PROGRAM MAGISTER PEMBANGUNAN WILAYAH DAN KOTA

PROGRAM PASCASARJANA – UNIVERSITAS DIPONEGORO

PERTEMUAN - 8

SEMESTER II – 2014

MPK - 606

RURALTO

URBAN

NORTHTO

SOUTH

FORMALTO

INFORMAL

CITIESTO

MEGACITIES

GLOBALURBANIZATION

ANDURBAN/REGIONAL

DEVELOPMENTISSUES

1. 2.

3.

4.

4

DUALISME PEMBANGUNAN KOTA

World Population lived in Urban Area : a. Year of 1800 : 3,00%

b. Year of 1950 : 29,00%c. Shortly after 2000 : 50,00%

Figure 1PERCENTAGE OF POPULATION LIVING IN URBAN AREA

IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES

RURALTO

URBAN

a. 1950 – 2050 The Urban population in third world countries will have increase 16 times : - 200 million to 3,15 billion. - Grows 140.000/day. b. 2000 - 2010 The urban in Developing Countries will be almost Twice that of Developed Nations

Figure 2PROJECTED URBAN POPULATION INCREASE

IN DEVELOPED AND DEVELOPING COUNTRIES, 1950 - 2025

NORTHTO

SOUTH

DevelopingCountries

Developed Countries

a. Migrants : They live in Squatter settlement, Shantytowns, Sub divisions illegal or Tenements in deteriorated and Peripheral neighborhoods. b. Formal city is growing: 3 – 4%/year and Informal city is growing twice that rate. c. 1/3 – 2/3 urban population lived in Illegal Settlements

Figure 3URBANIZATION AND PER CAPITA GNP IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES

20% s/d 40% URBANISTGNP PERCAPITA < $ 1,000/YEARS

FORMAL TO INFORMAL

Figure 4CITIES WITH POPULATIONS OFOVER 10 MILLION IN THE YEAR

1970 - 2000

a. 1970 : 4 Megacities only. b. 2000 : 23 Megacities

4 kota Megapolitan tahun 1970 :• London.• Shanghai.• New York City.• Tokyo

Penduduk kota Jakarta tahun 2000mendekati angka 15 juta jiwa,sekarang > 18 juta jiwa.

CITIES TOMEGACITIES

BERTAMBAH MENJADI 23 MEGAPOLITAN PADA TAHUN 2000 DAN PADA TAHUN 2025 > 40 MEGAPOLITAN

TAHUN 2000 (us.$ <Billion)

• Negara-negara Industri Baru sebesar 65,17

• Asia Timur : 7,08• Asia Tenggara : 19,04• China, Mongolia dan

negara-negara Asia Tengah : 28,82

• Negara-negara di Kep. Pasific : 0,01

Total : 120,12 (2000) 147,22 (2001) 269,62 (2010)

TAHUN 2020 (us.$ Billion)• Negara-negara

Industri Baru sebesar 212,39

• Asia Timur : 34,76• Asia Tenggara : 99,45• China, Mongolia dan

negara-negara Asia Tengah : 237,13

• Negara-negara di Kep. Pasific : 0,02

• Total : 6.400,70 (2020)

METHODOLOGY1. Forcasting-smoting Approacha. A simple method has been

used by The World Bank. b. A strong relation beetwen

Infrastructure and Percapita Gross Domestic Product.

1. Income Approacha. In general for every one

percent growth in percapita income, countries need to increase infrastructure stock by one percent of GDP.

b. At the same time, the compo sition of infrastructure stock changes significantly as income rises

TOTAL ESTIMATE FOR URBAN & REGIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE

PERIOD ON 2020

US $ 6,400.70(Billion)

1. KEBUTUHAN PSP/W. AKAN TERUS MENINGKAT SELARAS DENGAN PERTAMBAHAN PENDUDUK PERKOTAAN DAN WILAYAH.

2. KEMAMPUAN PEMKOT/KAB/PROV. DALAM PENYEDIAAN DANA INVESTASI PEMBANGUNAN PSP/W. TERBATAS.

DIPERLUKAN TEROBOSAN BARU UNTUK MEMECAHKANNYAURBAN AND REGIONAL

DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT

YANG SANGAT KOMPLEKDUALISME

PEMBANGUNAN KOTA

USER CHARGE

BETTERMENT LEVIES • Adalah tagihan modal utk

menutupi/membiayai investasi prasarana

Tujuan pungutan • Mendorong masyarakat yg mendapatkan

manfaat prasarana utk menanggung biaya • Didasarkan atas jumlah area atau besaran

nilai taksiran manfaat yg diperolehnya • Contoh : bea air irigasi

CONNECTION FEES

• Adalah pungutan yang dilakukan oleh perusahaan jasa pelayanan kepada individu, misal air bersih, telepon, sistem saluran pembuangan kotoran

• Tujuan untuk menutupi biaya yg timbul akibat adanya tambahan konsumen atas jaringan yg sudah ada

DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES• Dibayar oleh developer kepada pemda

atau perusda sebagai kompensasi atas dampak yg ditimbulkan oleh pembangunan baru tersebut

• Contoh : Pembangunan Perumahan Skala Besar

• Pungutan ini biasa dikenakan saat minta IMB dan harus dibayar dimuka

PINJAMAN • Secara umum lebih pendek waktunya dan

relatif lebih mahal dibanding obligasi

• Bisa bersifat komersial atau non komersial

• Sumber : Pinjaman DN atau LN

OBLIGASI• Sumber dana : mobilisasi dana di

pasar modal

• Bentuk dasar seperti pinjaman yg dilakukan pemerintah

• Jenis obligasi :•General obligation bonds•Revenue bonds

DEVELOPMENT EXACTION • Pungutan pada developer karena

pembangunan prasarana di lingkungan (on site) area pembangunan, sbg salah satu syarat sebelum pembangunan itu dimulai.

• Prasarana yg termasuk biasanya adalah jalan, saluran air bersih dan kotor, penerangan jalan, taman dsb nya.

• Besarnya pungutan : nego antar developer dgn institusi yg mewakili aktivitas masyarakat lokal.

Sehingga; • Kelebihannya : tidak ada biaya konstruksi

prasarana yg ditanggung pemerintah• Kekurangan : kadang prasarana yg

dibangun dibawah standar

EXCESS CONDEMNATION • Sejumlah tanah disisihkan utk

pembangunan prasarana, sisa tanah dibangun developer utk dibangun kawasan komersial, dan developer berkewajiban utk membangun prasarana tersebut.

• Instrumen ini biasa dipakai utk revitalisasi prasarana kawasan kumuh

LINKAGE • Developer diminta membangun prasarana

di daerah tertentu utk mendapatkan ijin pengembangan di daerah yg diinginkan

• Khusus utk pembangunan perumahan, dimana developer diminta membangun rumah sederhana utk pembangunan rumah mewah

JOINT VENTURES• Kerjasama pemerintah swasta, dan

keduanya memiiki posisi seimbang.

Tujuan utk memadukan keunggulan masing-masing pihak• Swasta modal, teknologi, kemampuan

manajemen.• Pemerintah sumber-sumber, kewenangan

dan kepercayaan masyarakat.

CONCESSIONS• Dikenal dalam banyak hal manajamen

prasarana, yaitu :• BOO• BOT• Divestiture • dll

Beberapa Pilihan ModelBeberapa Pilihan Model

Jangka waktu

Inve

stas

i pub

lik 1

00%

Inve

stas

i priv

at 1

00%

Kontrak pelayanan

Kontrak manajemen

Leases

Konsesi

BOT

BOO

Divestasi

Karakteristik PilihanKarakteristik PilihanModel Kepemi

likanO dan

PInvesta

si Risiko JangkaKontrak pelayanan

Publik Publik dan privat Publik Publik 1 – 2

tahun

Kontrak manajemen

Publik Privat Publik Publik 3 – 5 tahun

Lease (Sewa) Publik Privat Publik Dibagi

rata8 – 15 tahun

Konsesi Publik Privat Privat Privat 25 – 30 tahun

BOT/BOO Privat dan publik Privat Privat Privat 20 – 30

tahun

DivestasiPrivat atau

privat-publik

Privat Privat Privat Tak

terbatas (tergantu

ng)

KASUS: PENGELUARAN PEMBANGUNAN DI KOTA

SEMARANG

Sebagian besar cenderung dipergunakan untuk pengeluaran rutin

• Perlunya manajemen pengeluaran yang rasional : • dapat mendeteksi, akunting, dan menghentikan

kebocoran dalam pelayanan publik; • adanya mekanisme insentif dan disinsentif seperti

penalti bagi daerah yang kurang efektif; • mengurangi biaya dalam penyediaan pelayanan seperti

melalui staffing, pengaturan pelayanan bersama dengan wilayah sekitarnya, perencanaan dan penganggaran dan monitoring.

• Diversifikasi penyediaan layanan misal melalui kemitraan dengan pemerintah lokal yl, ataupun kerjasama dengan swasta

• Dukungan peraturan(Kim, 1997)

Pengeluaran rutin sebagian besar untuk membayar gaji

Tahun 2001 pengeluaran untuk gaji melonjak sejak desentralisasi diterapkan, sehingga penggajian di tingkat lokal (eksekutif dan legislatif) membengkak dan membebani kota.

Adanya penurunan pengeluaran pembangunan saat krisis (1998), namun kemudian cenderung meningkat lagi pasca krisis

Pengeluaran rutin > pembangunan/modal• Implikasi :• Pelayanan publik dan pembangunan

menjadi terkesan tidak lebih penting daripada pengeluaran rutin• OP Infrastruktur menjadi kurang

pendanaan( mis.jalan)

• Design-build-operate (DBO) *)

• Build Operate Transfer (BOT)• Design-build-operate-maintenance

(DBOM) *)

• Finance-design-build-operate-maintenance (FDBOM) *)

*) : diambil alih Pemerintah melalui transaksi jual beli.

PEMERINTAH

SWASTA

MASYARAKAT

Memberikan Jasa Layanan Pembayaran

Kontrak

Memberikan Pelayanan

Membayar Rekening

SWASTA

MASYARAKAT

Memberikan Jasa

Pembayaran Kontrak

Memberikan Pelayanan

Membayar Rekening

PEMERINTAH

PEMERINTAH

SWASTA

MASYARAKAT

Menyewakan Bagi Hasil

Memberikan Pelayanan Fee Pengelolaan

ESCROW

Pembayaran Rekening

Membayaran Rekening

MASYARAKAT

Melakukan BOT

Memberikan hak BOT

Memberikan

Pelayanan

Fee Investasi

Bagi Hasil

PEMERINTAH

SWASTA ESCROW

SWASTA

MASYARAKAT

Kontrak Konsesi

Memberikan Pelayanan Fee Investasi

ESCROW

Pembayaran Rekening

PEMERINTAH

Build, Own, Operate (BOO). The developer is responsible for design, funding, construction, operation and maintenance of the facility during the concession period, with no provision for transfer of ownership to the gov’t.

At the end of the concession period, the original agreement may be renegotiated,

a new agreement may be negotiated, or the facility may be purchased by the gov’t.

… kerjasama dengan masing-masing memberikan andil dan pertanggung-jawaban

untuk suatu harapan di masa mendatang

Partnership and sustainability

• Koordinasi dan maksimasi usaha• Masing-masing memberi dukungan atas

komitmen yang telah disepakati• Mengembangkan jenis dan jangkauan usaha yang

dikerjasasamakan• Meningkatkan sumber-sumber untuk ditingkatkan

hingga potensi pasarnya secara berkelanjutan

“ “ Working together : partners are not just donors“Working together : partners are not just donors“

•Roles•Responsibilities

•Resources⇑

⇑Preparatory workPreparatory work

Plan(Coordination)

Productive sector growth trough innovation infrastructure and knowledge development

Enhance research

capabilities

Develop and attract high-

qualified people

More access to research centers for

industry

Increase the number of

collaboration networks

Public policy to foster industry

development

Better access to knowledge

and technology

Partnership Competitiveness Agenda

Strength state-wide human capital system

Develop international networks and collaborative

projects

Increased regional capability on innovation and competitiveness

S e c t o r s

Partnerships and collaboration frameworks on e-government From theory to practice

Definitions

• Partners have a common interest

• Collaborators have a project in common

• Partnership : etymologically, a partner is a share-holder (pars tenens)

• Collaboration : etymologically, collaborate refers to working together (co-laborare)

KERJASAMA

PERKONGSIAN

PartnershipWho as a common interest?

• Countries/governments who aim at ‘doing things right’ while not necessarily doing the some thing

• Within one particular country, government entities and private entities who see their own respective interest in the success of e-government, while not necessarily having the same purposes, objectives of rules (PPPs)

• Any entity interested in obtaining/providing competence, expertise or other inputs to help develop something

Examples/interests

• International/regional for a where best practices can be exchanged, common interests are mainly for sharing best practices, identifying common trends and ‘de facto’ standards

• Various kinds of PPPs (not to be confused with delegations or procurement); respective interests are for cost reduction, efficiency, new services, universal service, (public sector) and profit (private sector)

• Support to national entities provided by external player (e.g. neighbouring country, regional or international organization – such as World Bank, UN,..)

CollaborationWho as a common project?

•Countries/governments who aim at developing their respective e-government strategies and plans in coordination

•Within governments/public sectors, various departments/entities working at developing common (shared) infrastructures, databases, tools or standards (e.g. for security, interoperability, capacity building)

•Private-public partnerships in e-government service delivery, or ‘upstream activities’

Examples/projects

• efforts to enhance good practice sharing in the area of national portals, or peer reviews of national e’gov policies

• guidelines and principles of a documents and public services

• Adopting common middleware solutions (Public Service Broker)

• Adopting common platforms for e-procurement

• All types of PPPs (more below)• Developing ‘Public goods’ such

as research on e-skills

Public Private PartnershipsDefinition

A public private partnership can be defined as an agreement between government and private entities for the purpose of delivering a project or service by sharing of risks and rewards of the venture.

Public Private Partnerships

Value Propositions

Access to private finance

Reduced operational risk for the public sector

Faster delivery of capital projects

Project management skills

Improved service delivery to citizens

Optimum utilization of government resources

Entrepreneurship and innovation

PPP Models: Investment Responsibility of Private Sector Design and

BuildBuild, Operate & Transfer (BOT)

Special Purpose Vehicle (Joint

Venture)

Build, Own & Operate (BOO)

Contract License (Operate & Maintain)

Lease Agreements

Build, Own, Operate & Transfer

(BOOT)

Fully Government

Venture

Complete Private Sector

Initiative

Type of PPP Model Design and Build

Contract License BOT Lease

AgreementsJoint

Venture BOOT BOO

Degree of Risk X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X

Degree of Reward

Increasing Investment Responsibility of the Private Sector

Risk vs Rewards

Example :Benefits of e-Government : on start of stage

Cost savings

Increase in foreign

investment in the country

Better access to information

Better value derived from government

services

Better access to information

Better access to

government services

Better customer service

Benefits to Businesses

Benefits to Government

Benefits to Citizens

Example : Benefits of e-Government : on medio stage

Cost savings Efficiency and transparency

Enhanced political capital

High economic growth

Citizen satisfaction

Efficient and innovative

public sector

Increased attractiveness to investment

and talents

Better access to information

Better value derived from government

services

Gain in productivity

Better access to information

Better access to

government services

Better customer service

Benefits to Businesses

Benefits to Government

Benefits to Citizens

Benefits to Society/Economy

Example : Benefits of e-Government : end stage

Cost savings

Efficiency and

transparency

Enhanced political capital

High economic growth

Citizen satisfaction

Local and Central

Government Synergy

Client-centricity

Efficient and

innovative public sector

Increased attractivene

ss to investment and talents

Better access to

information

CompetitiveInclusive

Democracy

Better value derived

from government

services

Gain in productivity

Better access to

information

Better access to

government services

Better customer service

Benefits to Businesses

Benefits to Government

Benefits to Citizens

Benefits to Society/Economy

Daftar Pustaka• Bird,R.M.(1999) User Charges in Local Government.

Worldbank paper• Potter,B. (1997). Budgetary and Financial Management

in Ter Minassian(eds)’Fiscal Federalism: in Theory and Practice’. International Monetary Fund, Washington DC

• Kim,K.H (1997)Improving Local Government Finance in a Changing Environment. Habitat International,vol 21.no.1 pp17-28

• Litvack,J.Ahmad J, and Bird R.(1998). Rethinking decentralization in Developing Cpuntries/ Poverty Reduction and Economic Management Sector Study Series. Washington,DC: The WB