Impak insentif ekonomi terhadap golongan berpendapatan rendah Program Perumahan Rakyat, Kuala Lumpur (The implications of economic incentives toward low income peoples at People Housing Project, Kuala Lumpur)

Saripah Osman

Abstract


Malaysia adalah sebuah negara yang semakin pesat membangun berbanding negara-negara di Asia Tenggara yang lain. Sejajar dengan pembangunan ekonomi, kerajaan telah memperkenalkan pelbagai insentif untuk menaiktaraf kualiti hidup rakyat khususnya bagi penduduk yang berpendapatan rendah. Bagi mengatasi isu miskin bandar yang kian meningkat, kerajaan telah memperkenalkan konsep 1Malaysia yang merangkumi pelbagai aspek pembangunan khususnya dalam bidang ekonomi dan sosial. Tujuan kajian ini dijalankan adalah untuk mengenalpasti implikasi dan faedah insentif 1Malaysia yang diberikan oleh kerajaan kepada kelompok masyarakat yang berpendapatan rendah. Kajian ini dilaksanakan di empat buah kawasan Program Perumahan Rakyat (PPR) iaitu  PPR Laksamana, PPR Kerinchi, PPR Intan Baiduri, dan PPR Sungai Bonus. Setiap  PPR akan diwakili  10 peratus daripada jumlah penduduk iaitu 35 orang bagi PPR Laksamana, 160 orang penduduk dari PPR Kerinchi, 100 orang PPR Intan Baiduri dan 30 orang penduduk daripada PPR Sungai Bonus. Hasil kajian mendapati kebanyakan penduduk menyokong insentif 1Malaysia yang diperkenalkan oleh pihak kerajaan dari segi kemudahan kesihatan, pendidikan, ekonomi dan sosial. Ini bermakna rata-rata pengguna berpuas hati dengan insentif yang diberikan kerana ia dikatakan dapat meringankan beban perbelanjaan yang ditanggung atas faktor kos sara hidup yang semakin meningkat. Oleh itu, perlaksanaan insentif 1Malaysia ini seharusnya dikekalkan dan seterusnya menyumbang kepada peningkatan taraf hidup komuniti berpendapatan rendah di Malaysia.

Kata kunci: Bantuan Rakyat 1Malaysia, berpendapatan rendah, insentif, komuniti, kualiti hidup, 1Malaysia

Malaysia is one of the countries that is growing rapidly compared to other Southeast Asian countries. In the economic development aspect, the government has introduced various types of incentives to improve the quality of life, especially among the people with low-income. In the effort to eradicate urban poverty issues, the government has introduced 1Malaysia conceptual project which encompasses various aspects of development, particularly in economic and social enhancement. The purpose of this study is to identify the implications and benefits of 1Malaysia incentives provided by the government to low-income peoples. This research has been conducted in four locations of Program Perumahan Rakyat (PPR), which is PPR Laksamana, PPR Kerinchi, PPR Intan Baiduri and PPR Sungai Bonus. Sample size for each PPR is represented by 10% of the total population, which is 35 respondents from PPR Laksamana, 160 respondents from PPR Kerinchi, 100 respondents from PPR Intan Baiduri and 30 respondents from PPR Sungai Bonus. The findings show most of the peoples supported 1Malaysia incentives introduced by the government in terms of health, education, economy and social facilities. This means most of the peoples were satisfied with the incentives and agreed that the incentives is able to help ease the burden of expenses due to the rising cost of living. Therefore, the implementation of 1Malaysia incentive should be sustained as it continuously contributes to improving the standard of living of the low-income communities in Malaysia.

Keywords: Bantuan Rakyat 1Malaysia (BR1M), low-income, incentive, peoples, quality of life, 1Malaysia


Keywords


Insentif ekonomi, golongan berpendapatan rendah, Bantuan Rakyat 1Malaysia(BR1M)

Full Text:

PDF

References


Affizal Ahmad (2008). Kepentingan pendidikan dalam pembentukan kualiti hidup sejahtera. Malaysian Education Dean’s Council Journal, 2, 1-8.

Azahan Awang, Abdul Samad Hadi, Jamaluddin Md. Jahi, Asmah Ahmad, & Abdul Hadi Harman Shah (2006). Mendefinisi semula makna kualiti hidup masyarakat bandar dalam konteks ilmu sosial. Malaysian Journal of Environmental Management, 7, 19-32.

Burnaby Association for Community Inclusion (2013). Being, becoming , belonging: BACI’s commitment to quality of life for all. Quality Assurance Review. 1-13. Retrieved from http://gobaci.com.

King, C. R., & Hinds, P. S, (2003). Quality of life: from nursing and patients perspectives. (Eds.).Ke-2. Boston, Jones and Bartlett Publishers.

Lehman, A. F. (1983). The well-being of chronic mental patients assessing their quality of life. Archives of General Phychiatry, 40 (4), 369-73.

Leplege, A., & Hunt (1997). The problem of quality of life in medicine. JAMA 278, 47-50

Liu, Ben-Chieh. (1976). Quality of life indicators in U.S Metropolitan areas: A statistical analysis. New York, Praeger Publishers.

Oliver, J., Huxley, P., Bridges K., & Hadi Muhammad. (1996). Quality of life and mental health services. London, Routledge.

Renwick, R., & Brown, I.. (1996). The centre for health promotion’s conceptual approach toquality of life: Being, belonging and becoming. Thousand, International Educationn and professional publisher.

Schmandt, H. J., & Bloomberg. (1969). The quality of urban life: affair annual reviews. Beverly Hills, Sage Publications Inc.

Haryati Shafii & Nurasyikin Miskam (2011) Pembentukan penunjuk dan indeks kualiti hidup bagi mengukur kesejahteraan hidup masyarakat di Pekan Parit Raja, Johor. In: Kertas kerja Persidangan Kebangsaan Geografi dan Alam Sekitar, Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris, Tanjong Malim.

Siti Miskam Fatimah Abdul Rahman. (2006). Kriteria kualiti hidup berkeluarga. Retrieved from: http://www.ikim.gov.my.

Siti Nadira Ahmad Rozlan Shah, Rosmadi Fauzi, & Jamilah Mohamad. (2015). Membina model indeks kesejahteraan hidup penduduk bagi Semenanjung Malaysia. Malaysian Journal of Society and Space, 11 (4), 87-96.

Unit Perancang Ekonomi. (1999). Usaha ke arah peningkatan kualiti hidup: Kualiti hidup Malaysia 99. Jabatan Perdana Menteri Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, Percetakan Nasional Berhad

Unit Perancang Ekonomi (2002). Kualiti hidup malaysia 2002. Jabatan Perdana Menteri, Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, Percetakan Nasional Berhad.

Varni, J. W., Burnwinkle, T. M., & Seid, M. (2006). The PendsQL. 4.0 as a school population health measure: Feasibility, reliability and validity. Quality of life Research, 15, 201-215.

World Health Organization (1993). WHO-QOL study protocol: the development of the World Health Organization quality of life assessment instrument. Geneva, World Health Organization.

Wright, T. A., & Bonnet, D.G. (2007). Job satisfaction and psychological well being as Non-addictive predictors of workplace turnover. Journal of management, 33, 141-161. Retrieved from http://www.uk.sagepub.com.

Zaimah Ramli, Sarmila Md Sum, Azima Abdul Manaf, Suhana Saad, Mohd Yusof Hussain, & Novel Lyndon. (2012). Kualiti hidup dan kesejahteraan belia: kajian ke atas pekerja sektor awam Malaysia. Malaysian Journal of Society and Space, 8 (6), 150-156.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.