188/1886/Kep/416-110/2017. The authors use Advocacy Coalition Framework lens in this research as a tool of analysis. To make it easier for readers, a flowchart of the logic frame in this research is shown as follows (Figure 1). USING THE ADVOCACY COALITION FRAMEWORK TO REJECT THE ENVIRONMENTAL PERMIT FOR HAZARDOUS AND TOXIC WASTE PROCESSING: RESOURCES AND STRATEGY USED BY COMMUNITY OF LAKARDOWO VILLAGE JSP | Jurnal Studi Pemerintahan, Vol. 11, No. 1 / February 2020 | 30 Conflict due to environmental pollution impacts from industrial activities Figure 1. Logical Framework Source: Writter Team, 2019 RESEARCH METHOD In this research, the authors used a qualitative research method through a descriptive review of a series of policy advocacy processes carried out by the village community of Penduduk Lakardowo Bangkit (Pendowo Bangkit). A qualitative method is used to see how resources and strategies are implemented in policy advocacy by the Pendowo Bangkit community. Besides, the reason of using qualitative research with a descriptive approach is that the authors can understand all the phenomena occured related to the problems happened in Lakardowo Village. In the final results of this paper, the researchers can provide recommendations and suggestions related to policy advocacy carried out by villagers in Lakardowo. Qualitative research also provides an opportunity for researchers to further explore in-depth information and data accurately available in the field. All data obtained by the writers is conveyed directly and sharply to reveal the results of in-depth research. The location of this research was in Lakardowo Village, Jetis Sub-District, Mojokerto District. We conducted a four-month study that began from March Establishment of PT. Putera Restu Ibu Abadi (PT.PRIA) in 2010 The issuance of Decree (SK) of Mojokerto Regent Number 188/1886/Kep/416-110/2017 Result of Policy Advocacy Advocacy Coalition Framework: Resources and Strategies. 1. Formal legal authorities to make a decision, 2. Developing public opinion, 3. Information and data obtained, 4. Mobilized forces to carry out the pressure, 5. Finance in a coalition, 6. The art of leadership coalition USING THE ADVOCACY COALITION FRAMEWORK TO REJECT THE ENVIRONMENTAL PERMIT FOR HAZARDOUS AND TOXIC WASTE PROCESSING: RESOURCES AND STRATEGY USED BY COMMUNITY OF LAKARDOWO VILLAGE JSP | Jurnal Studi Pemerintahan, Vol. 11, No. 1 / February 2020 | 31 to June with several times visiting informants to collect data to obtain the verifiable information and the accuracy of the data as our evidence in accountable for the validity of the research. We selected informants using a purposive sampling technique, followed by in-depth interviews with various actors involved in the series of policy advocacy. We asked the informants directly about how to use resources and policy advocacy strategies carried out by Lakardowo villagers to reject the environmental permit and their demands in closing the industry. The informants interviewes included the leader of Penduduk Lakardowo Bangkit (Pendowo Bangkit), the community leader of the Gerakan Perempuan Lakardowo Mandiri (Green Woman), Ms. Rumiyati who filed a lawsuit at PT. Putra Restu Ibu Abadi (PT. PRIA) to the Court, and the chairman of Ecological Observation and Wetlands Conservation (Ecoton), totaling to four key informants in the study (Table 1). Subsequently, to strengthen the evidence and complete the needs of our research data using documentation data, we collected highly credible data from print media and reputable journals sourced from Scopus and SINTA (Science and Technology Index) 2 through SINTA (Science and Technology Index) 4. Table 1. Research Informants No Informants Roles 1 Leader of Penduduk Lakardowo Bangkit (Pendowo Bangkit) Civil Society Organization in Lakardowo Village 2 Leader of Gerakan Perempuan Lakardowo Mandiri (Green Woman) Civil Society Organization in Lakardowo Village 3 Ms. Rumiyati Person in charge in Lakardowo Village who filed a lawsuit of PT. PRIA 4 Leader of Ecological Observation and Wetlands Conservation (Ecoton) Non Government Organizational of Environmental Source: Writter Team, 2019 To test the analysis of the data, we used the triangulation technique (source) and an analysis of the interactive data guidelines of the theory (Miles, Huberman & Saldaña, 2014), such as: data collection which is obtained through a series of interviews, documents, and recordings that are processed into a transcript. This data collection was obtained from several key actors involved in refusing the environmental permits of hazardous and toxic waste processing industry in Lakardowo. The data consisted of documents, photos, and notes from interviews with informants. Meanwhile, previous research reports were also used by the researchers as an overview in doing the writing. In the next stage, the authors conducted data condensation to simplify and clarify the results of the data to be more easily understood by readers. The authors made a strict selection so that the data obtained are interconnected to provide an accurate explanation. The third stage in terms of presenting data was in the form of images that are easily understood by the readers. The presentation of data is the organization of data obtained and subsequently processed and written to be presented in an easily understood form. Finally, in drawing a conclusion in this study, the authors concluded the results obtained in the field. USING THE ADVOCACY COALITION FRAMEWORK TO REJECT THE ENVIRONMENTAL PERMIT FOR HAZARDOUS AND TOXIC WASTE PROCESSING: RESOURCES AND STRATEGY USED BY COMMUNITY OF LAKARDOWO VILLAGE JSP | Jurnal Studi Pemerintahan, Vol. 11, No. 1 / February 2020 | 32 RESULT AND DISCUSSION Cases of environmental conflicts are broadly spread in Indonesia, as illustrated according to data released by the Wahana Lingkungan Hidup Indonesia, East Java (Walhi East Java) in 2019 that there are at least various typologies of environmental cases in Java Island such as spatial cases of 5%, damage in forestry cases of 13%, mining cases of 52%, infrastructure cases of 13%, tourism & property industry cases of 13%, and pollution cases of 4% (Figure 1). The cases that are not handled well result in damage and conflict between the actors concerned. Figure 2. Typology of Environmental Cases in Java Island in the Last Five Years Source: Walhi Jawa Timur, 2019. Community resistance to exploitative companies of the natural resources has been recorded on the history which is more likely to be the basis of their concerns were the threats and dangers of degradation of environment, without concerning economic growth as a positive impact of extractive activities. Public is well aware that degradation of environment will always destroy and pollute water, pollution from extraction and processing, and exploitation of soil outbreaks (Ascher, W. & Mirovitskaya, 2016). Protest to public policy is part of advocacy carried out by the community. Advocacy here is to build strong democratic organizations to make the authorities accountable and demand an increase in people’s skills and thinking about how power works (Miller & Covey, 2015). Regarding resources and strategies in policy advocacy to refuse environmental permits on the processing of hazardous and toxic waste and close down the industry’s activities have been carried out by the Pendowo Bangkit organization which includes: Formal Legal Authorities to Make a Decision Pendowo Bangkit used various access to resources that it has, including formal legal authorities to make decisions. In this resource aspect, the Empowerment of Coalition uses a network of formal legal authorities from Ecological Observation and Wetlands Conservation (Ecoton) to conduct reviews and investigations on the effects of environmental pollution occurred. Besides, the Ecoton institution also complained about the environmental issues of Lakardowo Village to the House of Representatives Commission VII of the Republic of Indonesia (DPR RI), 5% 13% 4% 52% 13% 13% Spatial Forestry Pollution Industrie, Tourism & Property Infrastructure Mining USING THE ADVOCACY COALITION FRAMEWORK TO REJECT THE ENVIRONMENTAL PERMIT FOR HAZARDOUS AND TOXIC WASTE PROCESSING: RESOURCES AND STRATEGY USED BY COMMUNITY OF LAKARDOWO VILLAGE JSP | Jurnal Studi Pemerintahan, Vol. 11, No. 1 / February 2020 | 33 Presidential Staff, Ministry of Environment and Forestry (KLHK) at the central and provincial government levels. National Commission of Human Rights Commission (KOMNASHAM) uses the network carried out by Pendowo that is considered essential because the access owned by Ecoton and KOMNASHAM knows the way and efforts should be prepared in rejecting the existence of hazardous and toxic waste processing industry in the village. Various issues in the case of pollution carried out by PT. PRIA was used by Pendowo Bangkit community to attract wider public attention. The opinion that had developed in the community, especially the community in several villages in Lakardowo, made the image of the waste processing company negative for Lakardowo Village community. The problem regarding the audit of environmental impact analysis (EIA) was also used by the community as a weapon against PT. PRIA and the licensee issuer, in this case, is the Government of Mojokerto District. Related to the information obtained by Pendowo Bangkit, to obtain clear information which will later be used as a weapon in suing Mojokerto District Government and PT. PRIA, the Pendowo Bangkit often conducts studies and discussions with several Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) such as the Ecological Observation and Wetlands Conservation (Ecoton), the East Java Indonesian Environmental Forum (WALHI East Java), and the Legal Aid Institute (LBH) in Surabaya. In exerting pressure, the Pendowo Bangkit organization uses some of the networks that they obtained to reject the environmental permit policy and demand the dismissal of the industry. This network gave access to Pendowo Bangkit in meeting some of the stakeholders responsible for issuing the permit. Policy advocacy networks that occur in the community can be a control for the label of public interest (Firmansyah, 2010). Besides, the complexity of managing shared interests arises and increasingly surfaces consistently and institutionalized in line with the development of governance approaches (Yuliarso & Prajoti, 2005). The network in policy advocacy is also an important component of social capital for the Pendowo Bangkit organization in carrying out its advocacy series. With social capital, they can build social networks that are geographically wider than the location where they live (Supraja, 2010). Information and Data Obtained Some results of the discussions and studies conducted by Pendowo Bangkit found several essential findings as information that was obtained among other deception from PT. PRIA that did not provide prior socialization regarding the establishment of the waste processing company to the community in Lakardowo Village. The second information related to the environmental permit for the construction of a waste processing company which is problematic and considered odd. It is because since the waste processing company was established in 2010, the new Government issued its environmental permit in 2017 with Decree (SK) of Mojokerto District Number 188/1886/Kep/416-110/2017 concerning Environmental Permit for Brick Industry Business Activities of PT. PRIA in Lakardowo Village. In addition, regarding laboratory tests conducted by Institute Technology Sepuluh November (ITS Surabaya) about the influence of the composition of soil materials, Ecoton and residents of Lakardowo Village also took the same sample and then tested it at the Laboratory at the Black Smith Institute Jakarta which aims to detect heavy metals in the soil. Related to this, the company USING THE ADVOCACY COALITION FRAMEWORK TO REJECT THE ENVIRONMENTAL PERMIT FOR HAZARDOUS AND TOXIC WASTE PROCESSING: RESOURCES AND STRATEGY USED BY COMMUNITY OF LAKARDOWO VILLAGE JSP | Jurnal Studi Pemerintahan, Vol. 11, No. 1 / February 2020 | 34 can be prosecuted legally and can be sanctioned by the state if it is indicated to have accumulated hazardous and toxic waste without permission. It also violate the laws of constitution number 32 of 2009 and Government Regulations number 101 of 2014 concerning Hazardous and Toxic Waste Management. The indication can be analyzed for the presence of unknown material, which means there is a landfill activity without a landfill permit because the company only has permits for utilization, processing, and destruction. In processing information, the organization of Pendowo Bangkit which already has a network with several Non-Governmental Organizations have obtained information based on studies and discussions with various other NGO actors. Information becomes an important component in policy advocacy because this is what will later be used as a weapon. Research conducted by Yagci (2018) discussed the importance of a differential access mechanism to information. Information is more easily available for a group of companies that can act together to solve the problem of collective action. Based on the previous research, access to information is an important component in policy advocacy. ACF assumes that information is a resource used by policy actors to win political battles against opponents on a public policy issue. Information is used include strategies that support negotiations, opponents of opinion, opponents, court decisions, and public opinion (Sabatier & Weible, 2007, p. 203). Develop Public Opinion Various methods have been taken so that the problem of hazardous and toxic waste in Lakardowo Village can be immediately completed and freed from the threat of hazardous and toxic waste because since the last four years the residents of Lakardowo Village have been harmed by the hazardous and toxic waste processing plant activities. Because of this issue, some children in the village have dermatitis due to the use of well water polluted by waste. Meanwhile, the company refused to process the identification of environmental pollution. Indeed, the use of campaigns in social, printed, and electronic media is also used by Pendowo Bangkit. It is aimed at creating an injustice frame felt by the community of Lakardowo Village from the environemental permit of the hazardous and toxic waste company. As for the documentation from the campaign carried out by Pendowo Bangkit to form joint awareness of the villagers about the dangers of hazardous and toxic waste in Lakardowo is as follows. (Figure 3) Figure 3. Pendowo Bangkit Campaign Source: Pendowo Bangkit Instagram, 2018 USING THE ADVOCACY COALITION FRAMEWORK TO REJECT THE ENVIRONMENTAL PERMIT FOR HAZARDOUS AND TOXIC WASTE PROCESSING: RESOURCES AND STRATEGY USED BY COMMUNITY OF LAKARDOWO VILLAGE JSP | Jurnal Studi Pemerintahan, Vol. 11, No. 1 / February 2020 | 35 Pendowo Bangkit has shaped issues and public opinion to encourage people in Lakardowo Village and outside the village to participate in their advocacy series. Besides, the issues are also used as media in shaping the framing of injustices done by the Government to Lakardowo villagers due to the environmental permit of the hazardous and toxic waste processing industry which was given to PT. PRIA. Issues and public opinion are commonly used by groups of policy advocacy. It is also found in research conducted by Rahardian & Kurnia (2018) about the use of an issue to be developed in policy advocacy to reject evictions in Jebres Demangan, Surakarta. It also agreed that public opinion was used to support the position of the coalition as the main resource for policy actors. A supportive public is more likely to support to help influence policy makers’ decisions (Sabatier & Weible, 2007, p. 203). Mobilize Forces to Carry Out the Pressure In mobilizing troops, Pendowo Bangkit utilized various classes of society consisting of five Village Lakardowo which are contradictory to the company in carrying out demonstrations to refuse environmental permits for hazardous and toxic waste processing company. This mobilization was carried out for the first time by demonstration addressed to the Head of Lakardowo Village, followed by a demonstration in front of the waste processing company of PT. PRIA with demands to dismiss activities from the company and repair the polluted Lakardowo Village environment. Further, the Pendowo Bangkit community also took action against the government of Mojokerto District and the East Java Province Government with demands to pay attention to what happened in Lakardowo Village. The campaign launched by the residents of Lakardowo Village was increasingly active because recently there was a discourse on land expansion by the hazardous and toxic waste management company. At this time, the campaign was dominated by mothers who were held at the Lakardowo Village Hall Office. Many of the residents who were members of the Pendowo Bangkit community carried banners and sang the national anthem Indonesia Raya and prayer. One of them even gave a speech about 20 minutes until finally the residents and government held a mediation. In the mediation, the residents asked the village to immediately resolve the problem of the activities of the B3 waste processing plant which increasingly caused losses and damage to the rice fields. Because for the past several years, paddy fields owned by residents have not been able to produce high-quality crops that have caused a decline in people’s income. It is common for plants to die before the harvest period. For example, corn has not produced quality fruit for about three years. Sometimes the crops are damaged before the harvest period. Lastly, the Pendowo Bangkit community also took a small action in front of the presidential palace in Jakarta. Another activity which is always mobilized by Pendowo Bangkit is to commemorate world water day and commemorate the February 20 tragedy which is considered as a day to commemorate the tragedy of intimidation received by Lakardowo Village fighters. This annual action was held in front of the PT. PRIA. Besides, troop mobilization was also used in various actions to guard the proceedings of the environmental permit lawsuit for the construction of hazardous and toxic waste processing company in the Administrative Court (PTUN) in Surabaya. USING THE ADVOCACY COALITION FRAMEWORK TO REJECT THE ENVIRONMENTAL PERMIT FOR HAZARDOUS AND TOXIC WASTE PROCESSING: RESOURCES AND STRATEGY USED BY COMMUNITY OF LAKARDOWO VILLAGE JSP | Jurnal Studi Pemerintahan, Vol. 11, No. 1 / February 2020 | 36 The use of mass mobilization to conduct demonstrations is widely used by several parties or groups that carry out policy advocacy. It is also shown in research conducted by Rahardian & Haryanti (2018) which in the research findings revealed demonstrations of several labor groups in Surakarta in rejecting wage policies. The latest research conducted by Wong (2016) also found several protests conducted by residents of Guangzhou, China in the case of anti -incinerator. Reflecting from previous research and theories, it also confirms that policy advocacy is identical to a social movement or mobilization of a period. To achieve the expected policy changes, mass mobilization becomes essential in the series of advocacy. It is because to get the attention of policymakers and implementers, it requires the appointment of a problem that is felt to be really important starting from the lower levels. The documentation of the activities in mobilizing the mass of Lakardowo village in protesting the environmental permit and the existence of the industry can be seen in the picture below (Figure 4). Figure 4. Mobilization of Lakardowo Village Source: Pendowo Bangkit Instagram, 2019 The campaign was also carried out by Lakardowo Village in various moments such as one of the moments of world water day which was used as a means of action for around 500 Lakrdowo villagers to declare that 60% of their regional well water had been contaminated with B3 waste. The Pendowo Bangkit Leader explained that the well water of Lakardowo Village has TDS leve ls above 1000 mg per liter, which has exceeded drinking water quality standards based on Health Minister Regulation number 402 of 2010. The impact of contamination of the water is believed to cause dermatitis or skin irritation suffered by 432 residents of Lakardowo village since 2016. In mobilizing troops to keep the spirit of change to create a sustainable Lakardowo Village, Pendowo Bangkit often held film screenings entitled “Desa Lakardowo Mencari Keadilan” (Lakardowo Village Seeks Justice). Pendowo Bangkit also often fills in activities on campuses that hold seminars that invite them to be speakers to tell about the problems and conflicts occurred in USING THE ADVOCACY COALITION FRAMEWORK TO REJECT THE ENVIRONMENTAL PERMIT FOR HAZARDOUS AND TOXIC WASTE PROCESSING: RESOURCES AND STRATEGY USED BY COMMUNITY OF LAKARDOWO VILLAGE JSP | Jurnal Studi Pemerintahan, Vol. 11, No. 1 / February 2020 | 37 Lakardowo Village. Activities to fill out seminars or discussions conducted by Pendowo Bangkit also endeavor to recruit supporters from academia and students who join in their activities to seek justice for the right to a healthy environment. (Figure 5) Finance Figure 5. Pendowo Bangkit Campaign in University Source: Pendowo Bangkit Instagram, 2019 In terms of finance, Pendowo Bangkit conducted a fundraising activity carried out by the youth of Tarang Karuna (Tarka) in the village who came to the residents’ homes in Lakardowo Village. Besides, they sought a budget by selling souvenirs of Pendowo Bangkit clothes through Instagram and promoting the Lakardowo Village waste tourism for academics or the wider community who visited the village. Other funds they get are sourced from Ecoton, which is a Non- Governmental Organization in East Java. The use of financial resources also becomes important, see in (Weible et al., 2011) which in its theoretical findings also maintains the financial aspects of resources as a strategy in advocating for policies carried out by certain groups. Leadership In the leadership aspect of the policy advocacy on permits for hazardous and toxic waste processing in Lakardowo Village, the leader of Pendowo Bangkit community carried out various techniques that characterize the leadership. For example, the leader of Pendowo Bangkit always intensely leads routine discussions every week to make strategy and evaluate the policy advocacy series they have done in Pendowo Bangkit base camp. The leader of Pendowo Bangkit has always been active in lobbying and negotiating with several stakeholders related to the issue of environmental permits for the processing of hazardous and toxic waste in the village. The leadership aspect becomes an important component that should not be ignored in policy advocacy, as shown by research findings of Pierce (2016) that among winning coalition members in the Colorado Hydraulic Fracturing Politics, leadership is a great resource for their strategy. Based on the explanation, one aspect of leadership in resources and strategy in the advocacy coalition USING THE ADVOCACY COALITION FRAMEWORK TO REJECT THE ENVIRONMENTAL PERMIT FOR HAZARDOUS AND TOXIC WASTE PROCESSING: RESOURCES AND STRATEGY USED BY COMMUNITY OF LAKARDOWO VILLAGE JSP | Jurnal Studi Pemerintahan, Vol. 11, No. 1 / February 2020 | 38 framework has been carried out by the Pendowo Bangkit organization. The leadership aspect becomes important in a series of policy advocacy. This is also in accordance with the research by Kingdon (1995) which stated the way to be a leader who can create an interesting vision for the coalition, use strategic resources, and attract new resources to the coalition. Policy Advocacy Result From the various uses of resources and strategies in advocating for environmental permit policies for the construction of waste processing companies, there are several successes and failures in the range of advocacy policies. First, the Pendowo Bangkit community succeeded in arousing the House of Representative of Indonesia Republic (DPR RI), especially the VII commission, issuing recommendations to urge PT. PRIA to restore environmental functions by taking landfill on community land exposed to waste in 2016, although the recommendations from the DPR RI have not been fully implemented by the waste processing company. Second, the negative result obtained was an environmental permit suit for the waste processing company sued by the Pendowo Bangkit community which was rejected by the Administrative Court (Pengadilan Tata Usaha Negara) in Surabaya. However, this is still not over because citizens and communities are demanding an appeal against the judge’s decision and the policy advocacy activities continue. CONCLUSION This paper discusses a resource and policy advocacy strategy carried out by Pendowo Bangkit in rejecting environmental permits and demanding the closure of the hazardous and toxic waste industry using the lens of the Advocacy Coalition Framework theory. The resources used as a strategy in conducting policy advocacy are essential because it has been done by community groups in Pendowo Bangkit in refusing environmental permits related to the processing of hazardous and toxic waste that has been issued by the Mojokerto District government and demanding the closure of the company. In carrying out a policy advocacy, the Pendowo Bangkit uses six resources as their strategy, which includes: formal legal authorities to make a decision, developing public opinion, information and data obtained, mobilized forces to carry out the emphasis, finance in a coalition, and the art of leadership. The results of the policy advocacy that have been carried out have not sided the group that urges it. Meanwhile, the hazardous and toxic waste processing company, in this case is PT.PRIA, still operates amid polemic in the village. This research certainly has limitations. first, because the research on Advocacy Coalition Framework requires quite a long time, the research cannot present optimum results. Second, Lakardowo villagers struggle to fight for their interests and are still being pursued so that later this research can be continued by other researchers who want to research policy advocacy in rejecting environmental permits for the processing of hazardous and toxic waste in the Lakardowo Village. Based on the case of this incident, the theoretical implications in this study provide the benefit that the application of resources used as a strategy in policy advocacy with the lens of Advocacy Coalition Framework can be used by actors who advocate policy. This research also provides recommendations to actors who advocate policy to seek innovation and strategy outside the strategy that has been carried out as well as appeal to the court and maintain the spirit of USING THE ADVOCACY COALITION FRAMEWORK TO REJECT THE ENVIRONMENTAL PERMIT FOR HAZARDOUS AND TOXIC WASTE PROCESSING: RESOURCES AND STRATEGY USED BY COMMUNITY OF LAKARDOWO VILLAGE JSP | Jurnal Studi Pemerintahan, Vol. 11, No. 1 / February 2020 | 39 struggle that has been built for the policy change. Meanwhile, other recommendations are also given to the Mojokerto District Government. Recommendations given primarily in environmental problems that in this era of governance, all parties should be involved in the formulation of a policy, including the government, private, and community actors. It is intended to minimize conflicts that exist and is already common in the developing countries such as Indonesia. ACKNOWLEDGMENT This article can be successful and published well because of the collaboration with various parties who cooperatively cooperated with the author, as well as various parties including the leader of the community Lakardowo Bangkit (Pendowo Bangkit) Mr. Nurhasim, Head of Gerakan Perempuan Lakardowo Mandiri (Green Woman), Mrs. Sutamah, Mrs. Rumiyati, the organization of the Ecological Observation and Wetlands Conservation (Ecoton), and Head of Lakardowo Village who have allowed the author to conduct research on policy advocacy of environmental permit of hazardous and toxic waste processing by PT. Putra Restu Ibu Abadi (PT. PRIA). The authors are very grateful to all those who are involved and very cooperative in providing information from several interview sessions and providing documentation of data related to the topic of research problems that the authors did until the research in this article is completed. REFERENCES Arshanti, L., Kartodihardjo, H., & Khan, A. (2017). Masalah Dan Kebijakan Sertifikasi Pengelolaan Hutan Alam Produksi Lestari: Penerapan Advocacy Coalition Framework. Jurnal Analisis Kebijakan Kehutanan, 14(2), 137–148. https://doi.org/10.20886/jakk.2017.14.2.137-148 Arshanti, L., Kartodihardjo, H., & Khan, A. (2017). Masalah Dan Kebijakan Sertifikasi Pengelolaan Hutan Alam Produksi Lestari: Penerapan Advocacy Coalition Framework. Jurnal Analisis Kebijakan Kehutanan, 14(2), 137–148. https://doi.org/10.20886/jakk.2017.14.2.137-148 Audreucci, D. 2016. Political Ecology For Civil Society. ENTITLE: European Network of Political Ecology. Ascher, W. & Mirovitskaya, N. (2016). Development strategies and inter-group violence: Insights on conflict-sensitive development. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Budianto, E. E. (2016). Ribuan Sumur di Mojokerto Diduga Tercemar, BLH Sebut bukan Akibat Pabrik Limbah. Detiknews.Com. Retrieved from https://news.detik.com/berita-jawa- timur/d-3126731/ribuan-sumur-di-mojokerto-diduga-tercemar-blh-sebut-bukan-akibat- pabrik-limbah Dahwilani, D. (2018, March). Akibat Limbah Pabrik, Warga Mojokerto Alami Gatal-Gatal. Inews.Id. Retrieved from https://www.inews.id/multimedia/read/akibat-limbah-pabrik- warga-mojokerto-alami-gatal-gatal?sub_slug=video Dunn (2003). Analisis Kebijakan Publik. Yogyakarta: Gadjah Mada University Press. Firmansyah, H. (2010). Jejaring Advokasi Kebijakan Dalam Mendukung Gerakan Anti Korupsi https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330088441_Analisis_Kebijakan_Pengelolaan_dan_Budidaya_Ekosistem_Gambut_di_Indonesia_Penerapan_Pendekatan_Advocacy_Coalition_Framework https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330088441_Analisis_Kebijakan_Pengelolaan_dan_Budidaya_Ekosistem_Gambut_di_Indonesia_Penerapan_Pendekatan_Advocacy_Coalition_Framework https://doi.org/10.20886/jakk.2017.14.2.137-148 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330088441_Analisis_Kebijakan_Pengelolaan_dan_Budidaya_Ekosistem_Gambut_di_Indonesia_Penerapan_Pendekatan_Advocacy_Coalition_Framework https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330088441_Analisis_Kebijakan_Pengelolaan_dan_Budidaya_Ekosistem_Gambut_di_Indonesia_Penerapan_Pendekatan_Advocacy_Coalition_Framework https://www.researchgate.net/publication/309385706_Political_Ecology_for_Civil_Society https://www.palgrave.com/gp/book/9781137555113 https://www.palgrave.com/gp/book/9781137555113 https://news.detik.com/berita-jawa-timur/d-3126731/ribuan-sumur-di-mojokerto-diduga-tercemar-blh-sebut-bukan-akibat-pabrik-limbah https://news.detik.com/berita-jawa-timur/d-3126731/ribuan-sumur-di-mojokerto-diduga-tercemar-blh-sebut-bukan-akibat-pabrik-limbah https://www.inews.id/multimedia/read/akibat-limbah-pabrik-warga-mojokerto-alami-gatal-gatal?sub_slug=video http://www.inews.id/multimedia/read/akibat-limbah-pabrik- https://ugmpress.ugm.ac.id/id/product/ekonomi-bisnis/pengantar-analisis-kebijakan-publik https://journal.ugm.ac.id/jkap/article/view/8124 USING THE ADVOCACY COALITION FRAMEWORK TO REJECT THE ENVIRONMENTAL PERMIT FOR HAZARDOUS AND TOXIC WASTE PROCESSING: RESOURCES AND STRATEGY USED BY COMMUNITY OF LAKARDOWO VILLAGE JSP | Jurnal Studi Pemerintahan, Vol. 11, No. 1 / February 2020 | 40 Di Daerah: Studi Tentang Aktor Dan Strategi Kelompok. Jurnal Kebijakan Dan Administrasi Publik (JKAP) UGM, 15 Nomor 1, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.22146/jkap.8124 Fischer, F. (2003). Reframing Public Policy: Discursive Politics and Deliberative Practices. United Kingdom (UK): Oxford University Press. Fischer, F. (2007). Handbook Of Public Policy Analysis Theory, Policy, And Methods. London: CRC Press. Hidayat, R. (2019). Public Distrust and Environmental Citizenship: Primary Impetuses of Radical Protest in Bima District, 2011-2012. Jurnal Ilmu Sosial Dan Ilmu Politik, 22(3), 187. https://doi.org/10.22146/jsp.35981 Howlett, M., M. Ramesh & A. Perl. 2009. Studying Public Policy: Policy Cycles & Policy Subsystems. 3rd ed. Toronto: Oxford University Press. Howlett, M & Mujherkee, I. (2017). Hand Book Of Policy Formulation. Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing. Hoppe R & Peterse A. (1993). Handling Frozen Fire. Boulder: CO; Westview Press. Jenkins-Smith, H. C., & Sabatier, P. A. (1994). Evaluating the Advocacy Coalition Framework. Journal of Public Policy, 14(2), 175–203. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0143814X00007431 Kingdon, J. W. 1995. Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies. 2nd ed. New York: Harper Collins. Markard, J., Suter, M., & Ingold, K. (2016). Socio-technical transitions and policy change - Advocacy coalitions in Swiss energy policy. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 18, 215–237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2015.05.003 Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative Data Analysis: A Methods Sourcebook. Retrieved from http://researchtalk.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Miles- Huberman-Saldana-Drawing-and-Verifying-Conclusions.pdf Miller, V., & Covey, J. (2015). Pedoman Advokasi Perencanaan Bertindak, dan Refleksi (2005th ed.). Jakarta: Yayasan Obor Indonesia. Mongabay. (2017). Ketika Lahan Tercemar Limbah B3, Warga Lakardowo Hadapi Beragam Masalah. Mongabay Situs Berita Lingkungan. Retrieved from https://www.mongabay.co.id/2018/02/16/ketika-lahan-tercemar-limbah-b3-warga- lakardowo-hadapi-beragam-masalah/ Nwalie, M. I. (2019). Advocacy Coalition Framework and Policy Changes in a Third‐World Country. Politics & Policy, 47(3), 545–568. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12302 Parra, C & Moulaert, F. (2016). The Governance of the Nature-Culture Nexus: Lessons Learned from the San Pedro de Atacama Case Study. Nature and Culture: New York, 11 No 03, 239– 258. https://doi.org/DOI:10.3167/nc.2016.110302. Pierce, J. J. (2016). Advocacy Coalition Resources and Strategies in Colorado Hydraulic Fracturing Politics. Society and Natural Resources, 29(10), 1154–1168. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2015.1131876 Rahardian, R., & Haryanti, R. H. (2018). Evaluating The Use of Paralegal Approach in Policy Advocacy, Jurnal Kebijakan Dan Administrasi Publik (JKAP) UGM. 22(1), 14–19. https://doi.org/10.22146/jkap.28337 https://journal.ugm.ac.id/jkap/article/view/8124 https://www.academia.edu/27488960/Fischer_Frank_Reframing_Public_Policy_Discursive_Politics_and_Deliberative_Practices https://www.crcpress.com/Handbook-of-Public-Policy-Analysis-Theory-Politics-and-Methods/Fischer-Miller/p/book/9781574445619 https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwiI3NXswZboAhXQXSsKHc0vDXoQFjAAegQIBRAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fpdfs.semanticscholar.org%2F766b%2Fb8eaa6822b29e72c64318176fcffe9ffa155.pdf&usg=AOvVaw21rHb2PzJ9ZXjPADG1adz_ https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwiI3NXswZboAhXQXSsKHc0vDXoQFjAAegQIBRAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fpdfs.semanticscholar.org%2F766b%2Fb8eaa6822b29e72c64318176fcffe9ffa155.pdf&usg=AOvVaw21rHb2PzJ9ZXjPADG1adz_ https://www.amazon.com/Studying-Public-Policy-Cycles-Subsystems/dp/0195428021 https://www.amazon.com/Studying-Public-Policy-Cycles-Subsystems/dp/0195428021 https://www.e-elgar.com/shop/gbp/handbook-of-policy-formulation-9781784719319.html https://books.google.co.id/books?id=lpzg3QOhGYsC&pg=PA275&lpg=PA275&dq=Hoppe%2BR%2B%26%2BPeterse%2BA.%2B(1993).%2BHandling%2BFrozen%2BFire.%2BBoulder%3A%2BCO%3B%2BWestview%2BPress.&source=bl&ots=1FDfd6WUlA&sig=ACfU3U2B33aO5ckg9825eHao_V3QVSym8A&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjPi72mw5boAhWFdn0KHf6BDSMQ6AEwAHoECAQQAQ%23v%3Donepage&q=Hoppe%20R%20%26%20Peterse%20A.%20(1993).%20Handling%20Frozen%20Fire.%20Boulder%3A%20CO%3B%20Westview%20Press.&f=false https://www.academia.edu/31665627/Agendas_Alternatives_and_Public_Policies_Second_Edition_With_new_foreword_by https://www.amazon.com/Qualitative-Data-Analysis-Methods-Sourcebook/dp/1452257876 https://www.amazon.com/Qualitative-Data-Analysis-Methods-Sourcebook/dp/1452257876 http://researchtalk.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Miles- https://journal.umy.ac.id/index.php/jsp/article/view/7550 https://journal.umy.ac.id/index.php/jsp/article/view/7550 https://www.mongabay.co.id/2018/02/16/ketika-lahan-tercemar-limbah-b3-warga-lakardowo-hadapi-beragam-masalah/ https://www.mongabay.co.id/2018/02/16/ketika-lahan-tercemar-limbah-b3-warga-lakardowo-hadapi-beragam-masalah/ http://www.mongabay.co.id/2018/02/16/ketika-lahan-tercemar-limbah-b3-warga- https://www.researchgate.net/publication/333244603_Advocacy_Coalition_Framework_and_Policy_Changes_in_a_Third-World_Country https://www.researchgate.net/publication/333244603_Advocacy_Coalition_Framework_and_Policy_Changes_in_a_Third-World_Country https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/The-Governance-of-the-Nature-Culture-Nexus%3A-Lessons-Parra-Moulaert/d35f1a75848b07e47b68022b9e356072b458e3f2 https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/The-Governance-of-the-Nature-Culture-Nexus%3A-Lessons-Parra-Moulaert/d35f1a75848b07e47b68022b9e356072b458e3f2 https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwj05vqU8pboAhVBKuwKHTt0CwAQFjAAegQIAhAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcanvas.umn.edu%2Fcourses%2F72125%2Ffiles%2F2790388%2Fdownload%3Fwrap%3D1&usg=AOvVaw0SIibV2xJjbpGllc9pgo3t https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwj05vqU8pboAhVBKuwKHTt0CwAQFjAAegQIAhAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcanvas.umn.edu%2Fcourses%2F72125%2Ffiles%2F2790388%2Fdownload%3Fwrap%3D1&usg=AOvVaw0SIibV2xJjbpGllc9pgo3t https://jurnal.ugm.ac.id/jkap/article/view/28337 https://jurnal.ugm.ac.id/jkap/article/view/28337 USING THE ADVOCACY COALITION FRAMEWORK TO REJECT THE ENVIRONMENTAL PERMIT FOR HAZARDOUS AND TOXIC WASTE PROCESSING: RESOURCES AND STRATEGY USED BY COMMUNITY OF LAKARDOWO VILLAGE JSP | Jurnal Studi Pemerintahan, Vol. 11, No. 1 / February 2020 | 41 Rahardian, R., & Kurnia, N. A.S . (2018). Integrated Advocacy Approaches In Refusing The Eviction Policy, Jurnal Ilmiah Administrasi Publik (JIAP) Universitas Brawijaya (Vol. 4) No 4. Robbins, Paul. 2012. Political Ecology: Second Edition. John Wiley: Oxford & Sons Ltd. Sabatier, P. A. (1987). Knowledge, Policy-Oriented Learning, and Policy Change: An Advocacy Coalition Framework. Science Communication, 8(4), 649–689. https://doi.org/10.1177/0164025987008004005 Sabatier, P. A & Jenkins-Smith, H. (1999). The Advocacy Coalition Framework: An assesment In P. Sabatier (ed). Theories Of The Policy Process. Boulder: CO: Westview Press. Sabatier, P. A & Weible, C. M., (2007). Theories Of The Policy Process. 2nd edition. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Schalger, E (1995). Policy Making and Collective Action : Defining Coalitions within the Advocacy Coalition Framework. Policy Science, 28(3), 243–270. Stake, R. B. (2011). A Framework for Evaluating Commonality. Design for Configuration, 38(20), 169–184. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-56905-0_14 Suharto, E. (2014). Analisis Kebijakan Publik, Panduan Praktis Mengkaji Masalah dan Kebijakan Sosial. Alfhabeta. Bandung: Alfhabeta. Sumarto, H. S. (2009). Inovasi, Partisipasi Dan Good Governance. Jakarta: Yayasan Obor Rakyat. Supraja, M. (2010). SDM dan Modal Sosial dalam Jaringan Bisnis Komunitas Tarekat di Yogyakarta. Journal Ilmu Sosial Dan Ilmu Politik, 13(3). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.22146/jsp.10955 Topatimasang, R. (2016). Merubah Kebijakan Publik : Panduan Pelatihan Advokasi Untuk Organisasi Non Pemerintah. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar. Walhi Jawa Timur. Negara, Korporasi dan Lembaga Pembiayaan Harus Bertanggung Jawab Terhadap Pelanggaran Ham dan Kerusakan Lingkungan. Walhijatim.or.id. Retrieved from http://walhijatim.or.id/2019/12/negara-korporasi-dan-lembaga-pembiayaan-harus- bertanggung-jawab-terhadap-pelanggaran-ham-dan-kerusakan-lingkungan/. Weible, C. M., Sabatier, P. A., Jenkins-Smith, H. C., Nohrstedt, D., Henry, A. D., & deLeon, P. (2011). A Quarter Century of the Advocacy Coalition Framework: An Introduction to the Special Issue. Policy Studies Journal, 39(3), 349–360. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541- 0072.2011.00412.x Wong, N. W. M. (2016). Advocacy Coalitions and Policy Change in China: A Case Study of Anti- incinerator Protest in Guangzhou. Voluntas, 27(5), 2037–2054. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-015-9603-1 Yagci, A. H. (2018). Policy knowledge, collective action and advocacy coalitions : regulating GMOs in Turkey Policy knowledge, collective action and advocacy coalitions : regulating GMOs in Turkey. Journal of European Public Policy, 0(0), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2018.1509884 Yuliarso, K K & Prajarto, N. (2005). Daftar Isi HAM di Indonesia: Menuju Democratic Governances. Jurnal Ilmu Sosial Dan Ilmu Politik, 8(3), 1–19 https://jiap.ub.ac.id/index.php/jiap/article/view/874/1155 https://jiap.ub.ac.id/index.php/jiap/article/view/874/1155 https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwiWr6-_85boAhWiPOwKHR-8Ct4QFjABegQIBhAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fassets.thalia.media%2Fdoc%2Faf%2Ff8%2Faff8e118-3eff-4350-a1ff-3ea694a844d1.pdf&usg=AOvVaw1GBHrA6YKxUOQxQ1QOrJ4m https://www.researchgate.net/publication/265874149_Advocacy_Coalitions_Policy-_Oriented_Learning_and_Long-Term_Change_in_Genetic_Engineering_Policy_An_Interpretist_View https://www.researchgate.net/publication/265874149_Advocacy_Coalitions_Policy-_Oriented_Learning_and_Long-Term_Change_in_Genetic_Engineering_Policy_An_Interpretist_View https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwidz4n385boAhVH-qQKHTQhAMIQFjAAegQIARAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcollectivememory.fsv.cuni.cz%2FCVKP-29-version1-priloha_2_FF.pdf&usg=AOvVaw3Rq3GUJtXtvAuJA7vjLZMv https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwidz4n385boAhVH-qQKHTQhAMIQFjAAegQIARAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcollectivememory.fsv.cuni.cz%2FCVKP-29-version1-priloha_2_FF.pdf&usg=AOvVaw3Rq3GUJtXtvAuJA7vjLZMv http://ruby.fgcu.edu/courses/twimberley/EVR2861/theorypolprocess.pdf https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF01000289 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF01000289 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/301164049_A_Framework_for_Evaluating_Commonality http://library.um.ac.id/free-contents/index.php/buku/detail/analisis-kebijakan-publik-panduan-praktis-mengkaji-masalah-dan-kebijakan-sosial-edi-suharto-31688.html http://library.um.ac.id/free-contents/index.php/buku/detail/analisis-kebijakan-publik-panduan-praktis-mengkaji-masalah-dan-kebijakan-sosial-edi-suharto-31688.html http://lib.ui.ac.id/detail.jsp?id=20234454 https://jurnal.ugm.ac.id/jsp/article/view/10955 https://jurnal.ugm.ac.id/jsp/article/view/10955 https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Merubah-kebijakan-publik-%3A-panduan-pelatihan-untuk-Topatimasang-Fakih/62dbdbe0b7860523ab6e42981db46d996cb4e38d https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Merubah-kebijakan-publik-%3A-panduan-pelatihan-untuk-Topatimasang-Fakih/62dbdbe0b7860523ab6e42981db46d996cb4e38d http://walhijatim.or.id/2019/12/negara-korporasi-dan-lembaga-pembiayaan-harus-bertanggung-jawab-terhadap-pelanggaran-ham-dan-kerusakan-lingkungan/ http://walhijatim.or.id/2019/12/negara-korporasi-dan-lembaga-pembiayaan-harus-bertanggung-jawab-terhadap-pelanggaran-ham-dan-kerusakan-lingkungan/ http://walhijatim.or.id/2019/12/negara-korporasi-dan-lembaga-pembiayaan-harus- https://arizona.pure.elsevier.com/en/publications/a-quarter-century-of-the-advocacy-coalition-framework-an-introduc https://arizona.pure.elsevier.com/en/publications/a-quarter-century-of-the-advocacy-coalition-framework-an-introduc https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11266-015-9603-1?shared-article-renderer https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11266-015-9603-1?shared-article-renderer https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327108514_Policy_knowledge_collective_action_and_advocacy_coalitions_regulating_GMOs_in_Turkey https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327108514_Policy_knowledge_collective_action_and_advocacy_coalitions_regulating_GMOs_in_Turkey https://jurnal.ugm.ac.id/jsp/article/view/11046 https://jurnal.ugm.ac.id/jsp/article/view/11046 USING THE ADVOCACY COALITION FRAMEWORK TO REJECT THE ENVIRONMENTAL PERMIT FOR HAZARDOUS AND TOXIC WASTE PROCESSING: RESOURCES AND STRATEGY USED BY COMMUNITY OF LAKARDOWO VILLAGE JSP | Jurnal Studi Pemerintahan, Vol. 11, No. 1 / February 2020 | 42 https://doi.org/10.22146/jsp.11046