Analyzing The Policy Conflict of Street Vendor Relocation In Malioboro, Yogyakarta

A Case Study Using Policy Conflict Framework

Abstract

The relocation of street vendors from Malioboro Street to Teras Malioboro has sustained a policy conflict between authorities and vendors. Using the Policy Conflict Framework (PCF), this study examines how divergent policy positions, perceived threats, and low willingness to compromise shape conflict intensity and outcomes. The research draws on in-depth interviews with vendors, non-participant observations at Teras Malioboro 1–2, and document/media analysis to triangulate findings. Results show substantial income disruption linked to reduced visibility, weaker pedestrian spillover from Malioboro, and design/management issues in the new sites. Coalition dynamics coalesced around two blocs—vendors and allied civil society versus government and planners—while the symbolic authority of the Sultan moderated overt confrontation without resolving underlying grievances. Limited participatory feedback loops, procedural opacity, and asymmetric problem framing escalated conflict intensity across episodes of implementation. The study contributes to PCF by situating urban informality and cultural authority as contextual moderators in a Global South setting. Practically, it recommends conflict-sensitive adjustments: targeted transitional assistance, improved wayfinding and circulation to restore footfall, formal vendor representation in decision-making, and an institutionalized grievance channel with service-level agreements. These measures align modernization goals with vendors’ economic security and strengthen policy legitimacy by responding to vendors’ appeals.