https://ejournal.unib.ac.id/convergence-jep <div style="text-align: justify;"> <p>Convergence: The Journal of Economic Development is focused on publishing research articles in the field of economics, both theoretically and empirically covering development economics, macroeconomics, microeconomics, industrial economics, public economics, monetary economics, natural resource economics and regional economics. Convergenge: The Journal of Economic Development published twice a year (June and December) with print ISSN 2721-6330 and online ISSN 2721-625X.</p> </div> Universitas Bengkulu en-US Convergence: The Journal of Economic Development 2721-6330 <div style="text-align: justify;"><ul><li>This statement is a commitment from the author, to respect copyright, both in terms of quoting the work of others, as well as in the use of journal content. </li><li>If needed, the author can send a statement of authenticity of the manuscript. With the receipt of an article by the Editor of Convergence: The Journal of Economic Development, the article submitted has the copyright held by Convergence: The Journal of Economic Development Convergence: </li><li>The Journal of Economic Development has the right to reproduce and distribute articles that have been published in journals. </li><li>The author is not permitted to publish the same article that has been published in this journal.</li></ul></div> https://ejournal.unib.ac.id/convergence-jep/article/view/39757 <p><strong>Abstract</strong></p> <p><em>This study investigates the economic consequences of terrorism by examining the impact of the Bali Bombings I (2002) and II (2005) on individual income in Indonesia. Using microdata from the Indonesia Family Life Survey (IFLS) for the periods 2000 and 2006, the analysis applies the Difference-in-Differences (DiD) method to identify causal effects of the bombings on income outcomes. The empirical strategy distinguishes between pre- and post-bombing periods, affected and unaffected regions, and further introduces interaction variables capturing direct impacts on individuals experiencing material and psychological losses. Additional socio-economic controls, such as education, gender, age, employment status, household role, urban–rural residence, ethnicity, and welfare status, are incorporated to reduce estimation bias. The results show that the Bali Bombings significantly reduced average income in affected areas by approximately 26.44 percent compared to unaffected regions. Individuals directly exposed to the bombings experienced even larger losses, with their income declining by about 36.33 percent. Distributional analysis further indicates that the middle-income group (40 percent of the population) was most severely affected, while low- and high-income groups showed relatively minor impacts. These findings highlight the vulnerability of the middle class, which plays a critical role in sustaining Indonesia’s economic development. This study contributes to the literature on terrorism and economic development by providing micro-level evidence of how external shocks disrupt household welfare and income distribution. The findings have important policy implications, particularly for designing social protection programs and resilience strategies in tourism-dependent regions facing risks of conflict and disaster</em><em>.</em></p> <p><strong><em>Keywords : </em></strong><em>Difference-in-Differences, Individual Income, Bali Bombings, Direct Impact, Education and Age, Household Welfare, Terrorism and Economy.</em></p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Abstrak</strong></p> <p><em>Penelitian ini mengkaji dampak ekonomi dari peristiwa terorisme dengan meneliti pengaruh Bom Bali I (2002) dan Bom Bali II (2005) terhadap pendapatan individu di Indonesia. Data yang digunakan berasal dari Indonesia Family Life Survey (IFLS) periode 2000 dan 2006. Metode yang digunakan adalah Difference-in-Differences (DiD) untuk mengidentifikasi pengaruh kausal dari peristiwa bom terhadap pendapatan. Strategi empiris membedakan antara periode sebelum dan sesudah bom, wilayah terdampak dan tidak terdampak, serta menambahkan variabel interaksi untuk menangkap dampak langsung pada individu yang mengalami kerugian material maupun psikologis. Variabel kontrol sosio-ekonomi juga dimasukkan, seperti pendidikan, gender, usia, status pekerjaan, peran dalam rumah tangga, lokasi perkotaan/pedesaan, etnisitas, dan status kesejahteraan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa Bom Bali secara signifikan menurunkan rata-rata pendapatan di daerah terdampak sekitar 26,44 persen dibandingkan daerah yang tidak terdampak. Individu yang terkena dampak langsung mengalami kerugian lebih besar, dengan penurunan pendapatan sekitar 36,33 persen. Analisis distribusi pendapatan menunjukkan bahwa kelompok berpendapatan menengah (40 persen dari populasi) adalah yang paling terdampak, sementara kelompok rendah dan tinggi relatif tidak terlalu terkena dampaknya. Temuan ini menyoroti kerentanan kelas menengah, yang justru memiliki peran penting dalam mendorong pembangunan ekonomi Indonesia. Penelitian ini memberikan kontribusi pada literatur tentang terorisme dan pembangunan ekonomi dengan bukti mikro mengenai bagaimana guncangan eksternal mengganggu kesejahteraan rumah tangga dan distribusi pendapatan. Temuan ini juga penting bagi perumusan kebijakan, terutama untuk merancang program perlindungan sosial dan strategi ketahanan di wilayah yang bergantung pada pariwisata serta berisiko terhadap konflik maupun bencana.</em></p> <p><strong><em>Kata kunci:</em></strong><em> Difference-in-Differences, Pendapatan Individu, Bom Bali, Dampak Langsung, Pendidikan dan Usia, Kesejahteraan Rumah Tangga, Terorisme dan Ekonomi.</em></p> Arif Kurnia Wicaksana Erma Ziamah Fatoni Copyright (c) 2025 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0 2025-06-30 2025-06-30 7 1 1 19 10.33369/convergencejep.v7i1.39757 https://ejournal.unib.ac.id/convergence-jep/article/view/39975 <p style="text-align: justify;"><strong><em>Abstract</em></strong></p> <p style="text-align: justify;"><em>This study attempts to assess threshold levels of income inequality and human development quality on economic growth for 34 provinces in Indonesia during 2022-2023. The cross-section threshold regression was employed. The findings reveal that the threshold levels of income inequality in 2022 and 2023 were 0.319 and 0.345, respectively. At the same time, the threshold levels of human development index were 71.65 and 71.25, respectively. The condition posits that the quality of income distribution and human development will be marginally lower in 2023 than in 2022. By considering Global OLS, total labor force and unemployment rate deliver a significant and negative impact on economic growth at 10% level in 2022. Interestingly, FDI provides a positive impact at 10% (income inequality) and 1% (human development) levels. Therefore, the central and local governments are challenged to design economic development under inclusive and sustainable perspectives. Their policies can improve the quality of labor (educated, skilled labors, and productive) and increase the equality of economic activities for all provinces. Besides, those governments should lead all economic agents to obtain and guarantee the quality of human development in the long-run.</em></p> <p style="text-align: justify;"><strong><em>Keywords : </em></strong><em>Income Inequality, Human Development, Threshold Level, Economic Growth.</em></p> <p style="text-align: justify;"><strong><em>Abstrak</em></strong></p> <p style="text-align: justify;"><em>Studi ini berupaya menilai ambang batas ketimpangan pendapatan dan kualitas pembangunan manusia terhadap pertumbuhan ekonomi di 34 provinsi di Indonesia selama periode 2022–2023. Metode cross-section threshold regression digunakan dalam analisis ini. Temuan penelitian menunjukkan bahwa ambang batas ketimpangan pendapatan pada tahun 2022 dan 2023 masing-masing sebesar 0,319 dan 0,345. Pada saat yang sama, ambang batas indeks pembangunan manusia (IPM) masing-masing tercatat sebesar 71,65 dan 71,25. Kondisi ini menunjukkan bahwa kualitas distribusi pendapatan dan pembangunan manusia pada tahun 2023 sedikit lebih rendah dibandingkan dengan tahun 2022. Dengan mempertimbangkan Global OLS, total angkatan kerja dan tingkat pengangguran memberikan pengaruh yang signifikan dan negatif terhadap pertumbuhan ekonomi pada taraf 10% di tahun 2022. Menariknya, Penanaman Modal Asing memberikan dampak positif pada taraf 10% (untuk ketimpangan pendapatan) dan 1% (untuk pembangunan manusia). Oleh karena itu, pemerintah pusat dan daerah ditantang untuk merancang pembangunan ekonomi dengan perspektif yang inklusif dan berkelanjutan. Kebijakan mereka dapat meningkatkan kualitas tenaga kerja (terdidik, terampil, dan produktif) serta mendorong pemerataan aktivitas ekonomi di seluruh provinsi. Selain itu, pemerintah juga perlu memimpin seluruh pelaku ekonomi untuk mencapai dan menjamin kualitas pembangunan manusia dalam jangka panjang.</em></p> <p style="text-align: justify;"><strong><em>Kata kunci: </em></strong><em>Ketimpangan Pendapatan, Pembangunan Manusia, Tingkat Ambang, Pertumbuhan Ekonomi</em></p> Malik Cahyadin Tulus T.H. Tambunan Copyright (c) 2025 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0 2025-06-30 2025-06-30 7 1 20 39 10.33369/convergencejep.v7i1.39975