THE 23RD PACIFIC CONFERENCE OF THE REGIONAL SCIENCE ASSOCIATION INTERNATIONAL (RSAI) AND THE 4TH INDONESIAN REGIONAL

SCIENCE ASSOCIATION (IRSA) INSTITUTE

A Socio-Cultural Dimension of Local Batik Industry Development in Indonesia

2-4 July 2013, Bandung, INDONESIA

Prihadi Nugroho (PhD Candidate)

Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Diponegoro University, INDONESIA Faculty of Spatial Planning, Technische Universitt Dortmund, GERMANY

A SOCIO-CULTURAL DIMENSION OF LOCAL BATIK INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT IN INDONESIA

Prihadi Nugroho (PhD Candidate) Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Diponegoro University 1 Faculty of Spatial Planning, Technische Universitt Dortmund 2

Abstract Over centuries batik industry in Indonesia has been transforming from a spare-time nontradable activity of peasant community into an interregional mass production industry. Initially, batik making was used to be a kind of womens leisure activity to produce handmade clothing for domestic purpose while waiting for harvesting period of agriculture land cultivation. Then it turned into a small household traditional industry around 16th century to supply the increasing demand of batik clothing for both Keraton (traditional monarchy) family and ordinary people. Later, Keraton-oriented batik product was recognised batik Keraton (court batik) and peopleoriented one was batik saudagaran (merchant batik). Following the inception of printing technology broadly used in textile industry in the early 20th century, the process of batik industrialisation led by a small number of large batik firms grew rapidly to compete with traditional batik makers who kept using canting (a pen stylus tool) and cap (a stamping tool). The co-existence of traditional and modern batik industry is advantageous for fulfilling such a nationwide growing market demand since the use of printing technology could overcome batik supply shortcoming by traditional batik makers. On the other hand, this industrialisation process has endangered the socio-cultural preservation of traditional batik making due to the decreasing number of qualified traditional batik makers. In 1970s onwards, the domination of printing batik products devastated traditional batik firms, creating extensive job losses and thereafter a lost generation of traditional batik makers. This research hence is to question how the local batik community responds for balancing economic opportunity pursuit and socio-cultural preservation. It aims to look carefully at the configuration of local institutions on managing batik industry growth which demonstrates endogenous development in particular. I use case study methodology to explore a localised nature of socio-cultural norms and traditions which is likely to steering up the building of institutional configuration. A serial of expert interviews with selected key informants and direct field observations were undertaken in Solo City and Lasem Area, both in Indonesia. The result
1

The author is a lecturer and researcher at Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Faculty of Engineering, Diponegoro University. Mailing address: c/o Laboratory of Regional Development and Environmental Management, rd Section B Building PWK 3 Floor, Jl. Prof. Soedarto, SH Tembalang, Semarang 50275, INDONESIA. Tel. (+62-24) 7059 1191 Fax. (+62-24) 746 0054. Email: prihadi.nugroho@yahoo.com URL: http://pwk.undip.ac.id 2 Currently, the author is a PhD Candidate at Department of Spatial Planning in Developing Countries (SPRING), Faculty of Spatial Planning, Technische Universitt Dortmund. Mailing address: August-Schmidt-Strae 6, 44227 Dortmund, GERMANY. Tel. (+49-231) 755 2543 Fax. (+49-231) 755 6468. Email: prihadi.nugroho@tu-dortmund.de URL: http://www.raumplanung.tu-dortmund.de/rel/cms/en/HOME/

PRSCO 2013

Contribution ID No. 367

shows that batik industry growth in both locations is shaped by local traditions Javanese in Solo and Chinese in Lasem and a high-level competition between batik firms. Unfortunately, each local batik community seems being trapped on opportunistic behaviour for short-term profit maximisation. The differences are of that the general character of batik community in Solo is more opened for promoting collective actions because of strong communal and primordial ties, and the adaptability to deal with changing environment of batik community in Solo is better than those in Lasem. To conclude, the contributions of socio-cultural milieu are pivotal to determining batik industry growth so that it should be accommodated into policy making process. Keywords: socio-cultural dimension, local institutions, batik industry, case study, Solo, Lasem

I. INTRODUCTION Emerging public awareness on recent developments of batik industry in Indonesia have marked dualistic trend of respective industry. After the disputes against Malaysian claim on batik cultural heritage in 2009 (Malaysia klaim, 2012) and the increasing inflows of Chinese batik textiles to domestic market since 2008 (Indonesia impor batik, 2012; Budiartie, 2013), the Indonesian Government and batik community responded actively to cope with such a surprising trend. Compared to general industrialisation trajectories, batik industry development permeates the coexistence of both traditional handmade and machinery process of production. Since Indonesian batik was internationally recognised as an intangible cultural heritage by UNESCOs Intergovernmental Committee for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage in Abu Dhabi on 2 October 2009, traditional batik making was encouraged to preserve its cultural values (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization [UNESCO], 2009). This implies on dilemmatic actions in redirecting national batik industry development as the UNESCOs Convention pointed out that Indonesian batik classified into three categories: 1) batik tulis (handwritten batik), 2) batik cap (stamping batik), and 3) batik kombinasi (handwritten and stamping batik), all refers to the types of traditional batik making process. Subsequently, it challenges the necessity of promoting modernised process which replaces human labour force with machinery equipment, a process which results in so-called printing batik. The fear of external threats to national batik industry is unnecessary since the main problem actually rests on the responsive adaptability of batik firms to deal with changing environment. Over centuries batik industry in Indonesia has been transforming from a spare-time nontradable activity of peasant community into an interregional mass production industry. Initially, batik making was used to be a kind of womens leisure activity to produce handmade clothing for domestic purpose while waiting for harvesting period of agriculture land cultivation. By history batik industrialisation and commercialisation have got accumulated from the blend of internal initiatives and external influences. Actually, the external influences particularly from India and China have occurred for centuries through various ways of migration, religion spread, and trade links (Doellah, 2002; Maxwell, 2003; Veldhuisen, 2007; Ishwara, Yahya, & Moeis, 2011). Even though batik technique and motifs rooted from Indonesian tradition and developed intensively in Java, the batik industry have welcomed to foreign influences. The transitional PRSCO 2013 Contribution ID No. 367 2

periods of batik industrialisation from traditional to machinery based batik making demonstrate the degree of socio-cultural openness of Indonesian batik community towards foreign cultures. In this sense, the ambivalent response over imported batik products reflects the fear of free market competition which is likely to threaten the domination of batik firms on domestic market. Certainly, it sounds more a kind of economic viability matters than the cultural preservation necessity of traditional batik making. The long-lasting tension between economic purpose and socio-cultural preservation of batik industrialisation is inseparable from policy-making realm and institutional setting of society. Both the government and society lack of capability in balancing these two interests and have jeopardised the importance of social development aspects of batik industry into a quick-yielding economic welfare improvement. No matter what policies imposed, the interests of batik firm owners, particularly juragan batik (large batik merchant/master), are weighted more than those buruh batik (batik maker). More importantly, since traditional batik making is perceived at most a means of (physical) accumulation along with the modernised production the excellence of quality batik tradition is somehow ignored. This devastates natural batik skills embedded in traditional batik makers and the stock of social capital of batik industry which is originated from family business and primordial ties. As a result, traditional batik makers are marginalised and remain poor, batik quality downgraded, and the social cohesion broken up because of opportunistic behaviour shown by both the government and society in general. Referring to historical events of national batik industry growth from the golden era of the early 20th century, the downturn during the Great Depression of 1930s, the resurrection period in Soekarnos Program Benteng (Fortress Program) of 1950s, the severe decrease in printing technology mass production era of 1970s, up to the recovery period of the early 2000s onwards the downgrading process in traditional batik making continues, leaving unstable jigsaw of batik industry development on the air. This research hence is to question how the local batik community responds for balancing economic opportunity pursuit and socio-cultural preservation. It aims to look carefully at the configuration of local institutions on managing batik industry growth which demonstrates endogenous development in particular. I use case study methodology to explore a localised nature of socio-cultural norms and traditions which is likely to steering up the building of institutional configuration. A serial of expert interviews with selected key informants and direct field observations were undertaken in Solo City and Lasem Area, both in Indonesia. The 41 interviewees come from a variety of leading government officials at local level, batik community organisations, prominent batik entrepreneurs, local historians, business associations, academics, and non-governmental organisations. Many of them play multiple roles in local batik industry development, creating a robust lifetime knowledge accumulation.

II. THEORETICAL FOUNDATIONS Theory of institutions basically suggests the importance of rules of the game and the role of organisations to deal with human interactions. Both are required for achieving (mostly) human PRSCO 2013 Contribution ID No. 367 3

self-interests by limiting human behaviour in society. As human self-interests are so diverse and individuals tend to rationally maximise their own wealth pursuits that humanly made constraints are critical to avoiding harmful impacts of undesired actions to the rest of society. Rules of the game are present to overcome potential social dispute and to ascertain social relations when uncertain conditions are not well-anticipated before in particular. According to North (1990), rules of the game provide a structure of incentives that shapes human interactions, given by the rulers to the ruled parties. It consists of both formal and informal rules, stipulating the forms of reward and sanction for society members. The formal rules are of written regulations like constitution, judicial laws and contracts while the informal ones are of unwritten regulations like conventions, customs and social norms. They both are complementary to each other bringing together the rigid arrangements of formal rules to specified issues and the flexible resolution of informal rules to broad context of social setting. In idealistic form, informal rules serve to capture overall social relations in society which is useful to direct the appropriateness of conducts. On the other hand, formal rules illuminate informal rules into measurable conducts regarding specific issues. The success and failure on implementing formal rules will feedback to the prevailing informal rules, creating continuous loop of interrelationships between these two. However, there are no formal rules which are congruent with informal rules. The main reason is that informal rules which appear in oral expressions, body gestures, and sometimes irrational or unconscious forms (for example, hypnosis, mantra, magical spelling, etc.) are so broad and dynamic to be identified by formal rules. As a result, in most cases informal rules often exceed formal rules and more effective in compelling desired conducts of the rulers (Figure 1).

SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT

Informal Rules Formal Rules Formal Rules

Formal Rules

Figure 1. Relationship between Formal and Informal Rules Organisations are built as a vessel for achieving particular objectives of formal and informal rules. Without organisations formal and informal rules are not applicable, remain on the air as a set of ideas or concepts with no consequences to human interactions. Either allowed or PRSCO 2013 Contribution ID No. 367 4

prohibited conducts are not manifested if organisations are absent. Thus, organisations support the sustainability of these rules in order to minimise the risks of uncertainties in human life (North, 1990). In reality, organisations work for limited interests of human welfare. It carries out contesting self-interests of individuals and/or groups in society. Actors engaged in organisations are negotiating to specify detailed rules to run organisations well. The design of rules agreed upon the negotiation process in the establishment of organisations actually accommodates power and resources distribution embedded in participating actors. Those who possess greater power and position are inevitably having better opportunity to dominate the process. Sometimes they can override the group dynamics in order to direct organisations objectives and actions. Such circumstance to some extent is parallel with the power and resources distribution of participating actors in the given society. In other words, social structure is translated into the organisations (Figure 2).

SOCIAL STRUCTURE Power and resources distribution

Participating actors Rules of the game Informal rules Formal rules Constraints and incentives Organisations

Objectives and actions

Wealth maximisation

Figure 2. Scope of Institutions

PRSCO 2013

Contribution ID No. 367

With regard to the creation of social structure, organisations holding key positions to represent the distribution of power and resources in society fall into three basic categories: public agencies, private enterprises, and community-based organisations. Extended organisations could be derived from the mixture of these types to serve broader functions and responsibilities such as state-owned enterprises, quasi-government organisations, donor agencies, and philanthropic institutions. The other types of organisations working on specific fields such as academics, research and development institutions, associations, political parties, civil society organisations, and non-governmental organisations are also influential to reinforce the working of certain rules appropriately. These latter types do not fit into the basic ones since they are classified into functional role rather than distributive role of wealth maximisation. Simply the basic organisations aforementioned are responsible for the accumulation and distribution of capital resources in society where the other types of organisations could also take a part in. Now we have three groupings of different types of organisations: the first class consists of the basic organisations, the second class is the group of extended organisations, and the third class is the functional group of organisations. Even though they look similar and share overlapping interests, they encourage different nature and capabilities in responding certain issues. Their engagement is inseparable from organisational objectives, missions, and the rules associated with their establishment. As for the purpose of this paper, I shall confine the discussion to the first class organisations, particularly the community-based organisation. In batik industry community-based organisation plays a leading role in directing its growth. It is not surprising since the origins and characteristics of batik industry are folk handicraft industry. Batik industry promotes neighbourhood spatial closure to maintain business environment. Therefore, the institutional configuration of batik industry is mostly shaped by local social norms, encouraging family kinship and primordial ties in social structure. Originated from leisure activity evolving to family home business and mass production firm, batik industry carries out family networks which are translated into certain social order. In Javanese culture society represents the agglomeration of extended family kinship that bounds social interactions. Social structure and groupings reflect the distribution of power and resources shared among families. Families with greater capital belongings and stronger charismatic leadership are likely to take leading positions in society. Conversely, social structure affects to the types of social relations embodied in their symbolic status. Those who are holding higher position and status can control the lower classes. Therefore, asymmetrical power relationship in Javanese social structure is maintained in order to ascertain collective harmony in both individual and social life, where the role of family units is essential to mediating individuals and society. On the other hand, family networks direct the individual behaviour to participate in society. In this case how batik players determine business and welfare improvements is bonded to the predetermined social order where they are living with. Batik players are not solely free in decision making process even though they seek for profit maximisation of self-interests. Thus, individual freedom does almost never exist within batik industry because of that collectivism of family kinship identifies local institutional configuration. Owing to Javanese tradition, the informality of batik industry development exceeds the formal regulations. Skills upgrading and marketing expansion are shared through neighbourhood PRSCO 2013 Contribution ID No. 367 6

system and family networks. Verbal teachings and direct practices are the common ways of transferring knowledge and innovation. At early stage, the senior batik makers in family unit usually the mothers or senior female family members teach batik production and marketing to selected daughter(s) to continue family business. They host naturally intuitive apprenticeship at home workshop to the first-time learners in order to maintain family tradition and confidentiality. Batik techniques and colouring formula are strongly concealed to family members only because they determine distinguished batik product identity and quality. There are no manual procedures and written documents delivered during the apprenticeship period. All the process of knowledge and skills transfers depends on oral expressions, body gestures, and memorising capabilities of both parties. While taking care of the children, the mothers are used to do batik works at home and show the young daughter(s) batik techniques. The mothers also teach batik production and marketing management by engaging them to the process of raw materials procurement, bookkeeping, customer service, and marketing network maintenance. At the following stage, this newly generation gets more actively engaged in batik production routines, particularly after they reach maturity age. During this stage they are assigned for running certain business lines by their parents. Such a parent-children partnership of batik production is an advanced training program, providing a transitional period for the upcoming family business successors. Even though they are responsible for running certain business lines, the authoritative supervision and control remain on the hands of their parents. Lastly, after the business handover completed, the newly batik successors take control over the family batik firm. The role of parents decreases to advisory consultation instead of providing direct influences to business operation. However, such closed inter-generational transfer of knowledge and skills in batik making cannot guarantee the continuation of family batik identity and quality completely. The main reason is related to the different capabilities of batik making between the parents and their successors. The inherited technical and entrepreneurial skills are not transferrable smoothly because of nonstandardised modes of teaching delivery and corrupted mastery of batik knowledge. In addition, the external knowledge exposures from the local neighbourhood and extended batik community areas are also influential to self-capability upgrading. New designs, technology, and marketing network are also obtained from family network, friendship circle, and (coercive) inward programs from the government in particular. As a result, family batik identity and quality get enriched by two-ways of internally mastery apprenticeship and externally induced improvement programs. The role of community-based organisation at neighbourhood level is important to promoting local institutional setting. It may lead to the bridging of batik production and marketing network between family batik firms and broader batik community links. It facilitates batik production and marketing development through information sharing, collective marketing, and trainings. Smaller batik firms or firms with less business linkages depend at most on this organisation assistance. In contrast, the larger batik firms usually might have managed their business linkages so that their dependency onto such organisational role (and perhaps external agencies support too) are relatively low. This organisation does not intervene in each batik firms production routines and business strategies. Nevertheless, it is also useful to maintaining social cohesion between batik firms or overall neighbourhood society through the mediation of social disputes and unhealthy business competition. On the other hand, the government and external agencies need this PRSCO 2013 Contribution ID No. 367 7

organisation on mediating particular assistance to batik firms. In most cases the government cooperate with this organisation to distribute government programs more quickly. The external agencies also do similar approach, even sometimes more actively than the government, in order to get closer engagement with overall batik community for delivering development initiatives. Looking back to the theory of institutions discussed earlier in this section, the middle position of community-based organisation to connect the interests of batik firms and batik community at neighbourhood level with the government and external agencies is critical to reconciling both informal and informal rules to support batik industry development (Figure 3). INFORMAL RULES FORMAL RULES External agencies

Social functions Communitybased organisation Economic functions NEIGHBOURHOOD SYSTEM

(Family) batik firms

Government agencies

Market institution

Figure 3. Institutions in Batik Industry

III. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY In this paper I raise a research question of how the local batik community responds to balancing the issue of economic opportunity pursuit and socio-cultural preservation in batik industry. The research objective is to examine the contribution of local institutional setting in directing batik industry growth. I conduct case study methodology in this research because it is suitable to the research context which emphasises on how question, contemporary situation, and bounded local phenomena. The selection of this methodology is also appropriate since the researcher is acting as external observer to local phenomena and do not have control over its dynamics. This methodology is intended to test neither a hypothesis nor replicable events that may fit to generalised theory. As a form of qualitative inquiries, the case study methodology is not used to check the truth or false of facts, rather it suggests the exploration over local phenomena as well as peoples understandings and perceptions about it (Yin, 2003; Creswell, 2007). PRSCO 2013 Contribution ID No. 367 8

The case involves three different batik industry clusters, i.e. Kampung Batik Laweyan, Kampung Batik Kauman (both in Surakarta Municipality), and Lasem Area (Rembang Regency). These locations embrace two different contextual setting of batik industry growth, where the first two clusters locate in the mainland and the third cluster in coastal region. Even though they all are in Central Java Province, the local batik industry growth trajectory is different. In the case of batik industry in Surakarta, its growth strongly depends on endogenous forces. Kampung Batik Laweyan reflects the freedom expression of local batik makers, resulting in a form of batik products called batik saudagaran (merchant batik). In contrast, Kampung Batik Kauman reflects the orthodoxy of batik making which produces batik Keraton (court batik). On the other hand, the case of Lasem Area reflects the acculturation of Javanese batik tradition and Chinese influences due to its strategic position as the important port city in the past. The local batik industry produces a form of batik pesisiran (coastal batik) products called batik Laseman. The unit of analysis is local batik community which consists of community-based organisation at neighbourhood and municipal/district levels, government agencies, and prominent society members. They are selected carefully regarding their influential positions and/or comprehensive knowledge on local batik industry development. A serial of expert interviews which involves 41 respondents is undertaken to collect data and information. Field observations, government official documents, archival data, and previous studies are also collected to enrich research analysis. By taking up combined data collection methods, I will obtain thorough exploration on local institutional setting of batik industry development in these three locations.

IV. THE SOCIO-CULTURAL DIMENSION IN BATIK INDUSTRY The transformation of batik industry in Indonesia have been long lasting for centuries from noncommercial to prospective commodities, from home-based traditional handmade to modern mass production industry, and from purposeful clothing to various derivative products. All the process of transformation is somehow intertwined with socio-cultural change beyond. Regardless of different views used to value batik products, the socio-cultural developments within batik communities always take part in the advancement of batik industry, creating more social networks than replacing the old traditions with the new trends. The adaptability of local traditions to welcome external influences is the key factor of batik industry sustainability. Along with the rise and fall of batik industry in various regions the role of local batik community determines how the adaptive behaviours may steer up the flexible responsiveness vis--vis changing environment. In the following section I will discuss the lessons learned from three cases of batik industry cluster in Kampung Laweyan, Kampung Kauman (both in Surakarta Municipality), and Lasem Area (Rembang Regency).

PRSCO 2013

Contribution ID No. 367

Kampung Laweyan: The Inherited Mbok Mase System of Peculiar Social Inclusiveness The establishment of batik industry in Kampung Laweyan is associated with the old weaving industry that has already existed during Pajang Monarchy era (1568 1586). Previously, this monarchy was a vassal of the older Majapahit Monarchy (1293 1478), which controlled many occupied lands throughout Southeast Asian territory including Lasem Area in the north coast of Java. The area stretched from Pengging (Boyolali Regency) on the west to Pajang (Klaten Regency) and Laweyan (Surakarta Municipality) on the east, linked with Jenes River heading to Bengawan Solo on the east. Along this area there were abundant cotton fields which supply the raw materials for a plenty of home-based weaving industries in traditional villages (Lombard, 2008c). Based on local folklore, after the demise of the last Majapahit emperor King Brawijaya V, his great grandson namely Ki Ageng Henis moved to Kampung Laweyan to teach Islamic lessons and batik making to local residents. According to local historian Soedarmono (expert interview, February 8 and March 6, 2012), the role of Ki Ageng Henis in spreading out batik making technique is doubtful since the principal role of Islamic missionaries is to teach religious beliefs to the locals. Logically, I argue that as the formerly vassal of Majapahit Monarchy batik making skills had been mastered by the locals before the stopover of Ki Ageng Henis. During the periods of ancient monarchies batik clothing with specific design and motifs was the royal family uniform on many formal occasions. The Emperors appointed batik makers were used to supply batik clothing for the royal family. They produced classical batik motifs like kawung, gringsing, and parang the types of classical batik motifs which later identified as batik Keraton (court batik) only for the royal family members and prohibited to ordinary people. The endogenous batik making skills were supported by the existence of older textile production technology, i.e. traditional manually operated weaving technology. This old technology (and so did the batik making techniques) equipped the local villagers, mostly the women, to produce traditional fabrics and clothing. Therefore, batik making mastery evolved as the combination of local tradition with the influences from the ruling monarchies (and any forms of external influences too). In Kampung Laweyan batik production has been the primary employment for the most local residents, showing their strong entrepreneurship independence. Even though its location was closed to the former Pajang Monarchy capital in Pajang Village, their batik making tradition was not exclusively associated with court batik. Their traditional weaving industry and the late-comer batik industry were used to supply fabrics and clothing for entire society. Those woven and batik fabrics were also used to be exported to the other Indonesian regions and overseas (Lombard, 2008c). Even though the Laweyan batik makers got inspired with classical court batik motifs, they kept the freedom of art expressions continuing up to present days, from which their batik products known as batik saudagaran (merchant batik). The unlimited market orientation and the flexibility of local batik makers to adapt new designs, motifs, and technology have shaped the strong image of Laweyan batik products identical to merchant batik. In this sense, Laweyan batik products were not competing against court batik products. Rather it came out to fulfil the increasing demand of ordinary people towards batik fabrics and clothing to accompany the woven ones. Before the batik products of Laweyan were getting popular, the local residents as well as those living elsewhere in Java wore woven fabrics. One of the most famous types of PRSCO 2013 Contribution ID No. 367 10

traditional woven fabrics was kain lurik, which was produced intensively in Klaten Regency. According to Siswandi (1999), the transitional textile making from woven to batik fabrics can be found in batik lurik fabrics, representing the mixture of both weaving and batik handmade technology (Figure 4). Hence, the originality of Laweyan batik products is rooted from local innovations in dealing with external influences and market change. Figure 4. An example of batik lurik motif produced in Kerek, Tuban Regency (East Java Province). The basic horisontal lines of lurik fabrics are added by geometric pattern of batikked dots and batik dyeing process. Source: Siswandi (1999, p. 34)

The earliest form of batik industry in Kampung Laweyan was a core family business with homebased workshop at the back of the main residence. The women mastered and managed batik production and marketing while their husband was responsible for production controlling. The role of women called Mbok Mase was dominant in directing home business and overall batik industry. They engaged actively on batik trading and marketing by taking up batik products to local marketplaces, and sometimes they also sold to distant cities and regions. Some of them had own kiosks at the local marketplaces while others sold batik products door-to-door. As for the juragan batik (large batik masters), they sometimes welcomed customers at home beyond the regular business hours between 9.00 17.00 hours weekdays. They provided batik display shelves usually in the living room to allow the customers in selecting desired batik products. Mbok Mase managed family networks to maintain business relationships with fellow batik entrepreneurs and batik traders who work as their middlemen to connect with broader markets and distant customers. They built business linkages independently instead of creating collective business marketing. The horizontal linkages between batik entrepreneurs in Kampung Laweyan almost never existed with exception to those the members of family networks. In contrast, the vertical linkages between batik entrepreneurs and batik traders (forward linkages) or subcontractors of particular production lines such as tukang mbatik (batik handwriter or batik stamper), tukang mbabar/nglorod (wax removal specialist), and tukang jahit (tailor) to support the core industry (backward linkages) were very common in this neighbourhood. This led to stratified division of labour in Kampung Laweyan society, which placed Mbok Mase or the large batik masters on the top rank of social system. This group was so influential to determining batik industry growth through aggressive market expansion that creating hierarchical pattern of both social and economic life in Kampung Laweyan. In short, the independently superior role of Mbok Mase and the large batik masters in Kampung Laweyan was the key driver of local batik industry development.

PRSCO 2013

Contribution ID No. 367

11

At household level, a gendered division of labour occurred between Mbok Mase, her husband called Mas Nganten, and daughters called Mas Roro. Mbok Mase was a central figure for social and economic welfare improvements because they led and supervised the management of batik production and marketing. She also controlled economic management of domestic well-being. During working days around 5.00 a.m. she started preparing the availability of all batik production raw materials and equipment, including the meals of in-house batik workers as well as entire family members. As for the most Mbok Mase, both in-house and outside batik workers were considered the extended family members. She built strong family kinship with the batik workers instead of a rigid professional contract. Such approach was useful to building loyalty commitments from the batik workers to their master, especially the senior high qualified batik workers. The special attention from the batik masters was usually given to the finest batik handwriters and batik stampers. At 9.00 a.m. Mbok Mase walked out from the house to collect debt returns from and distribute kain mori (plain cotton fabrics) to be batikked by the outside batik makers in certain villages. Afterwards, they went to the local marketplace to open the kiosk or sell batik products around between 2.00 5.00 p.m. At the end of the day they returned home to accomplish domestic jobs. While Mbok Mase was out of home, Mas Nganten did production control at the workshop according to prior supervision from Mbok Mase. He managed entire production process and sometimes took over certain production works such as dyeing process, for example. Dyeing process has been the most critical stage of production since it determines the durability of batik products. Another influential role of Mbok Mase was on deciding selected Mas Roro to be prepared for continuing batik business. She would teach Mas Roro entire batik knowledge since the childhood until they were ready to run the family business independently. The gendered division of labour in batik making could be found between the batik workers. The female workers were associated with the handwritten batik making while the male co-workers could have various positions. The male workers were responsible at most for batik stamping process, and it was very often that they worked for batik design, wax removal, and dyeing processes. On the contemporary setting, the Mbok Mase system is preserved by Kampung Laweyan batik community to some extent. A strong and independent entrepreneurial skill is the first and foremost feature of batik community in Kampung Laweyan inherited from their ancestors. The resurgence of Laweyan batik industry in the early 2000s has carried out the old batik industry management tradition, indicated by the restoration of the old family business networks with fewer contacts to fellow batik entrepreneurs in the neighbourhood. Both the family business successors and the newcomers are maintaining individual business links to suppliers, traders, and customers. Their flexible adaptive behaviours to anticipate market change and to augment market penetration have marked the second characteristics of preserved Mbok Mase system. The current Laweyan batik products are so diverse with enriched motifs and designs, showing the freedom of artistic expressions on batik making. All variants of batik products ranging from traditional to modern style batik motifs can be found in Kampung Laweyan, thanks to the introduction of printing technology in accelerating batik industry growth. Regardless of pros and cons related to the fourth wave of batik industrialisation that results in batik sablon/printing (printing batik), the adoption of printing technology in Kampung Laweyan demonstrates the PRSCO 2013 Contribution ID No. 367 12

flexibility of local batik firms to welcome incoming new technology and adjust it with the oldfashioned ways of batik production. Such flexibility is useful to maintaining the characteristics of Kampung Laweyan as batik production centre. Currently, many batik entrepreneurs are still undertaking batik production at home workshops even though some of them have moved it to different locations or subcontracted to batik makers in the villages of neighbouring regions such as Bekonang (Sukoharjo Regency) and Masaran (Sragen Regency). Lastly, the stratified class of Mbok Mase system remains preserved as shown by the highly segmented batik products supplied in Kampung Laweyan. Each batik firm produces distinguished batik products with diversified range of price levels. Hence, the price competition of similar batik products is rare to occur in Kampung Laweyan. In fact, they are mostly targeting for the middle-upper class of batik consumers so that batik exclusiveness is maintained carefully. Despite such inter-generational socio-cultural preservation, some changes have occurred in respective batik community. Currently, they have transformed from closed to more opened society compared to prior condition of the early 2000s backwards. Previously, Kampung Laweyan was noticed a closed neighbourhood to visitors and outsiders. With a high-mounted fortress-like wall surrounding the houses of batik masters, the society looked distant and suspicious to foreigners. It is not surprising that the current generation carries out a stubborn and sceptical attitude towards different perspectives. Nevertheless, the recent social change of batik community in Kampung Laweyan has marked a slight openness to visitors, outsiders, and investors. The opening of in-house batik galleries and the newcomers from out of society members indicates its social transformation. This situation leads to the broadening of batik trading ways which allow the customers and prospective buyers to come to batik producers more intensively. Such business marketing strategy is rather to strengthen the revitalisation of the old family business links than replacing with the modernised ways, including the use of online marketing strategy. The third transformative indicator perhaps this could be the most radical change in the earlier Mbok Mase system is the increasing role of Mas Nganten to take over batik trading and marketing responsibility from the hands of Mbok Mase. This domestic changing role has been occurring at least since the era of Soekarnos Program Benteng (Fortress Program) of 1950s. The Program which encouraged the rise of national industry has contributed to batik commercialisation intensively through the central government campaign of batik utilisation as the national symbolic identity. Mas Nganten was more responsive to take this opportunity by taking up long-distance batik marketing nationally, the situation where Mbok Mase was unable to achieve. In response to increased batik demand, Mas Nganten has adopted the early form of printing technology which based on manual handling called teknik sablon (screen printing technology) due to the limited capacity of traditional batik making. As a result, the fourth generation of batik products called batik sablon (printing batik) overwhelmed the domestic market, narrowing the gaps between demand and supply of batik products. Since then the role of Mbok Mase has been subordinated by Mas Nganten and (coincidentally) government politics. A community-based organisation was built in Kampung Laweyan on 25 September 2004 to respond further batik industry developments, namely Forum Pengembangan Kampoeng Batik Laweyan (FPKBL) or Kampung Batik Laweyan Development Forum. Its establishment was PRSCO 2013 Contribution ID No. 367 13

closely linked to prior bottom-up initiatives of kampung revitalisation program to promote Kampung Laweyan as a cultural heritage site and batik production centre. The Forum structure consists of two bodies: the advisory board comprising a group of elders or senior citizens, and the acting board comprising selected batik entrepreneurs or activists. All board members and targeted groups of Forums programs are entire batik community in Kampung Laweyan. The main task of Forum is to promote kampung revitalisation programs focusing on both sociocultural preservation of heritage buildings and properties and economic development of local batik industry. In doing so, FPKBL plays an intermediary function to bridge communication between a group of individual firms in Kampung Laweyan and related stakeholders from various groups of government agencies, market institutions (for example, suppliers, traders, brokers, customers, and buyers), and external agencies (for example, universities, non-governmental organisations/NGOs, and donors). FPKBL accommodates inputs from batik community in Kampung Laweyan and proposes development programs to city government agencies at most and various development agents. On the other hand, it also accommodates any development programs from outside neighbourhood society (Efendi, expert interview, December 22, 2011; Priyatmono, expert interview, December 22, 2011). With such institutional arrangement the role of FPKBL is more representing a meeting forum for discussing any issues and needs concerning with cultural heritage site preservation and batik industry development than a development project funder or executor (Figure 5).

Kampung society
A group of elders Individual batik firms FPKBL Kampung Laweyan Neighbourhood System Community-based organisation

External agencies (e.g. universities, NGOs, donors)

(Municipal) government agencies

Market institutions (e.g. traders, brokers, customers, buyers)

Figure 5. Local Institutions in Kampung Laweyan Batik Industry In fact, FPKBL cannot reconcile conflicting interests from within batik community easily. Due to the strong individualistic behaviour of batik entrepreneurs in Kampung Laweyan, a difficult negotiation process for attaining public consensus has challenged FPKBL to accomplish its main task and responsibility. Their independence sometimes inhibits FPKBL to build collective actions for improving socioeconomic welfare of entire society. Even though it deals with cultural PRSCO 2013 Contribution ID No. 367 14

preservation and economic development of respective batik industry, it must pay attention to immediate impacts of any development initiatives to entire society as well. To deal with social disputes that come from batik community or the affected groups of society FPKBL often relies on the powerful role of elderly group inherently in its structure of organisation to find the best solutions, and even to overcome the problems directly. Seniority does matter in Kampung Laweyan in a sense of respecting older citizens but it does not automatically correspond to immediate obedience. Within such circumstance social disputes could be relieved somehow even though the problems remain unsolved. Coercive actions are not applicable to Laweyan society since it may irritate individual dignity and therefore worsen social disputes. A rigid reward and punishment with written rules is almost impossible for the society to practice. The only form of social sanctions may be gossiping the confronting opponents or the outlaws, through which social exclusion appears directly. Some key ingredients of Javanese culture like pekewuh (bashfulness) and tepa selira (social tolerance) thus activate the mechanisms of social relations to control individual behaviours in the society. However, it seems only work for the middle-lower class or the subordinated groups of society, not for the large batik masters. Selfcorrection and social sanctions somehow cannot touch the latter group (and the superior group too). As long as they can maintain family networks and individual business linkages, social exclusion does not affect to them. For the same reason many outsiders are complaining about the less cooperative character of Kampung Laweyan society, particularly from government agencies. They consider the batik community of Kampung Laweyan is resistant to government programs because of their opposing tendency to challenge or even to refuse government programs. It is understandable if we look at the history of Kampung Laweyan which has shaped strong independence and highly entrepreneurial skills of entire society to achieve the high levels of self-esteem. They seem do not require any assistance from outside as they are used to keep a distance with bureaucrats and external influences. Bureaucrats are sceptically seen identical to uang beselan (bribery) and spendthrift custom advantageous for their group rather than for the governed society welfare. Such bureaucratic atmosphere is very contrast to the typical character of Kampung Laweyan society in general which emphasises hard-working and high achievement attitude. Dealing with this situation FPKBL is often facing some difficulties to reduce tensions between the government and batik community in Kampung Laweyan. As a result, the role of FPKBL to bridge communication between these two parties is less effective, so that program matching for promoting batik industry development is hardly achieved. Therefore, strong individualisms of batik community in Kampung Laweyan cannot build a harmonised social order indeed, but to some extent the bonding of social inclusiveness resulted can prevent the entire society from undesired intrusions that may break up the predetermined social protection.

Kampung Kauman: The Centralised Leadership of Batik Community Empowerment Compared to the background of Kampung Laweyan, the origins of batik industry in Kampung Kauman occurred more orderly. It was associated with the establishment of Keraton Solo (Solo Palace) by the King Sunan Pakubuwono II in 1745, following the movement of prior palace from PRSCO 2013 Contribution ID No. 367 15

Kartasura ruined by Chinese ethnic group rebellion of Geger Pecinan in 1742. His successor King Sunan Pakubuwono III built the first Great Mosque (Masjid Agung) in Surakarta territory in 1757 formerly the territory of Keraton Solo jurisdiction including the next-to-be Kampung Kauman was a vacant swamp land and assigned penghulu abdi dalem ulama, the Emperors royal servants who were responsible for the Mosque management organisation and Islamic teachings, namely Kanjeng Raden Pangeran Tafsir Anom. This religious royal servant lived in a kampung neighbourhood on the north of the Mosque. The position of this religious royal servant was similar to the Minister of Religious Affairs nowadays. To support his duty, some other royal servants called khotib, merbot, and modin were appointed officially and lived in the same neighbourhood. In addition, these religious leaders were also teaching Islamic lessons to students called santri, who were also living in the boarding school of pesantren in this neighbourhood. Soon this neighbourhood complex of abdi dalem kaum transformed into kampung santri called Kampung Kauman (Atmojo, 2009; Musyawaroh, expert interview, March 14, 2012). Started from religious neighbourhood consisting of the families of the royal servants of Keraton Solo, Kampung Kauman turned into batik industry centre later. It took about 50 years of transformation from religious to rather hedonistic home-based batik industry neighbourhood. Around the early 1800s batik trading in Surakarta was getting intensified and the surrounding area of Kampung Kauman covering Jl. DR. Radjiman, Singosaren, and Nonongan was used to be the famous batik trading centre in Surakarta. A lot of batik shops were built to accompany the first traditional textile and batik marketplace Pasar Klewer, which was built in 1785 by the ruling authority of Keraton Solo, King Sunan Pakubuwono III. Initially, Pasar Klewer was an outdoor market located on Lapangan Slompretan (Slompretan Square) to accommodate textile and clothing traders from the previous fire-burn market close to Pasar Legi. After being renovated in 1970 it turned into an indoor market with typical ways of product display by hanging batik clothing around the shops. The market located across Kampung Kauman site until the present days. Because of growing batik market in Surakarta a.k.a. Solo, nyai abdi dalem (the wives of royal servants) were attracted to take such economic opportunity for improving household welfare. However, these wives could not start up batik business directly without their husband approval. This was related to distinguished position of the Emperors royal servants who were exclusively appointed to serve the royal family only. As a consequence, these royal servants and their family abided by Keraton Solos codes of conduct, by which their lifetime behaviours and activities were ought to comply with Emperor Rules. Therefore, the role of Mbok Mase Kauman was subordinated by their husband who was the Emperors royal servants (Atmojo, 2009; Musyawaroh, expert interview, March 14, 2012; Soedarmono, expert interview, February 8 and March 6, 2012). Batik trading thus was the key driver of the establishment of batik industry in Kampung Kauman instead of batik production. As for Mbok Mase Kauman, batik trading was a side-job family business in order to improve their living standard. The main reason was that their husband lowrated salary obtained from the Keraton Solo was no longer sufficient to cover the increase of domestic spending. Mbok Mase then asked their husband for getting official trading license from the Emperor. In addition to such Javanese-Islamic orthodoxy of hierarchical social structure, the PRSCO 2013 Contribution ID No. 367 16

active engagement of Mbok Mase on batik industry in Kampung Kauman was also shaped from multiple external influences. In this sense, the batik knowledge and tradition mastered by Mbok Mase Kauman did not genuinely come from within, rather it was influenced by at least two sources, i.e. the Keraton Solo family and the extended family and business networks with Mbok Mase Laweyan. According to Musyawaroh (expert interview, March 14, 2012), the royal family taught female royal servants and nyai abdi dalem of Kampung Kauman batik techniques in order to fulfil internal Keratons demand of batik clothing. During the training they learned handwritten batik making and certain classical batik motifs prohibited to ordinary people, from which these typical batik motifs identified as court batik. In contrast to merchant batik, the court batik making must comply with the Emperor Rules of pakem (strict order) which specifies the pattern, name, meaning and use of certain batik fabrics and clothing. After training completion a fewer traditional batik producers in Kampung Kauman were appointed by the royal family to supply court batik products exclusively. Another source of knowledge transfer in batik making was the extension of family and business networks between Kampung Laweyan and Kampung Kauman residents. The most favoured way of network expansion was through marriage. According to Soedarmono (expert interview, February 8 and March 6, 2012), the mutual advantages of marriage between these two different groups of society are realised in the forms of increasing social status and economic welfare at once. As for the (large) batik masters of Kampung Laweyan, such marriage would like to strengthen their higher social status obtained from symbolic aristocracy attached to Kampung Kauman residents due to their closeness to Keraton Solo family circle. By doing so, they could get inspired intimately to the prohibited court batik motifs useful to enriching merchant batik products. On the other hand, the (large) batik masters of Kampung Kauman were likely to obtain greater economic welfare since Kampung Laweyan society was profoundly wealthier than the Emperor. As for comparison, in 1920s the Emperor owned an Italian Fiat fancy car whereas the most large batik masters in Kampung Laweyan had some. Such marriage relationships have demonstrated that both Kampung Laweyan and Kampung Kauman societies shared similar Javanese stereotyped culture of higher social status achievements, marking an orderly hierarchical social system. However, the practice of Javanese patriarchal system was more obvious and rigid in Kampung Kauman. Combined with strong Islamic beliefs, the social system has classified and clustered batik community and entire society in Kampung Kauman into certain functions, employments, and spatial arrangements. In batik industry context, there were groups of functional batik masters, suppliers, traders and makers who were living clustered in certain areas. For example, the large batik masters were living around Jl. Wijaya Kusuma axis connecting Jl. DR. Radjiman on the west to Jl. Slamet Riyadi on the east. The similar order occurred in religious organisation where the functional abdi dalem ulama living in certain areas as well. For example, Kampung Modinan was the residence of modin and Kampung Trayeman was the residence of khotib Trayem (Musyawaroh, 2001). The role of Mbok Mase in Kampung Kauman was subject to the social system even though their daily routines were similar to their counterparts in Kampung Laweyan. The main difference was that Mbok Mase in Kampung Kauman did not fully authorise batik business development because they had to consult and get approval from their husband before. The men engagement in batik industry particularly in production controlling was not quite intensive, and they preferred more to enjoy their primary job as the Emperors royal servants or PRSCO 2013 Contribution ID No. 367 17

the other types of employment workers. The superior role of men in domestic and social life in fact was useful to maintaining living harmony in the neighbourhood, particularly in balancing between hedonistic and religious activities. Referred to both Javanese and Islamic tradition, the position of men must be the leader and guardian of the women. Such circumstance affected the growth of batik industry in Kampung Kauman that was somewhat left behind Kampung Laweyan. Due to such orderly social system, both batik community and entire society of Kampung Kauman could build and maintain a strong social cohesion of neighbourhood life instead. Actually a rigid arrangement in many aspects of life has been beneficial to creating social inclusiveness, leading to dynamic social and economic cooperation within the society. Nowadays, batik industry in Kampung Kauman remains characterised a batik trading centre. A fewer batik producers keep producing court batik products in traditional ways (handwritten and stamping batik making) but there are much more batik traders who are supplying merchant batik products using printing technology. The rest batik producers have introduced combined batik making of both traditional and machinery printing technology. Many of them are also marketing imported printing batik products from different regions such as Pekalongan in particular rather than depending on their own products. Both male and female batik producers/traders enjoy batik industry growth equally. The evolutionary engagement of male batik producers/traders to accompany their female counterparts may take place easily due to preserved leading role of men in the society. In addition, cross-selling practices are very common in Kampung Kauman, creating a homogenous market segmentation of cheaper batik products. On one hand, joint marketing is flourished well and beneficial to customers and buyers in selecting diversified batik supplies at affordable prices. Batik producers/traders are able to put forward their products on their business allies shops/galleries and vice versa. They could also act as voluntary marketing agents of their allies if the customers and buyers are looking for different batik products unavailable on their shops/galleries. At least there are two ways of cross-selling and marketing practices in Kampung Kauman: 1) product consignment agreement through regular delivery or immediate on-site direct selling, and 2) directing the customers and buyers to favoured batik shops/galleries. On the other hand, batik marketing and trading cooperation may cause negative impacts to batik community and the rest of society in Kampung Kauman. As the similar batik products found on many spots in the neighbourhood discounted prices competition is unavoidable to present. Such unhealthy competition is advantageous for the customers and buyers but disadvantageous for local batik producers/traders due to continuous downgraded batik products prices. Subsequently, this situation may force down the prices of high quality batik products. The traditional batik producers who rely on handwritten and stamping batik making become less competitive against lower segmented batik suppliers. At last this situation has endangered the existence of local batik identity which is used to be identical to classical court batik products. Nevertheless, social cohesion is maintained well in Kampung Kauman in spite of social disputes that may arise because of such unhealthy competition. Again, the prevailing social system is contributing to resolve social disputes effectively. Even though there are no written rules and decisive reward-and-punishment mechanisms, collective actions for promoting batik industry in Kampung Kauman are rather accumulated easily. Voluntary pioneering and exemplary of PRSCO 2013 Contribution ID No. 367 18

prominent local leaders is the key factor for building more conducive business competition and social inclusion. As exemplified in the building of community-based organisation in Kampung Kauman called Paguyuban Kampung Wisata Batik Kauman (PKWBK) or Batik Tourism Kampung Community of Kauman in 2006, the organisation defines itself as a social voluntary organisation rather than (professional) business organisation. PKWBK aims at promoting Kampung Kauman as a prospective batik tourism destination. It facilitates local tourism and batik industry development needs by accommodating the interests of both batik community and entire society of Kampung Kauman and government policies/programs (and external agencies too) (Setiawan, expert interview, April 9, 2012). Sometimes PKWBK plays an intermediating role to reconcile social disputes within batik community. Even though the area of responsibility covers entire Kampung Kauman boundaries, its memberships are based on voluntary submission. As a result, a bonding social contract is elusive, creating inconsistent support from either members or non-members (Figure 6).

Kampung society

External agencies (e.g. universities, NGOs, donors)

Individual batik firms Kampung Kauman Neighbourhood System

Community-based organisation PKWBK

(Municipal) government agencies

A group of elders

Market institution (e.g. traders, brokers, customers, buyers)

Figure 6. Local Institutions in Kampung Kauman Batik Industry Regarding such institutional framework, the working of PKWBK is heavily depending on the capacity of prominent leaders in directing organisation activities. Without a strong leadership PKWBK is unlikely to respond the changing environment in batik industry appropriately, and collective engagement of batik community is difficult to exist. Voluntary initiatives from the Head of PKWBK to approach batik community and the rest of society in Kampung Kauman and various external agencies either in person or accompanied by fellow PKWBK board members have shown his leading role in the organisation. His pioneering and philanthropic actions for the advancement of organisation and batik community development provide a good example of embracing and bridging communication with all interest groups. Supported by his powerful background as the successor of a large batik master family in Kampung Kauman and Surakarta, he enjoys the heightened status and power at the upper class of society, from which powerful PRSCO 2013 Contribution ID No. 367 19

influences may be applied to organise local batik industry development. Nevertheless, such concentrated power on the hands of single or fewer leaders may jeopardise the building of independent organisation and sustainable batik industry development. At the beginning, the concentrated power on a fewer prominent social groups is useful to effectuate the direction of batik industry growth and to encourage bonding solidarity within batik community. Social disputes may also be resolved quickly even though with less or absent intervention from the group of elders. As exemplified in Kampung Kauman, the role of elderly group is somewhat less important in influencing local batik industry growth as the group members prefer to pay much attention on social and religious activities. However, this group can support PKWBK indirectly by giving certain advices or where if they are invited to find proper solutions regarding batik industry and tourism development in Kampung Kauman. As a result, the Head of PKWBK currently holds a great power and responsibility to direct the organisation and batik community development. Regardless of the virtues of hierarchical social system, the highly dependency of batik community in Kampung Kauman on a central figure of prominent leaders may foster their reluctance to empower themselves and to participate more actively in various forms of batik industry development.

Lasem Area: The Unsolved Competing Values of Family Business Cliques Batik industry in Lasem Area is one of the oldest batik production centres in Java and certainly older than those in Kampung Laweyan and Kampung Kauman. Its establishment is associated with Majapahit Monarchy era (1293 1478) similar to Kampung Laweyan, but Lasem became the vassal of the Monarch earlier following the commissioning of Bhre Lasem a.k.a Putri Indu Dewi Purnamawulan by the ruling Emperor and also her older cousin King Hayam Wuruk (1351 1389) to become Adipati Lasem in 1351. Bhre Lasem was the older sister of Bhre Pajang, the ancestor of Pajang Monarchy, thereby Kadipaten Lasem and Kadipaten Pajang was connected each other. During this old time batik industry in Lasem was believed a folk handmade industry to serve for the royal family clothing in particular. It was recognised from the archaeological discovery that found the use of court batik motifs in the sculptures of ancient temples. The older handwritten batik technique other than using a canting tool (a waxing pen stylus) was used to produce batik clothing. The batik products were to fulfil domestic clothing demand rather than being tradable commodities. The earliest form of Lasem batik products were court batik and dominated by soga brown colour before enriched by the foreign influences of Chinese and Islamic tradition (Widi, 2009; Ishwara et al., 2011; Winarno, expert interview, April 27, 2012). It achieved its finest form of batik motifs and dyeing technique since the adaptation of native batik makers to Chinese textile production skills. The (first) evolutionary Lasem batik making started shortly after the movement of a naval crew of the famous Chinese admiral Cheng Ho namely Bi Nang Un to reside in Lasem. During the stopover of Admiral Cheng Ho expedition to Lasem in 1413, Bi Nang Un asked permission to the Admiral to stay in Lasem with his wife Na Li Ni instead of returning to China. Later, their friendly interactions with local residents promoted the improvement of native batik making skills by introducing Chinese textile designs and motifs as well as colouring methods. The typical Chinese tradition motifs such as floral bouquet, PRSCO 2013 Contribution ID No. 367 20

phoenix, dragon, and kilin were applied to traditional court batik motifs. The red colouring technique was also adopted, creating a well-known getih pithik (chicken blood) colour of Lasem batik products. Later, the red colour of Lasem batik making contributed to the creation of famous batik tiga negeri (three-state batik products) to accompany soga brown colouring technique of Solo and blue colouring technique of Pekalongan batik industries. Another essential contribution of Chinese tradition was transformed into the multiple colouring processes which created a durable batik colour, where the frequent use of Lasem batik products would brighten the original colour (wantek). The combination of local and foreign traditions thus encouraged the excellence of Lasem batik industry a Chinese-styled handwritten batik production centre (Lombard, 2008b; Winarno, expert interview, April 27, 2012; Witjaksana, 2012). Lasem batik industrialisation started to grow intensively since the era of Dutch Indie colonisation on Java land in 1860s. During the colonisation era the northern coast of Java were the most developed region occupied for multiple functions of governments, trade and industry centres, military forces, and transportation hubs, including Lasem as the port and military city. The mainland was somewhat less developed and used for plantation fields and the extended areas of colonisation influences. Due to the Dutch Indie Government regulations, the Chinese ethnic group along with the non-European foreigners were privileged to the second class of society higher than the native citizens, making them to have important positions on government, trade, and industry. The Chinese group was appointed for several special duties on tax collection and military forces, which used by the ruling government to oppress the natives (Lombard, 2008a, 2008b, 2008c; Winarno, expert interview, April 27, 2012). Immediately, the large Chinese investors entered to and took over traditional batik industry from the hands of native batik makers. They introduced advanced colouring technology by using chemicals like naphtol to improve batik quality, replacing the old traditional technology which based on natural colouring materials. They also adopted Dutch textile motifs to traditional batik making along with a few Dutch batik makers to produce newly batik genre called batik Belanda (Dutch batik motifs). This new batik style displayed floral bouquet, bird, butterfly, life events, and fairy tales story. Since then batik industry in Lasem shifted into mass production industry and batik commodities were traded outwards (Doellah, 2002; Veldhuisen, 2007; Ishwara et al., 2011; Winarno, expert interview, April 27, 2012). Another external influence that shaped the finest colour quality of Lasem batik, but not known extensively, came from Islamic tradition. It was believed that the green colouring technique was influenced by Islamic tradition, the similar technology that could be found in other Islamic-affected batik production centres such as Pekalongan (Winarno, expert interview, April 27, 2012). Since the beginning batik industry in Lasem was a core family business for Indo-Chinese batik masters and heavily relied on closed family networks. They built in-house batik production workshop at the back of main house. Similar to traditional batik making process elsewhere, traditional native batik makers came to the workshop regularly on the weekdays. It was also possible that the batik makers did batik works at their homes in the villages and returned to their batik master for final processing. The batik making relied on handwritten batik technique entirely, through which Lasem batik products were identical to batik tulis halus (the finest handwritten batik products). The loyal bonding between the batik masters and makers was PRSCO 2013 Contribution ID No. 367 21

maintained well through family inclusion approach, not by written contracts, where the batik makers being treated as the extended family of their master. Such friendly relationships were associated with the flourished assimilation of the Chinese ethnic group with local residents in Lasem since the past times. As for the batik makers, batik making was considered a side-job while waiting for harvesting period of agriculture land cultivation. As they were living in the villages, their main employment was farm worker, cash crop plantation collector, and any other forms of agriculture-based employment. Initially, batik making was only a spare-time leisure activity for the female villagers before they turned into professional batik makers following the rise of batik industrialisation in Lasem. The closed family networks were also applied for further batik industry development. The batik masters developed individual family business linkages instead of inter-firm collective business development, creating a highly competition of batik industry among fellow Indo-Chinese batik masters. A gendered division of labour in batik making was present in Lasem. Compared to the case of Surakarta batik industry, both male and female batik masters in Lasem could take a leading role from batik production to marketing and trading equally. There were no socio-cultural restrictions that inhibit certain party to participate in batik industry. As a core family business, the intergenerational transfers of batik skills and knowledge were sustained from senior batik masters to selected family successors regardless of their sex types. The internally confidential training programs were conducted by the senior batik masters mostly during the childhood regarding traditional batik making and dyeing techniques in particular. Interestingly, the dyeing formula was not shown entirely to the upcoming successors, causing unsustainable batik colour quality. On this stage, it was the challenge for the upcoming successors to find out proper dyeing technique innovations in order to preserve family batik tradition. As for batik makers, there were clear labour division between male and female workers. The handwritten batik making was on the hands of female batik makers while the stamping batik making, wax removal and dyeing processes were for male workers. Recently, the continuation of traditional handwritten batik industry in Lasem has been at the crossroads. At least there are four driving forces that caused such inconvenience situation. Firstly, the preservation of traditional handwritten batik making has been threatened by the growing batik market supply with incredible variants of batik products at more affordable prices, including low-priced imported and printing batik products. This leads to the downgraded quality of traditional batik products for reducing the selling prices. Previously, Lasem batik products are broadly known the finest expensive batik products due to the lengthy process of traditional handwritten batik making and multiple colouring enrichments. Many batik producers including some old batik firms are now shifting down the targeted markets to the middle-lower market segments to complement their exclusive batik products. Secondly, the prolonged inter-firm conflicts between fellow Indo-Chinese batik masters remains unsolved satisfactorily. The highly tensions and competition resulted from their strong individualistic behaviours have created difficulties to social conflicts reconciliation as well as inter-firm business cooperation. Thirdly, the rise of newly native batik entrepreneurs specialised in the middle-lower market segments has introduced new batik designs and techniques. The group of newcomers is used to be the batik makers of the existing batik masters. As they started up their own batik business, they have PRSCO 2013 Contribution ID No. 367 22

brought some external influences that may potentially erode the local identity of Lasem batik products, i.e. the application free-styled batik motifs and teknik coletan (paintbrush colouring technique). Fourthly, the decreased number of loyal batik makers to their masters has disrupted traditional batik making sustainability. The emerging opportunistic behaviours of current batik makers along with the practice of quality batik makers hijacking from certain batik masters have broken up the prior family bonding between batik masters and makers. Getting more incomes and incentives are the main reason of such changing behaviour and mentality. Dealing with such circumstance, the response of batik community in Lasem is split into several factions. Currently, there are two batik organisations, i.e. a community-based organisation called Forum Rembug Klaster (FRK) or Cluster Consultative Forum and Koperasi Batik Tulis Lasem (KBTL) or Lasem Handwritten Batik Cooperative. FRK is sponsored by Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Daerah Kabupaten Rembang (Local Planning Authority of Rembang Regency) through its arm-length quasi-government organisation called Forum of Economic Development and Employment Promotion (FEDEP). The early establishment of FEDEP and FRK was sponsored by GTZ Germany in the mid-2000s as the provincial top-down initiative from the Central Java Province Regional Planning Authority. KBTL is sponsored by Dinas Perindustrian, Perdagangan dan Koperasi Kabupaten Rembang (Local Office for Industry, Trade, and Cooperatives of Rembang Regency) as part of the Offices main tasks and responsibilites (Drupodo, expert interview, May 7, 2012; Rifai, expert interview, May 8, 2012) . Even though both organisations are designed to serve batik community needs in Lasem, they represent top-down government-led organisations instead of purely community-based organisations. The individual batik firms are split to become the members of these organisations or remain non-affiliated (Figure 6). Until the first decade of 2000s such batik community grouping has not appeared obviously. A few (large) Indo-Chinese batik masters could have enjoyed the highly competition environment, particularly when the local batik community was led by a prominent charismatic batik master. She could maintain the balance between socio-cultural preservation of traditional batik making and economic opportunity pursuit towards entire batik community. She also encouraged the upgrading skills of fellow batik entrepreneurs and the rise of new batik generation from the natives. Her consistent principles and assertive actions applied when authorising FRK and KBTL together have contributed to better promotion of Lasem batik industry nationwide and abroad. Just a few years before her death, this socio-economic harmony started to break up. As the leading positions of FRK and KBTL separated to two different leaders to some extent this situation was rather backed up by two different local government agencies, i.e. BAPPEDA and DISPERINDAGKOP the socio-economic disharmony within local batik community has arisen. Dualistic authority in batik community organisation sparked the worsening social disputes between different batik family business factions. Some are consistent to protect the authenticity of traditional handwritten batik making in Lasem. The opponents are demanding for immediate batik industry direction change by introducing new technology, contemporary batik designs and motifs, and emphasising more on economic welfare pursuits. The rest are keeping the distance or being sceptical towards such uncertain conditions. As a result, the current batik industry development in Lasem seems to have no clear direction and better integrating management. PRSCO 2013 Contribution ID No. 367 23

Individual batik firms

External agencies (e.g. universities, NGOs, donors)

(District) government agencies Other agencies

Community-based organisation

Quasi-government organisation

FRK

FEDEP

BAPPEDA

Individual batik firms Lasem Area Subregional System

Koperasi Batik Tulis Lasem (Lasem Handwritten Batik Cooperative)

DISPERINDAGKOP

Individual batik firms

Market institution (e.g. traders, brokers, customers, buyers)

Individual batik firms

Figure 6. Local Institutions in Lasem Area Batik Industry The ineffective role of both FRK and KBTL to create socio-economic integration of batik industry in Lasem is associated with their establishment as the government top-down projects. Actually such approach is inappropriate to the building of inter-firm cooperation and more conducive business climate. Unfortunately, the government agencies are being trapped into opportunistic behaviour which is stressing more on the successful implementation of government programs. This means that the government agencies seem to look after their own institutional performance by supporting particular parties in batik community rather than to encourage better batik industry development. In other words, there is some internal competition within the local government structure which is to some extent transmitted to the worsening competition between batik firms. Moreover, the historical background of batik community in Lasem has shaped their strong individual entrepreneurship mentality and independence towards external assistance, the situation which is similar to batik community in Kampung Laweyan. They are accustomed to keep the distance with government intervention to promote batik industry. The general society of Lasem is characterised by a centre of business and agriculture industry with a strong working PRSCO 2013 Contribution ID No. 367 24

class, compared to the most Rembang society which is shaped by public servants and service industry. Since the past Lasem area previously called as Kadipaten Lasem has been the centre of trade and industry as well as the prominent port city in the north coast of Java. However, after the Dutch Indie Government built a new centre of government services in Rembang area located 12 km heading to the west from Lasem area, it has raised social segregation and spatial disintegration between these two areas until present days (Lombard, 2008a, 2008b). Therefore, the careless government intervention has led to the heightened social disputes within batik community in Lasem, mainly since the government programs are designed without proper engagement from below.

V. CONCLUSION The three cases of batik industry development above show that local socio-cultural setting determines respective batik community responses in dealing with certain issues. The choices of building a rigid or flexible institutional milieu are depending on the predetermined social system prevailing on the local context. Even though there are substantial changes in the local social system evolving for centuries, some core social values remains preserved. Such preserved values transferred over generations and have been recurring in modified forms to direct the emerging responses. Some key social values are related to the structure of power relations in society, gendered division of labour and the adaptive behaviours of participating actors. The Javanese culture which provides the foundations of batik industry development in those cases has created a rather consistent hierarchical social structure, putting the high level prominent leaders on the critical positions to reconcile the conflicts of interests. Interestingly, it cannot assure thorough practicalities of similar social values where some modifications have been applied in different local contexts. For example, the original Javanese tradition points out the male domination over the female in both private and public life. However, the cases of Kampung Laweyan and Lasem Area demonstrate modified responses of local batik community. In contrast, the case of Kampung Kauman shows the strengthening of Javanese culture due to the influences of Islamic beliefs which suggest the leading role of men over the women. Regarding a gendered division of labour, there are constant values preserved by batik makers. Handwritten batik works belong to the women while stamping and printing batik works belong to the men. The male workers are also mostly responsible for wax removal and dyeing processes. Such orderly division of labour is not applicable for batik masters where each local batik community may respond differently. The adaptability of local batik community in dealing with changing environment has indicated the basic character of local society. A strong individualistic behaviour has been shown in Kampung Laweyan and Lasem Area. The driving force in Kampung Laweyan is the struggling spirit of the natives against the practices of colonisation either from the foreigners or the governments. In Lasem Area it comes from the Chinese tradition which suggests for individual high achievements of life. However, the case of Kampung Laweyan shows that such individualisms encourage flexible responses towards incoming new batik motifs and technology while the batik community in Lasem Area responds conversely. In the meantime, the batik community in Kampung Kauman to some extent remains maintaining PRSCO 2013 Contribution ID No. 367 25

the closeness to the government. Due to the more rigid social system, the attempts towards batik community independence must be negotiated with the entire society (and the ruling government as well). This aims to assure the proper conducts of batik community in compliance with the predetermined social system. As a consequence, the structural dependence of smaller social units towards the larger ones is maintained carefully in Kampung Kauman. Even though the local background and the driving forces are different, the three cases are facing similar high-level competition between batik firms. The local batik communities are being trapped on opportunistic behaviour for short-term profit maximisation. The differences are that each local batik community in Kampung Laweyan and Kampung Kauman can manage some collective actions to promote entire batik industry development whereas the batik community in Lasem Area is reluctant to do the same. Reflecting to these cases, the strong communal and primordial ties in Surakarta is beneficial to facilitate collective actions. In other words, family networks of individual batik firms are intertwined with social networks of local batik community. Unfortunately, the case of Lasem Area demonstrates that these two networks are not blended completely. Therefore, socio-cultural setting does matter in directing the response of local batik community towards changing environment.

REFERENCES Atmojo, H. (2009). Traditional batik of Kauman, Solo: An exotic, timeless cultural heritage. Surakarta: Penerbit Tiga Serangkai. Budiartie, G. (2013, April 27). Pasar Tanah Abang dibanjiri batik asal Cina. Tempo. Retrieved from http://www.tempo.co/read/news/2013/04/27/090476312/Pasar-Tanah-Abang-DibanjiriBatik-Asal-Cina Creswell, J.W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Second Edition. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Doellah, S. (2002). Batik: Pengaruh zaman dan lingkungan. Surakarta: Danar Hadi. Ishwara, H., Yahya, L.R.S., and Moeis, X. (2011). Batik pesisir pusaka Indonesia: Koleksi Hartono Sumarsono. Jakarta: Kepustakaan Populer Gramedia. Lombard, D. (2008a). Nusa Jawa: Silang Budaya kajian sejarah terpadu, Buku I: Batas-batas pembaratan. Jakarta: PT. Gramedia Pustaka Utama in collaboration with Forum Jakarta Paris and cole franaise dExtrme-Orient. Lombard, D. (2008b). Nusa Jawa: Silang Budaya kajian sejarah terpadu, Buku II: Jaringan Asia. Jakarta: PT. Gramedia Pustaka Utama in collaboration with Forum Jakarta Paris and cole franaise dExtrme-Orient.

PRSCO 2013

Contribution ID No. 367

26

Lombard, D. (2008c). Nusa Jawa: Silang Budaya kajian sejarah terpadu, Buku III: Warisan kerajaan-kerajaan konsentris. Jakarta: PT. Gramedia Pustaka Utama in collaboration with Forum Jakarta Paris and cole franaise dExtrme-Orient. Malaysia klaim tujuh budaya Indonesia. (2012, June 19). ANTARA News. Retrieved from http://www.antaranews.com/berita/317054/2007-2012-malaysia-klaim-tujuh-budaya-indonesia Maxwell, R. (2003). Textiles of Southeast Asia: Trade, tradition and transformation. Revised Edition. Hongkong: Periplus Editions. Musyawaroh (2001). Deskripsi tata fisik rumah pengusaha batik di Kauman Surakarta. (Unpublished master thesis), Universitas Gadjah Mada, Indonesia. North, D.C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Siswandi, R. (1999). The roots of tradition. In Achjadi, J. (Ed.), Batik: Spirit of Indonesia (pp. 2035). Jakarta: Yayasan Batik Indonesia. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (2009). Indonesian batik (Decision 4.COM 13.44). Retrieved from http://www.unesco.org/culture/ich/RL/00170 Veldhuisen, H.C. (2007). Batik Belanda 1840 1940: Dutch influence in batik from Java history and stories. Jakarta: PT. Gaya Favorit Press. Widi, A.H. (2009, September 5). Menapaki jejak Majapahit di Kajar, Lasem. Kompas. Retrieved from http://cetak.kompas.com/read/2009/09/05/0323093/Menapaki.Jejak.Majapahit.di.Kajar..Lasem Yin, R.B. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods. Third Edition. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. 2012, Indonesia impor batik senilai Rp 285 miliar. (2012, February 20). Pikiran Rakyat. Retrieved from http://www.kemenperin.go.id/artikel/5715/2012,-Indonesia-Impor-Batik-SenilaiRp-285-Miliar

PRSCO 2013

Contribution ID No. 367

27