KOPI DELFT Governance – Financial - Social aspects of Jakarta’s flooding

13 February 2020

Daniel Sihombing; d.daniel@tudelft.nl

Important remarks!

1. Analyse as a system

2. Trying to find social – financial – political pattern and root causes ->

system approach aims to find pattern and root causes

3. Data may not reliable

4. Symbol (?) means “is that true?”

5. Jakarta is rempong! -> can’t discuss all

Jabodetabek • One (watershed) integrated system

Source: 2014

• Bogor -> Depok -> Jakarta • Bogor + Depok -> Tangerang selatan • Bogor -> Bekasi

Governance

• Badan Besar Wilayah Sungai Ciliwung – Cisadane (BBWS

CILCIS) -> National government

• Ciliwung watershed: DKI Jakarta and West Java (Kab. +

Kota Bogor & Depok)

• Overlapping regulations & authority (central

government vs province vs municipality)

• Synergy between stakeholders -> ego sektoral,

Conflict of interest (?)

• Autonomy law -> overlapping regulations;

Economic oriented

Issues

Law implementation

• Law no. 26/2007 about green space : 30% of the total area -> Reality 10% (2019)

• Regulation on spatial planning : Rentjana Induk 1965-1985, Rencana Umum Tata Ruang

2005, Rencana Tata Ruang Wilayah Provinsi 2010, Peraturan presiden 54 (2008), Perda DKI

no 1 (2012) -> implementation (?)

• Jakarta local government regulation (2012) to have 30% green space in 2030 -> do we have

the green space master plan (?)

Financial

Financial related issues • Affected area: Industry, Transportation, Commercial (shopping center), Bank, Residential area, office and governmental area, school,

health (+mortality), etc.

• Do we invest enough money (?)

• If we don’t have money, how can we get it (?) -> think about the reclamation case

• Pattern: (1) we invest too little, but …; (2) it seems that the budget will increase after big flooding (if the data below is accurate)

Social

Social aspect: Population growth

• Population Jakarta = Bogor (Kab+Kota) + Depok -> 2030 • Green space in Jakarta: 28% in 1984 -> 6% in 2007 -> 10% in 2019 • Average % increasing of domestic waste in DKI (2019 – 2025) = 0.97 > % population = 0.74 • ~350 ton/day waste in river (~4.3% of total domestic waste) • Q: what will happen in the upstream and midstream area (?) • Pattern: More people, more problem (?) -> two sides of a coin

% population growth upstream >> downstream

Social aspect: Relocation / eviction & community involvement - empowerment

• Naturalisasi – normalisasi -> need Relocation or Eviction (=Penggusuran)

• Relocation and Eviction do not involve the target group (?)

• Community involvement / empowerment / development (?)

• Example: Kali Code (Jogja), Stren Kali (Surabaya)

• Q: Do people trust the province / central government (?)

Social aspect: People perception regarding flooding • Delay effect to realize the risk: (1) knowledge of causes, (2) vulnerability (probability), (3) severity

(consequences)

• Adibroto (2018): knowledge is good, but vulnerability (1.6 out of 5) < severity (2.5)

• Pattern: Indonesian has high resilience / endurance / adaption (accustomed to flooding) + has “too positive”

perception (in a bad way) (?)

• To minimize the delay effect: campaign / public education -> public awareness

Governance

Publicawareness

Campaign / publiceducation

Socio-economicdevelopment

+

+

+

Trust+

+

++

Psychology of people

• In economics, demand = willingness + ability to purchase goods

• Willingness (often) comes first, then ability -> government (often) create ability first and then/but not willingness (e.g., relocation to flats) (?)

• Community involvement / empowerment / development -> Q: Does government invest money and time on this (?)

• Pattern: People have low willingness, low ability, and have no options/preference (?)

Economic perspective Psychology perspective

Solutions

Governance – Economical - Social

Solutions • Polder • Naturalisasi sungai • Normalisasi sungai • Infiltration wells + drainase vertikal • Banjir kanal • Sodetan sungai • Community empowerment / development

Q: which one is least popular (?)

vs soft

• Hard solution: infrastructure, technology, etc. • Soft solution: people (behaviour, attitude, perceptions, performance,

etc.) • Pattern: Solution for Jakarta’s flooding is (always) hard solution (?)

vs soft

Pattern: We are bad at operation & maintenance (?)

vs soft

• Hard solution is mostly effective and sustainable in the context of

developed countries / the “enlightened” people

• Historical institutions -> Culture -> Economic development (Tabellini,

2005) The influence of historical / colonial knowledge

(Octavianti & Charles, 2018)

• Choosing hard or soft solution need to consider culture

Flooding

Extreme (andhigh) rainfall

Threat of sealevel rise

land usechange

Domesticwaste

Totalpopulation

urbanization

Birth

++

Economic growth(and income)

Backwater effectfrom Java sea

Upsteamwatershed rainfall

Mid and downstreamwatershed rainfall

high intensity andfrequency of rainfall in

Bogor

Residencearea

+

+

Business / industry /economic area +

Landsubsidence

+

Riversedimentation

Rivernarrowing

+

Spatialplanning

Autonomy law

+

Socioeconomicdevelopment

+

+

Governance+

Climatechange

+

+

++

Technology andinfrastructuremaintenance

+

-

+

Groundwaterextraction

+

+

+

DrainagesystemPump Quality of technology

and infrastructure

+

+

+

+

Institutionssynergy

Publicawareness

-

-

Residence area inthe riverbanks

+-

+

+

+

Drainage systemand capacity

--

+

+

-

Water storagecapacity

Inundation

Water runoff

-

Regulatoryquality Rule of law

+

Villagedevelopment

-

+

--

+

+ -

-

Campaign

+

+

The causes of the causes

• Multiple pathways that lead to flooding

• Domino effect / chain reaction -> we can’t compartmentalize/cluster them

• Tackle the root causes / stop the demand

Flooding

Extreme (andhigh) rainfall

Threat of sealevel rise

land usechange

Domesticwaste

Totalpopulation

urbanization

Birth

++

Economic growth(and income)

Backwater effectfrom Java sea

Upsteamwatershed rainfall

Mid and downstreamwatershed rainfall

high intensity andfrequency of rainfall in

Bogor

Residencearea

+

+

Business / industry /economic area +

Landsubsidence

+

Riversedimentation

Rivernarrowing

+

Spatialplanning

Autonomy law

+

Socioeconomicdevelopment

+

+

Governance+

Climatechange

+

+

++

Technology andinfrastructuremaintenance

+

-

+

Groundwaterextraction

+

+

+

DrainagesystemPump Quality of technology

and infrastructure

+

+

+

+

Institutionssynergy

Publicawareness

-

-

Residence area inthe riverbanks

+-

+

+

+

Drainage systemand capacity

--

+

+

-

Water storagecapacity

Inundation

Water runoff

-

Regulatoryquality Rule of law

+

Villagedevelopment

-

+

--

+

+ -

-

Campaign

+

+

Potential solutions (Institutional, Financial, Social)

1.Better governance

2.Population growth control & “prevent” urbanization

3.Invest money and time on people

Summary • We know the causes and it is indeed very complex

• We often compartmentalize / cluster them -> debate + not effective and sustainable solution

• There is always a trade-off

• We focused more on hard intervention -> may not work in the case of Indonesia (less rational

than developed countries)

• Engineering-driven solutions (hard solution) -> socio-engineering solutions (hard + soft solution)

• Main research gap:

1. Sosial – behavioral studies related to flooding

2. Modelling the flooding which cover all hard and soft factors within one system (mono-

disciplinary -> multi-disciplinary (but not in the same realm of science))

Kegilaan:

melakukan hal yang

sama berulang-ulang

dan mengharapkan

hasil yang berbeda