INSTITUTIONAL COMPLEXITY IN RELIGIOUS CONFLICT PREVENTION: A CASE STUDY OF MAKASSAR CITY

Abstract

Religious conflict prevention in plur alistic urban settings requires sophisticated institutional arrangements that can effectively coordinate diverse stakeholders while maintaining legitimacy across different religious communities. This study examines the institutional complexity in religious conflict prevention in Makassar City, Indonesia, using Interactive Governance theory as the analytical framework. Through a qualitative case study approach involving in-depth interviews with 13 key informants, participatory observation, and document analysis conducted from March to July 2025, this research investigates coordination mechanisms, collaborative arrangements, and cross-sector decision-making processes in religious conflict prevention. The findings reveal a multi-layered institutional architecture involving various agencies with complementary functions, including the Early Warning Team, FKUB (Inter-Religious Harmony Forum), Kesbangpol (National Unity and Political Agency), and multiple intelligence agencies. However, significant challenges persist in the form of unclear authority distribution, financial dependencies, and implementation gaps between formal structures and operational realities. The study identifies hybrid formal-informal collaboration patterns, such as the formation of interfaith youth forums that demonstrate adaptive capacity within institutional frameworks. Decision-making processes exhibit sophisticated procedural requirements including multi-religious representation and consensus-based approaches, though these create potential for deadlocks in contentious cases. The research concludes that effective religious conflict prevention requires balancing institutional complexity with operational clarity, ensuring that multiple stakeholder involvement enhances rather than complicates conflict prevention efforts. The case of Makassar demonstrates that successful Interactive Governance depends on strong leadership capabilities, sustainable funding mechanisms, and clear procedural guidelines that bridge formal governance structures with practical implementation needs.