MARKET AS A SITE OF CITIZENSHIP: HOW YOGYAKARTA'S TRADITIONAL MARKETS RESPONDED DURING THE PANDEMIC ERA
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31980/journalcss.v8i1.1429Keywords:
deliberasi, pandemi Covid-19, pasar tradisional, situs kewarganegaraanAbstract
This research aims to examine the existence of traditional markets as sites of citizenship in responding to the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic. This research departs from the basic assumption that the market is not only a place for economic transactions. But it is also a place for political, cultural, social and other transactions. Therefore, the Covid-19 Pandemic situation is not only related to the impact on the economy, it has a broader and deeper impact on the market as a site of citizenship. This research produces an understanding that traditional markets are quite important civic sites in the era of the Covid-19 Pandemic. The research was conducted at 4 (four) traditional markets in Bantul Regency, namely Imogiri Market, Bantul Market, Angkruksari Market and Semampir Market. The subjects of this research were 61 people consisting of traders, market organizations (APPSI), and market heads as basic government representatives. The research was carried out and analyzed qualitatively and used source triangulation and technical triangulation. This research concludes that the Yogyakarta traditional market as a civic site is relatively effective in responding to the Covid-19 pandemic because it has family values, cooperation, and trust that are relatively dominant in decision making. Meeting activities in the form of deliberation and consensus in decision making are also dominant in this research. This research is still very limited and needs to be studied more widely and in depth with a relatively different approach.
References
C. O’Brien, “Market Citizenship and Ideological Obstacles to Social Justice : The Market as Morality,” in Unity in Adversity : EU Citizenship, Social Justice and the Cautionary Tale of the UK, Hart Publishing, 2018. doi: 10.5040/9781509995561.ch-005.
G. M. Hodgson, “What Are Institutions?,” J. Econ. issues, vol. XL, no. 1, pp. 1–25, Jan. 2006.
S. Arrazy, U. Islam, N. Sumatera, and H. Sanitasi, “Persepsi masyarakat tentang higiene sanitasi Ppasar Ttradisional kota medan,” Contag. Sci. Period. Public Heal. Coast. Heal., vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 1–13, 2020.
N. Ariyani, “Penataan pasar-pasar tradisional di indonesia berdasarkan teori ‘von stufennaufbau de rechtsordnung,’” Yogyakarta, 2019.
S. Leksono, Runtuhnya Modal Sosial pasar Tradisional. Malang: CV. Citra, 2009.
S. F. Nurhayati, “Pengelolaan pasar tradisional berbasis musyawarah untuk mufakat,” in Seminar Nasional dan Call for Paper (Sancall 2014): RESEARCH METHODS AND ORGANIZATIONAL STUDIES, 2014, pp. 89–95.
S. Fahmi, Ardiansah, and D. Aprialdi, “Model pengaturan yang efektif terkait pengelolaan pasar tradisional di indonesia,” J. Huk. samuda keadilan, vol. 16, no. 2, 2021, [Online]. Available: https://ejurnalunsam.id/index.php/jhsk
A. Pramudyo, “Menjaga eksistensi pasar tradisional di yogyakarta,” vol. II, no. 1, pp. 78–93, 2014.
I. W. Adnyana, N. N. Murniasih, I. D. P. Juwana, N. L. P. Y. Anggreni, and P. S. Firmani, “Pasar modern dan repitalisasi pasar tradisional di denpasar,” Widyadari, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 528–541, 2021, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.5574439.
J. Habermas, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere, First MIT Press. Cambridge: The MIT Press, 1991.
Margaret R. Somers, Genealogies of Citizenship: Markets, Statelessness, and the Right to Have Rights. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008.
V. A. Zelizer, “Review: Beyond the Polemics on the Market: Establishing a Theoretical and Empirical Agenda,” Sociol. Forum, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 614–634, 1988, [Online]. Available: http://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html.
J. W. Creswell, Penelitian kualitatif & desain riset: Memilih di antara lima pendekatan Diterjemahkan dari: Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design: Choosing Among Five Appoaches, Third Edition, 3rd ed. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar, 2015. [Online]. Available: http://digilib.uin-suka.ac.id/id/eprint/37624/1/penelitian.pdf
Sugiyono, Memahami penelitian kualitatif. Bandung: Alfabeta, 2011.
V. Annisa, Q. 1, R. G. Supratman, and R. B. Khuzaimah, “trategi ketahanan pasar rakyat di masa pandemi covid-19 Vika,” Keuang. dan Manaj., vol. 18, no. 1, p. 105, 2022, doi: 10.29264/jinv.v18i1.10365.
M. Rovisco, “Staging citizenship: Artistic performance as a site of contestation of citizenship,” Int. J. Cult. Stud., vol. 22, no. 5, pp. 647–661, Sep. 2019, doi: 10.1177/1367877919849962.
H. M. Kyed and L. Buur, “New sites of citizenship: Recognition of traditional authority and group-based citizenship in Mozambique,” J. South. Afr. Stud., vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 563–581, Sep. 2006, doi: 10.1080/03057070600830532.
P. Wiseman, “Lifting the lid: Disabled toilets as sites of belonging and embodied citizenship,” Sociol. Rev., vol. 67, no. 4, pp. 788–806, Jul. 2019, doi: 10.1177/0038026119854255.
C. O’Brien, “Market Citizenship and Ideological Obstacles to Social Justice : The Market as Morality,” in Unity in Adversity : EU Citizenship, Social Justice and the Cautionary Tale of the UK, Hart Publishing, 2018. doi: 10.5040/9781509995561.ch-005.
