The Effect of Labor, Fiscal Decentralization, And Local Income On The Human Development Index Mediated By The Economic Growth Of Urban And District Areas In East Java Province In 2017-2021

Indonesia`s intensively encouraging even better economic growth by the role of labor as one of the factors of production that will affect the high level of national income in terms of quality or quantity alone. The purpose of this study is to determine the effect of labor, fiscal decentralization, and local income on the human development index mediated by the economic growth of urban and district areas in east java province in 2017-2021. The quantitative research method was applied in this research with Explanatory Research, which employs hypothesis testing to explain the correlation among independent and dependent variables. The population in this research was the City of East Java Province in the research period during the period 2017 – 2021. The determination of the number of samples used by researchers is by the census method. The data employed in this study is secondary data using panel data from 2017 – 2021. The analysis technique carried out is the Model Moderator Regression Analysis (MRA), with the help of SPSS version 26 application. This study concludes that the Labor variable has an influence on the Human Development Index, the Fiscal Decentralization variable has no effect on the Human Development Index, the Local Revenue variable has an influence on the Human Development Index, the Regional Economic Growth variable has no influence on the Human Development Index, the Labor variable has an influence on Regional Economic Growth, the variable Fiscal Decentralization has no effect on Regional Economic Growth, the Local Revenue variable has no influence on Regional Economic Growth, the Regional Economic Growth variable cannot mediate the influence of Labor on the Human Development Index, the Regional Economic Growth variable cannot mediate the effect of Fiscal Decentralization on the Human Development Index and Regional Economic Growth variables cannot mediate the effect of Local Revenue on the Human Development Index.


INTRODUCTION
The Human Development Index (HDI) is one method for assessing a nation's performance in the field of human development (Resce, 2021) Furthermore, several low-income countries may attain a high degree of human development by utilizing all available resources properly to develop fundamental human qualities (Raikes, Smith, Baldwin, & Henstra, 2021).
A stable and growing economy is the primary goal of every country.In achieving this goal, it can be achieved through economic development.While in current development, many countries have adopted economic development to be able to influence the economy (Otero et al., 2020).Meanwhile, the government's participation in development will be highly essential via the formation of programs that will be implemented to the community or area as specified in the fiscal policy that is developed (Peterson, 2017).
In order to achieve even better  Tizón Larroca et al., 2020).
Labor is an element that influences the Human Development Index (HDI).
Additionally, the role of labor as one of the factors of production that will affect the high level of national income in terms of quality or quantity alone (Ryan & McCarthy, 2019).
Labor has several definitions.governments in carrying out regional autonomy.So that the higher the ratio of Fiscal Decentralization Degrees, the better the ability of regional financial independence to support regional autonomy (Siburian, 2020).(Ginting, Hamzah, & Sofilda, 2019).
The following is the analysis tool according to the concept of Ginting (2019), to determine the level of fiscal decentralization across regional and central governments: -Regional Original Income x 100% Total Regional Income -Tax and Non-Tax Revenue for Regions x 100% Total Regional Income -Regional Contribution x 100% The Local Revenue, or PAD (pendapatan asli daerah), is the revenue acquired by the region through regional sources inside its own area and collected in agreement with regional rules or relevant legislation.The Local Revenue sector is critical because it demonstrates the extent to which an area can finance government operations and regional development (Abdullah, Christan, Hartono, & Febryanti, 2021).
The greater the involvement of local revenue (PAD) in the regional financial system, the higher the function of PAD with in regional financial structure.The greater the region's financial capabilities to carry out regional development operations (Sirojuzilam, Turnip, & Saputra, 2020).
Local revenue (PAD) is derived from its income, which are regional levies, local taxes, the results of segregated wealth management, as well as other legitimate local original income.
The original regional income is said to be suitable d for meeting the financing of regional development if the achievement of the percentage exceeds 70% of the total PAD acceptance (Abdullah et al., 2021).

Hypothesis Test
The regression analysis employed in this study is a simple multiple linear regression utilizing medium regression analysis (MRA).MRA is a subset of multiple linear regression in which the regression equation includes one interactive element (the multiplication of at least two free variables).This analysis aims to ascertain the effect of independent variables on dependents and whether moderation variables can adjust the impact of independent variables on dependents.The calculation results are:   Growth.The findings of the T test revealed that the sig value was lower than 0.05, which was 0.031.The t-count value is more than the t-table (2.233>1.67943).In conclusion, Labor has an influence on Regional Growth.
In the sixth hypothesis, it is suspected that Fiscal Decentralization has no influence on Regional Economic Growth.The outcomes of the T test revealed that the sig value was more than 0.05, which was 0.840.The t-count value is lower than the t-table (-0.203 < 1.67943).

In conclusion, Fiscal
Decentralization does not affect Regional Economic Growth.
In the seventh hypothesis in this study, it is suspected that there is no influence between Local Revenue on Regional Economic Growth.The results of the T test that were carried out revealed that the sig value was greater than 0.05, which was 0.378.The t-count value is lower than the t-table (-0.070 < 1.67943).So it can be concluded that Local Revenue has no influence on Regional Economic Growth.
In the eighth hypothesis, it is assumed that Regional Economic Growth is unable to mediate the relation between labor and the Human Development Index.The results of the T test that were carried out proved that the sig value was more than 0.05, which was 0.943.The t-count value is lower than the t-table (0.070 < 1.67943).So Regional Economic Growth cannot mediate the influence of Labor on the Human Development Index.
The outcomes of the hypothesis suspected that Regional Economic Growth is unable to mediate the relation between Fiscal Decentralization and the Human Development Index.The outcomes of the T test showed that the sig value was greater than 0.05, which was 0.943.The t-count value is lower than the t-table (0.070 < 1.67943).So Regional Economic Growth cannot mediate the effect of Fiscal Decentralization on the Human Development Index.
In the outcomes of the tenth hypothesis, it is assumed that Regional Economic Growth is unable to mediate the relationship between Local Revenue and the Human Development Index.
The results of the T test that was carried out showed that the sig value was more than 0.05, which was 0.943.and Ningrum, et al., (2020) which show that the Regional Economic Growth variable has no effect on the Human Development Index.
In the fifth hypothesis, it is suspected that there is an influence between Labor on Regional Economic Growth.The T test result showed that the sig value was smaller than 0.05, which was 0.031.The t-count value is more than the t-table (2.233>1.67943).In conclusion, Labor has an influence on Regional Economic Growth.
The outcomes are also in line with Menajang's research (2019), which shows that the Labor variable has an effect on Regional Economic Growth.
In the sixth hypothesis, it is suspected that there is no influence between the Fiscal Decentralization on the regional economic growth.From the T test result, researchers found that the sig value is more than 0.
. The Human Development Index is among the indicators to assess the level of physical and non-physical quality of the population (Leon-Castro, Blanco-Mesa, reduce social issues such as drug misuse, AIDS, alcoholism, vagrants, as well as domestic violence. , economic development shows the outcomes of changes in output structure and the allocation of inputs in the economic sector which can cause an increase in output through productivity.According to Bove & Elia (2017), The level of economic progress indicates the success of development because the development of economic sector activity can be measured through the level of economic growth.Economic growth and development should be inseparable, but are inseparable unitary things.The term of economic growth is an increase in output capacity derived from a production process in the form of an increase in national income (Indonesian state is still far behind the neighboring countries (Dat, Hoang, Huyen, Huy, & Lan, 2020).
The first model may be recognized within all normally distributed data, according to the findings of the Normality test.This is because there is a significance value of 0.104, but also 0.200, both of which are more than 0.05.While the results of the Normality test carried out are known that the second model can be known on any data with a normal distribution, based on a significance value of 0.109, but also 0.200, both of which are more than 0.05.The first model may be recognized within all normally distributed data, according to the findings of the Normality test.This is because there is a significance value of 0.104, but also 0.200, both of which are more than 0.05.While the results of the Normality test carried out are known that the second model can be known on any data with a normal distribution, based on a significance value of 0.109, but also 0.200, both of which are more than 0.05.The heteroskedasticity testing's results show that the regression model of the 1 st model and the 2 nd model can be known under all data that heteroskedasticity does not occur in the regression model.

Table 4 :
Autocorrelation Test results