← All articles

Economy & Policy

Gunungkidul Tourism Revenue: What the 2025-2026 Reports Show

· Infowisata.id Editorial Team · ~10 min read

Public reports show a tourism-revenue shortfall in 2025 and receipts above a reported 2026 target by August. But published targets and revenue labels differ, so the figures must be attributed rather than treated as one reconciled series.

A tourism retribution collection point at a coastal destination in Gunungkidul, Yogyakarta

The public figures do not yet form one reconciled series

Public reporting describes a shortfall in Gunungkidul Regency's tourism-sector revenue in 2025 and receipts above a reported annual target by August 2026. The figures are worth examining, but the reports do not use fully consistent labels or present a single, traceable history of the 2026 target. This article therefore reports what each source said, identifies the speakers or institutions behind the figures, and separates those statements from calculations made from the published numbers.

The source discrepancy is itself relevant to public accountability. It does not, by itself, prove that an agency reported incorrectly: targets may have been revised, rounded in public remarks, or described using different accounting scopes. The sources reviewed here do not establish which explanation applies.

What the 2025 report said

In a report published on January 4, 2026, Radio Republik Indonesia (RRI) stated that the Gunungkidul Tourism Office recorded IDR 30.4 billion in tourism-sector Pendapatan Asli Daerah (PAD, locally generated revenue) by December 31, 2025, against a target of IDR 33.5 billion. RRI attributed the figures to the Tourism Office. The outlet also quoted Eko Nur Cahyo, then secretary of the local tourism office, saying visitor numbers reached about 2.8 million against a target of 3.1 million and identifying restrictions on study tours in some regions and extreme weather as factors affecting visits. The report did not quantify the contribution of each factor to the revenue shortfall. (RRI, January 4, 2026 (opens in a new tab))

Using the rounded revenue figures published by RRI, IDR 30.4 billion was IDR 3.1 billion below the IDR 33.5 billion target, or about 90.7% of the target. This is an arithmetic calculation from RRI's reported inputs, not a separate audited result. RRI reported that Eko described the gap as about IDR 3 billion, which is compatible with a rounded public statement.

The 2026 target appears differently in public reports

Several public reports cite different versions of the annual target for tourism revenue in 2026. They should not be silently collapsed into one number.

Publication date and sourceFigure reportedWho said it or where it came fromWhat can be concluded
January 29, 2026. RRI, “Tingkatkan PAD, Gunungkidul Perketat Retribusi Wisata”Annual tourism-sector PAD target of IDR 36 billionRRI attributed the target to Harry Sukmono, then head of Gunungkidul's tourism office.A public report cited a target of IDR 36 billion in January. The article does not reproduce the underlying budget instrument. (RRI, January 29, 2026 (opens in a new tab))
May 12, 2026: Gunungkidul Regency Government launch announcementAnnual tourism PAD target of IDR 34 billionThe official announcement attributed the statement to Regent Endah Subekti Kuntariningsih during the launch of cashless tourism retribution at Baron Utama.The regency's own public announcement cited IDR 34 billion in May. The page does not say whether this was a rounded figure, a revised target, or a differently scoped measure. (Gunungkidul Regency Government, May 12, 2026 (opens in a new tab))
July 1, 2026. RRI, “Capaian PAD Wisata Gunungkidul Nyaris Terpenuhi”Annual target of IDR 36.06 billion; receipts of IDR 35.8 billion by June 30RRI attributed the figures to Eko Nur Cahyo, secretary of the local tourism office.A July report returned to a target close to IDR 36.06 billion. It reported the June result as 99.29% of that target. (RRI, July 1, 2026 (opens in a new tab))
August 18, 2026: Radar Jogja, “Long Weekend Hari Kemerdekaan, Pengunjung Melonjak, PAD Pariwisata Gunungkidul Tembus Rp 47 Miliar”Receipts of IDR 47,204,078,630 against a target of IDR 36,064,663,400Radar Jogja attributed the exact receipts and target to reporting by the local tourism authority and attributed the statement that receipts exceeded the target by “around IDR 11.4 billion” to Antonius Hary Sukmono, head of Disparekrafpora Gunungkidul.The published inputs imply a smaller difference than the approximate amount reported in the same story. The source does not explain that difference. (Radar Jogja, August 18, 2026 (opens in a new tab))

These communications could reflect target revisions, rounding, or differences between tourism-sector PAD and tourism-retribution reporting. The pages reviewed do not include an approved target instrument and change history that would resolve the difference. Consequently, this article does not present any one of the published target figures as the definitive legally adopted target for all reporting dates.

What the August figures calculate to

Radar Jogja reported receipts of IDR 47,204,078,630 by August 18, 2026, and a target of IDR 36,064,663,400. Subtracting the latter from the former gives IDR 11,139,415,230, or approximately IDR 11.14 billion. Dividing receipts by that stated target gives approximately 130.89% of target. These calculations reproduce the exact inputs quoted in the report.

The same Radar Jogja story attributed an “around IDR 11.4 billion” excess to Antonius Hary Sukmono. The difference between that approximate statement and the calculation from the exact inputs is about IDR 260.6 million. The report does not explain whether the official was using another figure, a different calculation, or a rough verbal estimate. This article preserves both the attributed statement and the calculation rather than silently replacing one with the other.

The May government announcement's IDR 34 billion target would produce a different calculation if applied to the same IDR 47.204 billion receipt figure: the arithmetic difference would be IDR 13.204 billion, or approximately 138.84% of target. This is a hypothetical comparison of published figures, not a claim that IDR 34 billion remained the operative target in August. The sources reviewed do not establish whether it did.

There is also a terminology limit. The 2025 RRI story describes the measure as tourism-sector PAD, while the August report calls the figure tourism retribution. These terms are related, but the public articles do not provide an accounting reconciliation proving the two reported series are identical in scope. Comparing them as if they were a single continuous series would therefore overstate what the sources show.

What the visitor figures do and do not explain

The August report said visits had reached 3,841,360 by August 18, compared with an annual target of 3,239,205. It also reported around 26,000 visitors on August 15 and around 40,000 on August 16 during the Independence Day long weekend. Those figures support the narrower observation that reported visits had exceeded the stated annual target and that attendance was high during that holiday period. They do not quantify how much of the year-to-date revenue came from those days, because the story did not provide daily receipt data or a matched comparison period. (Radar Jogja, August 18, 2026 (opens in a new tab))

Collection procedures also changed during 2026. In its May 12 announcement, the regency government said it had launched cashless tourism-retribution collection at Baron Utama, with plans to extend it to other collection points. In another government report on digital transformation, officials reported a 159% year-over-year increase in revenue at the pilot point and a rise in the share of noncash transactions in total regional revenue from 10.60% to 35.81%. The page does not provide a sufficiently detailed matched-period dataset or a counterfactual showing what would have happened without the pilot. The 159% figure must therefore remain an attributed government-reported result, not proof that cashless collection caused the broader 2026 revenue result. (Gunungkidul Regency Government, May 12, 2026 (opens in a new tab); Gunungkidul Regency Government, digital-transformation report, accessed October 26, 2026 (opens in a new tab))

Higher visitor demand and better collection controls could both contribute to revenue performance; so could changes in tariffs, collection-point coverage, target-setting, or accounting classification. The reports reviewed do not quantify each mechanism's contribution. A change in receipts after a new collection system is introduced is not sufficient, by itself, to prove causation.

What a comparable public report should disclose

To make fiscal performance assessable, Gunungkidul's tourism and regional finance authorities should publish one reconciled statement with:

  1. The official target and its history. Include the approved budget or target document and any formal amendment, with effective dates.
  2. A defined revenue measure. Identify whether each figure represents tourism retribution at collection points, tourism-sector PAD, or another category, and explain any scope changes.
  3. Matched periods. Compare year-to-date receipts through the same calendar date in the prior year and provide final full-year receipts when available.
  4. Consistent visitor definitions. Clarify whether the count refers to people, visits, tickets, vehicles, or transactions and identify exclusions or bundled entries.
  5. Collection and reconciliation data. Publish receipt totals by collection point, payment method, failed or canceled transactions, manual overrides, refunds, and daily reconciliation gaps where disclosable.

These measures would make it easier to distinguish a real change in collection performance from a change in reporting scope, target version, or visitor volume. They would also allow a later study to test the impact of cashless collection against matched periods instead of relying on a before-and-after headline figure.

Conclusion

The published record supports two separate findings: RRI reported that tourism-sector PAD missed its 2025 target, and several 2026 reports described receipts above a stated annual target by midyear or August. It also contains differences in the 2026 target cited across time, a difference in the labels used for revenue, and a gap between one published approximate excess and the calculation from the exact inputs. All of these differences can be reported transparently without guessing which explanation is correct.

The strongest conclusion is that public reporting needs a traceable target history and a consistent revenue definition, which no single unqualified number can supply. Until those records are published, the figures can show what officials and media reported at particular dates, but they cannot fully explain how much of the change came from visitor demand, cashless collection, stronger oversight, or other factors.

Sources consulted

Keep reading

This article is part 1 of 6 in the series "Tourism Revenue and Accountability".

Related articles:

  • Gunungkidul
  • Tourism Revenue
  • PAD
  • Tourism Retribution
  • Public Finance
  • Tourism Policy
  • Revenue Collection
  • Visitor Data

Privacy