Building Indonesia’s Resilience to Disaster: Experiences from Mainstreaming Disaster Risk Reduction in Indonesia Program A report for the implementation of P122240 – Mainstreaming Disaster Risk Reduction in Indonesia Phase II Programmatic Advisory Services Analytics Contents 1.0. Introduction 1 2.0. The 2004 Tsunami: Hard Lesson and Move On 2 3.0. The Baseline: Rapidly Developing Vulnerable Country 3 4.0. Key Results from Mainstreaming Resilience in Indonesia 4 4.1. Risk Identification 4 4.2. Preparedness 5 4.3. Risk Reduction 5 4.4. Financial Protection and Risk Financing 7 4.5.Resilient Recovery 9 5.0. Achievements, Lessons and Remaining Challenges 11 Figure Figure 1. Five Pillars of Action adopted by the GFDRR 1 Figure 2. Schematic diagram of resilience goal and program pillar (source: Bappenas 2015) 13 1.0. Introduction As a country highly vulnerable to disasters, This report summarizes the works Indonesia has made a remarkable undertaken under the program providing achievement in bringing disaster risk information about the context in which he management to the forefront of its Government is building its Disaster Risk development agenda. The Mainstreaming Management institutions and capacities, Disaster Risk Reduction in Indonesia Program and highlighting the key activities of the is the World Bank engagement with the program in leveraging the Government’s Government of Indonesia supported by the efforts. The activities were organized Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and following the five-pillar structure of Disaster Recovery (GFDRR). The program, which Risk Management (DRM) adopted by started in 2009, has the rare opportunity to the GFDRR (Figure 1). The report aims complement the full cycle of National Mid to capture the experiences and lessons Term Development Plan for 2009-2014, in making DRM becomes everybody’s which also coincides with the conclusion of business, and to confirm that such a the Hyogo Framework for Action. mainstreaming approach is possible, even in the context of a highly vulnerable, geographically diverse, and socially complex country like Indonesia. Institutional, political, normative, financial context Risk Identification Risk assesments (community based, probalistic modelling); risk mapping; information campaigns; public outreach;etc. Risk Reduction Structural and non-structural measures; land use planning; policies and rgulation; infrastructure retrofitting; etc. Preparedness Civil protection system; pre-posititioning emergency response equipment; early warning system; contingency planning; etc Financial Protection Assesing and reducing contingent liabilities; budget appropriation $ and execution; ex-ante and ex-post financing instrument; etc Resilient Recovery Resilient recovery and reconstruction policies, ex-ante design of institutional response Figure 1. Five Pillars of Action adopted by the GFDRR Building Indonesia’s Resilience to Disaster 1 2.0. The 2004 Tsunami: Hard Lesson and Move On December 26, 2004 is a wake up day for exactly the latter. The reconstruction of Indonesia’s disaster management. The one Aceh and Nias, two most affected areas, in 200 years tsunami that hit a territory long was deliberately designed as a ‘special engulfed in conflict generating casualties project’ that has ambitious goals and was of more than 200,000 and causing USD 2 carried out with special privileges. But, billion of direct impact gave Indonesia a given the geographic size and complexity of hard lesson in many aspect of the country’s Indonesia, the Government quickly realized development. Failure of governance and that his ‘special project’ needs to be scaled social justice, physical development that did up through building institution and capacity not consider disaster risks, and many other at all levels to reach more than 500 districts factors all leading to one important lesson and municipalities spread in about more that “hard fought development which did than one thousand inhabited islands. not consider the interaction among and between people and nature could fail in a Indonesia learned that the Aceh Tsunami matter of minutes”. was not the only such risk confronting the archipelago, a series of similarly devastating There are typically two options that such a disasters occured in 2006 with earthquake hard lesson could lead to: 1) ripple effect in Yogyakarta and Central Java and tsunami that leads to total collapse, or 2) a bounce on the southern coast of West Java. This back that allows the system to recover serves as confirmation that Indonesia and build coping capacity to future similar should look at past experiences, but it occurrences. Indonesia has done just definitely needed to move-on focusing on building resilience at all levels. 200,000 USD 2 billion 2 3.0. The Baseline: Rapidly Developing Vulnerable Country If statistics were an accurate indication of The increased risk to these natural events probability for future disaster occurrences, is contributed by the rapid development Indonesia certainly qualifies as one of of the country in the last 25 years where the most vulnerable countries on earth. a number of physical assets built, albeit Based on EM-DAT, there are approximately not all meeting seismic resilient standard, 464 major disasters that had occurred have quadrupled from the same period in Indonesia between 1900 and 2016 before. Indonesia also experienced rapid killing more than 240,000 people, putting urbanization where may built assets and the country at the top rank. Data from settlements are concentrated in urban Indonesia Disaster Data and Information areas and often in locations not suitable for (DiBi), there are on average 1.164 disaster development, such as along the riverbanks events annually during the period of this or in landslide prone areas. It is estimated Program. that 80 percent of Indonesia’s population are exposed to the two most common Indonesia’s location along the Pacific Ring hazards, flood and landslide. of Fire contributed to the high seismicity and volcanism. With an average annual It is against this backdrop that Indonesia’s rainfall of 2,000 mm, among the highest development is placed. The country’s efforts in the world archipelagos, climate induced to eradicate poverty and boost shared disasters such as flood, drought and prosperity needs to internalize disaster and landslides are also quite common. In fact, climate risks to ensure that the hard earned the most frequent disasters in Indonesia is growth and equality will not be taken aback flood at 103 event followed by landslides by shocks brought by the disasters. with 63 events only for the period of peak rainy season from January to February 2016 alone. 90% Indonesia’s population are exposed to the two most common hazards, flood and landslide. Building Indonesia’s Resilience to Disaster 3 4.0. Key Results from Mainstreaming Resilience in Indonesia 4.1. Risk Identification initiative. The Program’s effort to facilitate risk While risk map/atlas at national and identification was started with the provincial level provides very useful and development of risk map (atlas) at the necessary basis for prioritizing actions, national scale, which shows spatial the field level measures to reduce risk will distribution of risk (as a function of hazard, require higher resolution geospatial data vulnerability and capacity) using district and analysis. As systematic nationwide boundary as the smallest unit. This initial mapping at large scale (up-to 1:5,000) has risk mapping exercise in 2009 was carried not yet covered the entire archipelago, base out while BNPB was just beginning to maps for such detailed risk identification are recruit staffs from other government not generally available. The Mainstreaming agencies. Experts from universities and DRR in Indonesia Program was among research agencies were mobilized to the first to work with the Government provide the technical knowhow on the to champion the use of alternative and method to represent different variables innovative geospatial data generation in a series of composite maps showing approaches to fill in this data gap. risk to different hazards. While this set of Confronted with the need to provide higher maps is far from perfect, it provides the resolution map of flood prone areas in the impetus of identifying areas with more City of Jakarta, the Program joined forces significant relative risks for interventions to with the Provincial Disaster Management be directed. The maps generated from this Agency (BPBD) of Jakarta and the Australia activity were first included in the National Indonesia Facility for Disaster Reduction Action Plan for Disaster Risk Reduction (AIFDR) and Humanitarian OpenStreet Team for 2009-2012 and subsequently in the (HOT) as well as UN-OCHA to carry out the National Disaster Management Plan for first government-sponsored participatory 2009-2014. The later is a formal planning mapping (crowd sourcing) in the history reference mandated by the Law 24/2007 on of the City. This participatory mapping Disaster Management. exercise produced for the first time the To-date, BNPB has further experimented neighborhood (RW) maps of the city as with methodology to downscale the risk well delineating more than 8,000 facilities mapping to the provincial level, providing identified as critical to flood preparedness. guidance for sub-national governments to This initiative then grew by introducing the prioritize their risk reduction efforts in sub- involvement of more government agencies districts that have higher relative risk level. in the mapping process to address similar Similarly, national level risk mapping for the data gap in Mt. Merapi in Yogyakarta and subsequent National Disaster Management Central Java, where areas which were Plan for 2015-2019 was carried out by BNPB affected by the 2010 eruption of the using its own internal capacity. The Program volcano had not been mapped, while there continues to provide support in piloting was urgent need for hazard rezoning which similar risk mapping approach for the would affect many community owned education sector to assist the Safe School lands and settlements. The Collaborative 4 Mapping approach was first introduced minimum standard of emergency logistics by the Program, referring to participatory issued by the BNPB. This had allowed the mapping involving sectoral agencies newly established BPBDs to quickly grasp mandated to produce key geospatial data the importance of preparedness as well as for public use (e.g., volcanology agency, to enable the to use locational reference river authority, land registry, etc.). in developing their first ever disaster contingency plans.. The accompanying Technical Note Number 1 provides a summary of experiences of In addition to using InaSAFE, the Program the Program in investing in Risk Information also supported several piloting of the use in a rather comprehensive manner to of village and school based risk assessment support major metropolis like Jakarta. While to help kick start the resilient village and supporting Jakarta in itself was a major safe school initiatives of the Government undertaking, the Program took advantage through the introduction of preparedness. on the experiences gained to expand Typical approach introduced through to the experimentation of Collaborative this pilot was to increase risk awareness Mapping to respond to urgent and growing and adoption of simple safety plans and geospatial needs as summarized in the procedures that suit the specific context of accompanying Technical Note Number 2. the local community. 4.2. Preparedness 4.3. Risk Reduction While risk maps provide important Unlike risk identification and preparedness indication to prioritize risk reduction where the measures were considered actions and measures, their most essential as soft, risk reduction activities most of utilization is to increase preparedness to the time require hard measures. While reduce loss of life in the event of a disaster. some measures such as zoning can still The Program also entered into strategic be considered as soft, in practice its collaborated with the BNPB and AIFDR in implementation requires hard investment developing open-source geospatial tool such as resettlement, which involves for disaster preparedness known as the housing and infrastructure construction and InaSAFE. The system provides a tailored relocation. application, which allows non-expert users to conduct simple disaster scenario As a Technical Assistance activity, the assessment to determine and prioritize Mainstreaming DRR in Indonesia Program allocation and placement of logistics by its nature is not a hard investment and assets (e.g., food, water, shelters) in project. However, being a mainstreaming preparation for disaster emergency. activity, its risk reduction related activities cannot work separately from To ensure that InaSAFE has relevance to the hard investment projects. Considering preparedness efforts of the sub-national Indonesia’s geography, the Program looks at governments through their Provincial/ the resilient at the community level as one District Disaster Management Agency of its priorities. This was done by designing (BPBDs), the system uses a national a parallel component of mainstreaming DRR Building Indonesia’s Resilience to Disaster 5 into Community Driven Development by where the Government provided funding adding an element of resilient in the PNPM for the construction of new public school Urban Program.1 buildings and rehabilitation of the existing ones. The Mainstreaming DRR in Indonesia The PNPM Urban Program is the Program also built the experience of Government platform that provides mainstreaming resilience in such public technical and funding support to investment as school construction. By communities at the urban ward to plan implementing pilot Technical Assistance to and implement projects carried out using support Safe School initiative, the Program community driven (based) approach. As facilitated the mainstreaming of resilience a platform the PNPM Urban serves as in the Government classroom rehabilitation a strategic entry point to provide small program between 2011 and 2012. This additional investment to mainstream pilot, which covered 3 high risk provinces of resilience into local development program West Sumatera, West Java and West Nusa managed by the community. The Tenggara, was jointly implemented with Mainstreaming DRR in Indonesia Program GFDRR grant and Basic Education Capacity provided technical expertise and facilitated building Trust Fund (BEC-TF) grant from institutional linkages between DRM and the European Union and the Netherlands urban settlement infrastructure that Government. In PNPM Urban, the program allow the process of risk identification to invested in both technical assistance and be integrated into the community driven facilitation as well as in providing to-up process, and inserted resilient measures grant for community infrastructure and in the menu of community projects in preparedness. But, in the Safe School the PNPM Urban. Readers are advised to pilot, around 180 schools that received refer to the accompanying Technical Note government funding through the Special Number 3 for more detailed description of Allocation Fund (DAK) fiscal transfer this initiative. for infrastructure rehabilitation, were While the PNPM Urban is a Government provided only with technical assistance program that was also partly financed by and facilitation from the Mainstreaming the World Bank, there are many other DRR Program and from the BEC-TF. This Government initiatives that are fully proofed that mainstreaming can also be financed by state budget and also has successfully done through parallel funding, nationwide scale. One such program is where investment costs were provided school construction and rehabilitation fully by the Government, providing greater sustainability for such investment. Readers 1 The National Program for Community Empower- are referred to Technical Note Number 4 ment (Program Nasional Pemberdayaan Masyarakat- for more detailed information about this PNPM) is a nation wide Government Community- initiative. Driven Development (CDD) that operates in all urban wards and rural villages of Indonesia. The The experiences in mainstreaming resilience World Bank supported the Government of Indonesia into major community driven development in developing its early version called the UPP and program like PNPM and the Government’s KDP back in nid-1990s, and subsequently co-fi- nanced the program until its completion in 2015. school rehabilitation program have helped 6 built the confidence for the Mainstreaming Indonesia that captures the key framework DRR in Indonesia Program to look at the and opportunities in mainstreaming broader urban resilience challenges. As resilience into urban development in the Indonesia is rapidly urbanizing, at the level country. of 4.1% between 2000 and 2010 alone, and at the same time decentralizing its 4.4. Financial Protection and Risk development decision to the sub-national Financing governments, making the growth of more Global experiences showed that even the than 98 cities taking a resilient path is a most prepared country to face large scale daunting task. Cities are at different level disaster, namely Japan, cannot entirely of development and have varying fiscal reduce its risk to zero. There will remain capacities to meet their development residual risks even if risk identification, needs. In 2010, the Program started an preparedness, and risk reduction engagement with the cities of Yogyakarta investments have been fully mainstreamed and Jakarta as part of the Climate Resilient into a country’s development program. It is Cities initiative to better understand the in anticipation of these residual risks that specific disaster and climate risks, needs financial protection plays a critical role, in and challenges. Several development the same manner where the most careful partners were also working on the subject driver of the best built car will still require also in search for the proper model for accidental insurance to anticipate potential engaging cities in building disaster and financial loss due to an unexpected traffic climate resilience. In 2012, the World Bank accident. initiated a Building Urban Resilience in Financial protection and financing of East Asia program which became the basis disaster risks, however, is a large and more for the Mainstreaming DRR in Indonesia complicated space as the type of risks Program to work with 6 cities (Balikpapan, and assets to be covered are much varied Denpasar, Makassar, Palembang, Semarang compared to those in the case of vehicle and Yogyakarta) through rapid risk insurance. Indonesia, however, being diagnostic for building urban resilience in vulnerable to multiple hazards and perils, Indonesia. Risk profiles for the 6 cities were and are at the stage of investing heavily developed as tool to initiate conversations on public and private infrastructure are with the cities stakeholders on resilient actually an “ideal” ground for introducing urban investment. While the path toward the concept of comprehensive risk financing actual city resilient investment is long, strategy to complement its existing reliance there has been significant progress made only on Government reserve budget and on in developing framework to help cities individual community savings to cushion its assess their risks, and identify on-going risk from disasters. and planned development investment where resilience could be integrated The Mainstreaming DRR in Indonesia into projects and program. Readers are Program initiated efforts to introduce this referred to Technical Note Number 5 on concept and to start policy discourse by Urban Resilience Concept and Practices in undertaking an analysis and eventually Building Indonesia’s Resilience to Disaster 7 published a report titled “Indonesia: 3. While state budget may appear to be Advancing a National Disaster Risk Financing sufficient to cover any unexpected Strategy – Options for Consideration”. The needs (especially when only referring report, which was prepared by a multi- to unspent budget at the end of fiscal disciplinary team of World Bank experts year cycle), in practice multiple disaster following a series of consultations with occurrences may overwhelm the public national stakeholders, highlighted the sector financial management system, importance of: 1) improving the budgetary and that available public fund is best process for disaster contingent activities, be allocated for financing development and 2) diversifying the source of funding expenditures already planned as to finance such activities beyond the state opposed to be kept as contingent fund. budget reserve. Utilizing risk transfer instruments such as insurance or catastrophic bonds may There are some important lessons emerging reduce uncertainty in the event of a from the risk financing works of the ‘disaster year’, and help discipline the program which may be useful for other contingent budgetary system. countries with similar sets of complexity, economic and physical sizes, and variety of The Government of Indonesia had made hazards as Indonesia: significant progress, albeit still insufficient, in developing its Disaster Risk Financing 1. The most frequent and damaging Framework, notable achievement include: disasters (in the case of Indonesia is landslide and flash floods) may not a. Robust mechanism and accountability always trigger conditions that justify of the On-Call Fund (Dana Siap Pakai) contingent processes at the country which has proven to be effective in wide level. This would mean that providing resources during a declared localized pooling system need to be state of disaster emergency. In recent developed cascading up to a national years the On Call fund has even expand scale protection; its scope to support international relief efforts, and it is only limited (for a good 2. Contingent financing in the public sector purpose) by its availability only during is bound by the same accountability the period of emergency; requirements as regular public spending, and special privileges (e.g., b. A better defined contingent liability, faster disbursement and more relaxed where principally responsibility to requirement) may lead to moral rehabilitate assets damaged by the hazards and the proliferation of political disaster rests within the owner of such economy around the contingent fund. assets. In the context of Indonesia’s A clear budgetary responsibilities decentralized system, asset ownerships among different levels of government, are divided as national, provincial, local and allocation system that match the and private and community’s common defined responsibilities need to be put properties. There has been clear policy in place; and practice that the State provide 8 support (i.e., serves as insurer of the reform in the public sector financial last resort), only when the asset owner management of the country. Continued is financially incapable of funding its improvement supported by regular analysis own rehabilitation program; and policy dialogues and coordination will c. A well-articulated framework on be required to built the momentum and Contingent Fund (Dana Darurat) as gradually implement the comprehensive stipulated in the Government Regulation framework as building blocks. For more 44/2012. While the Regulation was detailed information about lessons in aimed at providing a clear legal basis DRFI development in Indonesia, readers for financing of National level disaster are advised to refer to the accompanying emergency and theoretically will be very Technical Note Number 6. rarely used, the principles, processes 4.5.Resilient Recovery and procedures can be adopted in the regulation for smaller and more The positive spin on Indonesia being highly frequent disasters; vulnerable to and frequently experiencing disasters is that there are ample d. Multiple track efforts and initiatives in opportunities to use every disaster event as different ministries and units within the a learning process. The National Disaster Ministry of Finance to think through Management Authority (BNPB) had in fact policy options covering the subjects of: often use the term Indonesia as a living 1) fiscal protection against disaster, 2) laboratory for Disaster Risk Management. insurance of public assets, 3) pooling of In this regard, mainstreaming resilience into post disaster funding, and 4) promoting post disaster recovery and reconstruction private and micro disaster risk becomes an important agenda. insurance; and The Mainstreaming DRR in Indonesia e. Establishment of standing mechanism Program was in fact growing from the to coordinate and channel international various post disaster reconstruction assistance for post disaster funding activities including Aceh and Nias tsunami, through the Indonesia Disaster Fund Yogyakarta and Central Java earthquake, (IDF), which has two trust fund windows West Java tsunami, West Sumatera managed by the United Nations and earthquake, Mt Merapi eruption and the World Bank, and the third window various other smaller disasters that to accommodate direct/turn key occurred between 2010 and to-date. assistance. Starting from mainstreaming Damage As Indonesia is still in the process of And Losses Assessment (DaLA) into the consolidating its decentralized fiscal policy, Government’s recovery framework which efforts to implement comprehensive was initiated during the Phase I of the Disaster Risk Financing and Insurance Program, supports were deepen into (DRFI) framework as proposed by the institutionalizing and operationalizing Mainstreaming DRR in Indonesia Program the community-driven approach to cannot be separated from the broader housing and settlement rehabilitation and Building Indonesia’s Resilience to Disaster 9 reconstruction, and integration of eco- The success of REKOMPAK in Yogyakarta settlement and livelihood into the recovery (especially Mt Merapi reconstruction) strategy and investment. was often attributed to the strong social capital of the local community and the Among the notable achievement under servant leadership of the provincial and this pillar is the support to the post 2010 local governments, in that is not easily Mt Merapi eruption reconstruction which replicable in other disaster-affected regions saw one of the most innovative and well of Indonesia. This attribution was not recognized settlement rehabilitation and entirely true as such social capitals also reconstruction involving the development exist in other regions. In close collaboration of new settlements consisting of more with the Indonesia Disaster Fund (IDF), than 2,600 houses in 18 locations spread the Mainstreaming DRR in Indonesia over 2 provinces, under the REKOMPAK Program helped transition the REKOMPAK Program. The REKOMPAK (Community from previously a geographically focused Based Settlement Rehabilitation and project into a national platform that is Reconstruction Project-CSSRRP) itself was now mandated to operate in any disaster first established in support of Aceh and Nias affected area of Indonesia. tsunami as well as Yogyakarta earthquake recovery prior to BNPB’s existence. In The GFDRR Program support to the context of Mt. Merapi recovery, the mainstreaming resilience through Mainstreaming DRR in Indonesia Program REKOMPAK stretched beyond successfully linked a program which institutionalizing the program platform, to already existed pre BNPB, into a new also include several innovative experiments partnership under the coordination of BNPB in resilient eco-settlement, collaborative and combining funding resources from mapping for hazard zoning, and community various donors (under Java Reconstruction livelihood. For more detailed information Fund and PNPM Support Facility) with about lessons in resilient settlement the Government’s Rehabilitation and recovery, readers are advised to refer to the Reconstruction (RR) Fund under BNPB accompanying Report Number 1. all under one coordinated management and implemented by the community with technical support of the Ministry of Public Works, provincial and local governments. 10 5.0. Achievements, Lessons and Remaining Challenges Achievements climate risks. In the context of Indonesia, several achievement of the country in As a programmatic approach, the mainstreaming resilience can be attributed Mainstreaming DRR in Indonesia Program to the contribution of this program. Within had contributed to the efforts of developing the 6 pillars, these achievement include: a working model to leverage the World Bank Country Partnership Strategy and a. Risk Identification: the practice of investment program in Indonesia to including risk maps in DM Plan and IRBI integrate resilience into the portfolio. was initiated by the Program’s support The GFDRR 6-pillar approach provides a to the first risk mapping as part of NAP guidance to strengthen the critical element DRR 2010-2012 of a country’s resilience to disaster and Box 1. Resilience is mainstreamed in the Medium Term Development Plan- RPJMN 2015-2019 The National Medium Term Development development. The Government also Plan (RPJMN) for 2015-2019 is very recognized the importance of disaster encouraging from the Disaster Risk risk management in decision-making by Management perspective. A simple count targeting to establish situation room at the of the keyword “disaster” resulted in the President office to prevent, manage and words mentioned 68 times throughout the respond to potential crisis from disasters 7-chapter planning document. Conservation and social conflict. of natural resources and environment and disaster management is section within the Under the specific sub-chapter on pillar of “Building economic independence management and reduction of disaster through mobilization of domestic economic risks, there are 3 strategic directions sectors”. While the overall pillar is about including: 1) Internalizing disaster risk building greater reliance on national reduction in the national and sub- capacity, the fact that disaster management national development framework, 2) is part of an economic agenda is a reducing vulnerability to disasters, and welcome departure from previous planning 3) strengthening the capacity of the document that put disaster in the general Government sub-national governments and category of externalities that need to be community in disaster risk reduction. The managed. RPJM also highlighted the importance in strengthening risk information and early Building disaster resilience is also warning for disaster and climate risks, as found in the chapters that outline well as utilizing planning instrument such as development agenda on infrastructure, spatial risk zoning and development control urban development including through to prevention the creation of new risks from disaster proofing and green and resilient new development. Building Indonesia’s Resilience to Disaster 11 b. Preparedness: making preparedness a most mainstreaming efforts will have concrete undertaking by using InaSAFE to be done by sectors and projects, and has helped the newly established BPBDs not by the DRM agency or team. to gain leverage as a new institution b. Mainstreaming is about supporting among its much better established others who undertake investment peers through advocacy and technical support c. Risk Reduction: mainstreaming DRR into in thinking about risk and managing PNPM urban build strong foundation the risk. Tools such as risk maps, risk and platform to operationalize resilient profiles, resilient design are among the investment into urban development  in examples where supports are usually inside Slum Upgrading needed by program and project owner d. Financial Protection: while Indonesia to consider and incorporate. still falls short from adopting country c. Resilience is a condition that benefit and wide risk transfer mechanism, it already should credit everyone. Most programs has the different element of the or projects are sectoral in nature and comprehensive risk financing puzzle in are linked to specific performance place indicator and budget accountability. e. Resilient Recovery: community Achieving resiliency is not usually at based housing rehabilitation and the forefront of these indicators. But it reconstruction has become an icon for is important to built within a program Indonesia’s resilient recovery agenda, and project a sense and measures that despite continued challenges  this is can inform sectoral managers if their a reflection that Indonesia is large and program or projects are disaster and complex. climate risk proof. d. Finally, making investment resilience is about finding the additionality to Lessons respond to specific risk. Therefore, investing in resilience has to start There are several key lessons that can be from including risk management in drawn from the implementation of the the planning and design, although in Mainstreaming DRR in Indonesia Program some cases a retrofitting or upgrading that could be useful for further efforts approach could be used. domestically or in other countries, as well as of mainstreaming other subject into Remaining Challenges a country’s development. Few notable While the inclusion of resilience in the lessons include: national development agenda of the next a. That the main enemy of mainstreaming 5 years is a welcome step, implementation DRM/resilience effort is actually a will require systematic, consistent and specific project in DRM itself. While more importantly realistic target. Schematic there are some subject such as risk diagram of the Government of Indonesia’s financing or flood control that are clear resilience goal and program pillars is cut disaster risk management project, presented in the diagram in Figure 2. 12 POLICY AND INSTITUTIONAL STRENGTHENING AN RIS EGR D EM IN K A AT RY ENT T ST SS ED CO OPM SY ES E SM LAN AK TSU QU L N EN AM VE VE RTH I P DE T EA RE NI OF NG VO PTION ERU FLOO H LCA D FLAS MID-TERM DEVELOPMENT TARGET ON DISASTER NIC INFO MANAGEMENT: Reduction of disaster risk index in RMAT ESS growth centers with high risks TRAIN E SPONS AREDN ION S AREAS: IN 120 district/cities with high risk G NCY RE S G PREP IDE YSTEM AND 16 district/cities with medium risk FLO SL LOGIS OD ND E IN G D R E LA N E VELO E TICS AND EM TH STRENG PMEN LAN T FOR D FIRE UGH T, EST S DRO AND IN ON DIS I G ATI AS IT TH T D M ENES S EM ER PR N AN I V ATI O C M NE A IO CT NT FFE EA REA R EVE ING E SU RES S P V OF RO IMP Figure 2. Schematic diagram of resilience goal and program pillar (source: Bappenas 2015) Building Indonesia’s Resilience to Disaster 13 With a goal of reducing disaster risk index As Indonesia is a large archipelagic territory in 120 districts and 16 cities considered with multiple hazards and decentralized as targeted for rapid development governance and public service delivery investment, there are clear opportunity system, building such a massive institutional where investments are being made infrastructure will require non-conventional and resilience can be mainstreamed. approach. Considering itself as a living However, the seven program pillars starting laboratory for Disaster Risk Management, from policy strengthening to thematic the National Disaster Management interventions in disaster prone areas to Authority (BNPB) has adopted a knowledge development of recovery system, requires management approach in building and close coordination between sectoral sustaining local capacity to manage ministry, sub-national governments and disaster risks. The knowledge management other development actors undertaking approach is aimed at ensuring that every the investment to ensure that resilient experience and lesson from a handling and measures (e.g., improved design standard) managing of a disaster event will strengthen are built-in from the beginning. The initial the country’s capacity in managing the next focus on 8 hazards, from earthquake to events. With the support of the Leadership, forest fires, also poses a challenge as Learning, and Innovation (LLI) of the different technical approaches are needed World Bank, the Mainstreaming of DRR in for different combination of hazards. Indonesia Program has supported the BNPB in internalizing the DRM Knowledge Sharing Experience from the Mainstreaming culture and capacity. Readers are advised to DRR in Indonesia Program, however, refer to the accompanying Technical Note suggest that such an ambitious agenda is Number 8 for more detailed information on achievable so long as realistic targets are the DRM Knowledge Management works set, key stakeholders in the investment with the BNPB. are identified, continued support is provided, and concrete measures are well coordinated. The Safe School and Urban DRM-CDD experiences as outlined in this report provide evidence that such systematic processes can be carried out and that Indonesia is ready to gradually scale up it mainstreaming investment. 14 Technical Note 1 RISK INFORMATION FOR MANAGING URBAN FLOOD IN JAKARTA IWAN GUNAWAN, SURYANI AMIN, MOHAMMAD FADLI, YANTISA AKHADI The World Bank Office Jakarta Indonesia Stock Exchange Building, Tower II/12-13th Fl. Jl. Jend. Sudirman Kav.52-53 Printed June, 2016 © 2016 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank 1818 H Street NW Internet: www.worldbank.org This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The bound- aries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Rights and Permissions The material in this work is subject to copyright. Because The World Bank encourages dissemi- nation of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for noncommercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given. Authors: Iwan Gunawan, Suryani Amin Mohammad Fadli Yantisa Akhadi Photo Credit : Dissy Ekapramudita, Rizky Budiarto, Kristadi Setiawan, Suryani Amin Copyright World Bank Design & Layout : Adhi Wibowo First Edition, June 2016 Contents ACRONYMS & ABBREVIATIONS D I. FLOOD RISK IN JAKARTA 1 I.1. CITY PROFILE 1 I.2. FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO JAKARTA’S VULNERABILITY TO FLOODS 2 I.3. HISTORY OF FLOOD OCCURRENCE 3 I.4. FLOOD IMPACT 5 II. INFORMATION GAPS IN MANAGING URBAN FLOOD 6 2.2 INFORMATION MANAGEMENT IN FLOODS 7 III.1. STRENGTHENING RISK INFORMATION 9 III.1. INASAFE – A TOOL TO UNDERSTAND THE IMPACT OF FLOOD 9 III.2. IMPROVING SPATIAL DATA ACCURACY: ADMINISTRATIVE BOUNDARIES & EXPOSURE 10 III.3. DEVELOPING AUTOMATIC DAMAGE AND LOSS ASSESSMENT CALCULATOR 12 III.3. COLLABORATIVE APPROACHES 15 III.4. METHOD AND EFFECTIVENESS 15 III.5. RESULTS - COMPARING PAST AND RECENT PRACTICE OF USING RISK INFORMATION IN DECISION MAKING 16 IV. WAY FORWARD 18 IV.1. PLANNING AND MAINTAINING THE SYSTEM 18 IV.2. DATA MANAGEMENT 18 IV.3. USE OF THE SYSTEM FOR OPERATIONS 19 REFERENCES 21 Risk Information For Managing Urban Flood In Jakarta iii ACRONYMS & ABBREVIATIONS AIFDR Australia Indonesia Facility for Disaster Reduction API Application Programming Interface BIG Badan Informasi Geospatial (Geospatial Information Agency) BPBD Badan Penanggulangan Bencana Daerah DIMS Disaster Information Management System DKI Daerah Khusus Ibukota (Capital Special Region) GFDRR Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery HOT Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team OSM OpenStreetMap SKPD Satuan Kerja Perangkat Dinas (Government Working Unit) UN OCHA United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs FIGURE Figure 1 : City Landscape (World Bank: 2015) 2 Figure 2 : Jakarta River Network And Reservoir Development Plan (Bappeda DKI, 2012 ) 2 Figure 3 : Flood in Jakarta since 2003 (Indonesia Disaster Data and Information ) Figure 4 : Historical Records Of Flood Incident In Jakarta (BPBD DKI Jakarta, 2013) 4 Figure 5 : Comparison Of Flood In 2007 And 2013 (Source: BPBD DKI Jakarta) 4 Figure 6 : Damage and Loss from Flood in Jakarta in 2013 in million rupiah (BPBD DKI Jakarta, 2013) 5 Figure 7 : Flood Information In Different Phases Of Disaster 7 Figure 8 : The Hierarchy Of Administrative Unit In Jakarta (Statistics Of Dki Jakarta Provinces, 2012) 10 Figure 9 : Jakarta 2012 Rw Mapping Series Of Events (Chapman, 2012) 10 Figure 10 : Collaborative Data Input In 2012 Jakarta Rw Mapping (Osm Indonesia) 11 Figure 11 : Example Of Village Map From Jakarta Rw Mapping, Rw Boundaries Are Displayed In Dashed Purple Line 11 Figure 12 : Historical Inundation Map In One Of Rw At Petamburan Village 11 Figure 13 : Flood Damages Components (Inteligensi Risiko, 2015) 12 Figure 14 : Jaksafe Application On Web (Http://Jaksafe.bpbd.jakarta.go.id/) 13 Figure 15: Jaksafe Integration Into Jakarta Smart City Platform (Pt. Geo Enviro Omega, 2015) 13 Figure 16 : User Interface Of Jaksafe In Opendims 14 Figure 17: Jaksafe Code Repository Is Publicly Available At Bitbucket Platform 15 Figure 18: The Use Of Open Source Gis During Jakarta Flood Response (Source: Openstreetmap.id) 16 Figure 19: Regular Flood Report In 2014 (Source: Openstreetmap.id ) 17 Figure 20: Geoportal Of Bpbd Dki Jakarta (http://gis.bpbd.jakarta.go.id/) 17 Figure 21. Simulation Of Areas (Rws) Potentially Affected By Floodwater Coming From The Gaps 20 iv Risk Information For Managing Urban Flood In Jakarta I. FLOOD RISK IN JAKARTA I.1. CITY PROFILE Jakarta, the capital city of one of the The total size of Jakarta city area world’s fastest growing economy, holds is 661.5km2 and is divided to five a very strategic role as the country’s administrative cities of South Jakarta, political and economic center. The Central Jakarta, East Jakarta, West President, Parliament and lines of Jakarta, and North Jakarta, and one government Ministries offices are administrative district, the Thousand all located in Jakarta, as well as the Island, a collection of small 105 islands embassies’ offices, a number of large located to the north of Jakarta. Jakarta international and regional bodies, total population is 10 million within and a large number of civil society the city, while the total population of organizations, which make Jakarta such a the entire metro area is 30 million. strategic place for the Indonesian policy The total metropolitan area is known making and public affairs. On top of this, as Jabodetabek, which stands for the Jakarta also houses important financial Jakarta, Bogor, Depok, Tangerang and institutions such as the Indonesia stock Bekasi. 60 per cent of the economic exchange and the Bank of Indonesia, as activities occurs in Jakarta, which draws well as the corporate headquarters to a millions of people from the surrounding large number of Indonesian companies satellite cities to commute to Jakarta on and multinational corporations, which daily basis. makes it also hold a very strategic role for the country’s economy. Risk Information For Managing Urban Flood In Jakarta 1 Jakarta has 13 rivers that pass through the city and end in Jakarta Bay. Any environmental damage and deforestation around the river banks in Jakarta and Bogor, the satellite city where the upper- rivers are located, will lead to overflowing of rivers. On top of this, Jakarta also has insufficient drainage system, which is worsened by poor waste management practice and the community’s low awareness in terms of waste management leading to a large quantity Figure 1: City Landscape (World Bank: 2015) of garbage that ends in the rivers. Moreover, like any other metropolitan Jakarta needs strong infrastructure area in fast-growing-economic countries, to facilitate its roles as center of it also faces tremendous challenge to government and economic, as well as protect the environment due to increase to accommodate the needs of its own pressure from settlement, and major population towards public facilities, decline of catchment area in and around transportation, utilities network, and so Jakarta due to environmental damage on. around the riverbanks and deforestation. I.2. FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO Most of the major floods in Jakarta, JAKARTA’S VULNERABILITY TO including the one in 2007, were in-land FLOODS flood due to overflowing of Ciliwung and Cisadane rivers from heavy rainfall The underlying factors of Jakarta’s in the upper stream in Bogor city that vulnerability to floods are linked to overtopped the downstream in Jakarta. geographical conditions, infrastructures, environmental damage and low awareness of its population to care for On top of this, around 40% (24,000 ha) of the environment. Jakarta area is lower than the sea surface due to pressure from infrastructures and over-exploitation of groundwater. This leads to coastal flooding or intrusion of sea water, which is due to the topography of the land exposed to flooding, especially in North Jakarta area (BPBD Provinsi DKI Jakarta, 2012). FIGURE 2: JAKARTA RIVER NETWORK AND RESERVOIR DEVELOPMENT PLAN (BAPPEDA DKI, 2012 ) 2 Risk Information For Managing Urban Flood In Jakarta I.3. HISTORY OF FLOOD OCCURRENCE Flood issue in Jakarta has been recognized since the city was first developed by the Dutch Colony government in the 1619. During that period, the Dutch government had designed network of canals to reduce the risk of flood. Nevertheless, the worst flood recorded in history still occurred during colonial period in 1621, 1654, 1976, and 1918 as described by the following figure. 1699 Flood around Ciliwung river in old Batavia soon after the eruption of Salak volcano 1714 Overflowing of Ciliwung River due to deforestation of forest area in Puncak 1854 The New Batavia fell to one meter below sea surface due to the overflowing of Ciliwung River 1918 Flood continued to occur. The Dutch Colony government started the 1942 construction of West Banjir Canal Flood still occurred in Jakarta de- spite of the completion of West Banjir Canal 1996 Flood inundated the capital city. 10 people died. 2002 Noted as the largest flood in the his- tory of Jakarta, 25 people died. 2007 The largest flood in Jakarta in the last 2013 three decades. Flood in Jakarta spread to larger area. FIGURE 3: HISTORICAL RECORDS OF FLOOD INCIDENT IN JAKARTA (BPBD DKI JAKARTA, 2013) Risk Information For Managing Urban Flood In Jakarta 3 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Evacuated Injured Dead Figure : Flood in Jakarta since 2003 (Indonesia Disaster Data and Information ) In the more recent 2003 2004years, 2005floods 2006 occur 2007 2008 The 2009following 2010 2011 shows map 2013spread 2012 the 2014 of 2015 Dead 5 2 0 0 48 6 0 4 every year in some areas in Jakarta since inundated area 0during0 the worst 38 25 floods 0 Injured 3,479 0 0 0 484 144 0 238 0 0 0 0 0 2002. Some Evacuated years 13,936 14,233 than are worse 26,662 1,308 the 522,569 79,169 incident 4,403 in Jakarta 1,316 130 in 3,519 2007 86,651 and 2013. 95,997 15,178 others. The floods which occurred in 2007 and 2013 received the greatest Dead InjuredFigure … presents the comparison Evacuated attention as they inundated almost the of inundated area in 2007 and 2013, entire city area. which shows expansion especially in the northern area of Jakarta. Figure 5: Comparison Of Flood In 2007 And 2013 (Source: Bpbd DKI Jakarta) 4 Risk Information For Managing Urban Flood In Jakarta I.4. FLOOD IMPACT Once a flood occurred, it immediately Based on the table, the cost of Jakarta paralyzed the entire city and this situation flood in 2013 for private sector was 6.3 could last for several days. In Jakarta, the trillion rupiahs, while for the government impact is significant due to the number it cost them 1.2 trillion rupiahs, which of population and infrastructures. A flood means that it cost private sector forces business, government offices, and more than five times compared to the health and education facilities to shut government. Private’s financial sector down entirely, while people were busy suffered the most lost with 3.1 trillion coping with the flood. In February 2007, rupiahs, followed by private trade sector floods have cost the country IDR 5.16 with 2.3 trillion rupiahs. The huge trillion (BPBD Provinsi DKI Jakarta, 2012). impact of flood requires the city to better Furthermore, the following table shows prepare and reduce the risk in the future. the damage and loss that Jakarta had to suffer due to the flood in 2013. Owned by Sector Damage Loss Total Government Private Productive Sector 310,000 3,279,000 3,590,000 530,000 3,059,000 Agriculture 35 100 135 0 135 Trade 200,000 2,628,000 2,828,000 527,000 2,301,000 Industry 92,000 613,000 706,000 0 706,000 Tourism 18,000 37,000 56,000 3,000 52,000 Social and housing 153,000 150,000 303,000 267,000 36,000 Housing 62,000 62,000 124,000 0 124,000 Health 39,000 85,000 124,000 117,000 8,000 Education 51,000 3,000 54,000 26,000 29,000 Infrastructure 224,000 221,000 445,000 328,000 116,000 Transportation 102,000 101,000 203,000 94,000 109,000 Telecommunication 230 1,000 2,000 0 2,000 Energy 116,000 100,000 216,000 216,000 0 Clean water & 6,000 17,000 23,000 18,000 5,000 sanitation Cross Sector 140,000 3,112,000 3,252,000 96,000 3,156,000 Government 92,000 9,000 101,000 101,000 0 Finance 0 3,110,000 3,110,000 0 3,110,000 Religion 6,000 3,000 8,000 0 8,000 Environment 2,000 1,000 3,000 3,000 0 Total 828,000 6,762,000 7,590,000 1,222,000 6,368,000 Figure 6 : Damage and Loss from Flood in Jakarta in 2013 in million rupiah (BPBD DKI Jakarta, 2013) Risk Information For Managing Urban Flood In Jakarta 5 II. INFORMATION GAPS IN MANAGING URBAN FLOOD II.1. POLICY FRAMEWORK a better system and organization of post-disaster response, recovery and Disaster management is a newly rehabilitation. developed paradigm across policy makers in Indonesia. Indonesia first Jakarta flood management, which impact developed Law on Disaster Management is limited to Jakarta Province, also used (Law number 24 of 2007) in 2007 to be managed in ad-hoc manner by the amidst the pressure from a series of local government, in which the Governor massive natural disasters including the used his authority to mobilize emergency Boxing Day Tsunami in 2004 and the supports such as the military and earthquake in Jogjakarta and Central Java Search-and-Rescue team, and in more in 2006. Prior to Law 24/2007, disaster recent years the Disaster Management management was organized on ad-hoc Coordination Body (BAKORNAS PB). basis following a natural disaster. In 2004, The Jakarta Governor’s Regulation however, the Boxing Day Tsunami had 26/2011 concerning the Local Disaster cost significant damages and casualties Management Agency (BPBD DKI Jakarta) occurred, followed by overwhelming was issued to ensure the implementation flow of humanitarian aid, both of which of the Law 24/2007 at local level. The had created tremendous pressures Governor’s Regulation 26/2011 provides from the affected population, civil that the DKI Jakarta Province Secretary society organizations and international holds the position of ex-officio Head of humanitarian community to the BPBD (Article 3), while the Agency bears Government of Indonesia to create mandates such as establishing guidelines 6 Risk Information For Managing Urban Flood In Jakarta and taking leadership in disaster earns its much needed legitimacy to management efforts before, during and coordinate and take leadership in disaster post-disaster (Article 4). management efforts as expected in the legislation that establishes it. As a result, Assuming strong leadership in disaster disaster management continues to be management, as mandated, has always addressed in ad-hoc basis by a single been a difficult task for BPBD DKI Jakarta, institution led by the Province Secretary, as a new institution, it continues to who advises the Governor, instead of struggle with numerous challenges having SKPDs chipped-in into disaster related to institutional building. The management efforts coordinated by disaster management agency continues BPBD DKI Jakarta. to struggle to find a solid role and standing position within a larger policy 2.2 INFORMATION MANAGEMENT IN context and among other government FLOODS working units. In the case of BPBD, the arrangement with having the Province Information management is the backbone Secretary holding the mandate of leading of disaster management. It tells us areas BPBD DKI Jakarta has its up and down that are at risk, the circumstances of sides. The good thing is it provides the emergency situation, the size of impact, BPBD DKI Jakarta with a much needed priority areas for recovery and so on. strong leadership and authority to lead It is urgent to get accurate and timely other SKPDs during emergency response. information before, during and after Having the Province Secretary leading a disaster (Putra, 2014). Each disaster BPBD DKI also helps ensuring that each phase requires different kinds of SKPD implement their part of the task in information that would eventually lead to reducing disaster risk. However, there is a better planning, response and recovery. not much clarity whether such leadership The diverse nature of information also is performed by the Province Secretary means that it will be managed by multiple as part of his/her job as the Province agencies which may not directly relate Secretary or if it is conducted through to the needs of disaster management. BPBD as the Head of BPBD, which could Moreover, there are multiple data policies provide the opportunity to strengthen and formats. The main challenge, thus, BPBD role and legitimacy. lies on how to collect, store and manage the data under data management Moreover, such arrangement with having perspectives. an ex-officio leader also provides little incentive for the Province Secretary to Below are examples of the different assume stronger role as the Head of kinds of information required for flood BPBD with interest to enforce other SKPD management according to disaster to support BPBD and to ensure that BPBD management cycle: Preparedness Emergency Response Recovery Flood prone areas Flood depth Damage and Loss Flood-related infrastructures Affected areas List of beneficiaries Watergate location Casualties River network Logistic needs Land Use Road access Evacuation camp Figure 7: Flood Information in different phases of disaster Risk Information For Managing Urban Flood In Jakarta 7 There are multiple challenges on managing this breadth of information that would include technical and non- technical challenges such as data format, accuracy, human resources, and policy. A robust information system is the core of a disaster management agency, including the one in BPBD DKI Jakarta. The information system is particularly necessary for the decision maker to make better decisions. There are two big challenges that they often have; how to collect the data and how to turn them into useful information. These data are normally located at different offices, using different formats and need higher authorization to retrieve them. Thus, it would require a considerable amount of time to collect them. Another potential source of data comes from mass media and social media channel, yet it still requires additional steps to validate and verify the accuracy of the information. The second big challenge faced by Jakarta is the availability of manpower to manage the information. The effort to recruit skilled information management person often constrained by the availability of the budget and the lengthy time required for the whole process of civil servant’s recruitment. 8 Risk Information For Managing Urban Flood In Jakarta III.1. STRENGTHENING RISK INFORMATION III.1. INASAFE – A TOOL TO schools will be closed; which hospitals UNDERSTAND THE IMPACT OF FLOOD can still take patients; and, what roads will be closed. The software is focused on The absence of technology to assist a examining, in detail, the impacts a single disaster manager to understand the hazard would have on specific sectors. impact of a disaster and how to prepare InaSAFE is designed to use and combine to respond drives to the development existing data from science agencies, local of InaSAFE - a software that produces governments, and communities (www. realistic natural hazard impact scenarios inasafe.org). . InaSAFE was developed jointly by Indonesia (BNPB), Australia (Australian The use of InaSAFE in Jakarta was hold by Government) and the World Bank BPBD DKI Jakarta. During the exercise, (GFDRR). Version 1 was launched in 2012 there was a challenge in the availability and has rolled out ever since. It has been of spatial data. The issue was around the trialed and used to develop scenarios in basis of assumption which was derived some areas in Indonesia. from administrative units in Jakarta . While, at the time InaSAFE was trialed, In Jakarta, the tool has been tested Jakarta had only boundaries information based on the 2007 flood scenario. To up to kelurahan (village) levels. This had effectively prepare for floods, a disaster led to over estimating impacts of flood manager must first understand the likely resulted in InaSAFE. The need of more impacts that need to be managed. For detailed information on boundaries and example, to prepare contingency plans assets was responded through the use of for a severe flood in Jakarta, emergency external tools such as OpenStreetMap. managers need to answer questions This initiative was followed up by a series like: what are the areas likely to be of activity to support the improvement of affected; how many people will need spatial data accuracy, exposure and flood to be evacuated and sheltered; which reporting system. Risk Information For Managing Urban Flood In Jakarta 9 representation of what really happens on the ground. Based on BPBD DKI Jakarta experience, the reports from village heads can provide information regarding the affected areas in detail, including the flood depth down to the smallest administrative unit (RT), but the visualization is only available down to village unit (two levels above RT). This would result in overestimation of the Figure …. : InaSAFE exercise based on the 2007 Jakarta flood actual condition of flood impact when scenario the report is presented in a map because the whole village will be displayed as III.2. IMPROVING SPATIAL DATA affected. ACCURACY: ADMINISTRATIVE BOUNDARIES & EXPOSURE Based on the challenges above, in March 2012, BPBD DKI Jakarta in collaboration Although Indonesia government with BNPB, Australia Indonesia Facility for hierarchy has already been well Disaster Reduction, United Nations Office established based on administrative for the Coordination of Humanitarian units, there are still challenges in Affairs (UNOCHA), Global Facility for visualizing the information. Jakarta Disaster Reduction and Recovery provincial government and the National (GFDRR), World Bank, Humanitarian Mapping Agency (BIG) use village maps OpenStreetMap Team (HOT), and as their most detailed administrative boundary visualization. This would result in difficulties in depicting accurate Training of 70 mapping assistants DKI Jakarta province Creation of baseline map for the Village Head to gather initial data 6 Cities 44 Sub Districts Workshop for Mapping Assistants & Village Head to digitize the information spatially 267 Villages 2,707 RW Data Clean-up 30,300 RT Final Presentation and deliver Figure 8: The Hierarchy Of Administrative Unit In printed maps back to Village Head Jakarta (Statistics Of Dki Jakarta Provinces, 2012) Figure 9: Jakarta 2012 Rw Mapping Series Of Events (Chapman, 2012) 10 Risk Information For Managing Urban Flood In Jakarta University of Indonesia (UI) pioneered an effort to map all of the RW (sub-village) boundaries, critical infrastructures and assets in 267 villages in DKI Jakarta province. The above activities (Figure 5: Jakarta 2012 RW Mapping Series of Events (Chapman, 2012)) were conducted in March-April 2012. It was a successful event, where more than 500 representatives of Jakarta’s 267 villages participated in the workshop and managed to map around 6,000 buildings Figure 10: Collaborative Data Input In 2012 Jakarta Rw and 2,688 RW boundaries (Chapman, Mapping (OSM Indonesia) 2012). All of these data are inputted in OpenStreetMap (OSM), a free and open mapping platform. This choice of platform enables future updates of the data by the community as well as wider utilization of the data in sectors beyond disaster management. There are multiple ways on how these data can be used in disaster management. Oneexample is how the data is used to develop a detailed scenario on estimation of future flood impact. The scenario will assist government and other stakeholders Figure 11: Example Of Village Map From Jakarta Rw to make a better plan anticipating the Mapping, Rw Boundaries Are Displayed In Dashed Purple impact of future disasters. Line The quest to produce more detailed data, in this case RT level, continued in 2014-2015 through a series of event namely Jakarta RT Mapping. The event was led by BPBD DKI Jakarta with the support from AIFDR, HOT and The World Bank. 35 flood prone villages in Jakarta were selected to be mapped down to RT level. This project attempted to map RT boundaries (sub-sub village), roads, and critical infrastructures. RT level mapping has also made capturing proposed evacuation route and evacuation camp that will be used during emergencies Figure 12: Historical Inundation Map In One Of Rw At becomes doable. Additional data such as Petamburan Village local structural risks and historical flood event in every RT were also captured. Risk Information For Managing Urban Flood In Jakarta 11 More detailed data enable more in-depth III.3. DEVELOPING AUTOMATIC analysis of flood occurrences and better DAMAGE AND LOSS ASSESSMENT preparedness for future flooding. CALCULATOR Based on the result from Jakarta RT To get the damage and loss assessment Mapping, there are attempts to replicate (DaLA) of a certain disaster, such as the RT-level detail into all of the villages Jakarta flood, government needs to do in Jakarta through government’s own manual calculation and valuation of the budget. Even when all RTs in Jakarta have flood impact. In 2013, BPBD led the been mapped, the job is never finished, activity of DaLA estimation for Jakarta due to the nature of the dynamic urban flood with support from the World Bank. environment. It took months to result the estimation. Figure 8 shows the example of one of the The reason was similar to what have results from RT Mapping. RT boundaries been described in chapter 2, where the are represented by green dotted line. data were scattered across different It also shows location of temporary agencies in the government. The quality evacuation centers and public facilities, of data was also poor as they did not such as health facilities, government represent the whole profile of assets offices, and religious facilities in the area. but only partially recorded. In 2014, Using this information, potential flood BPBD DKI Jakarta tried to work on the risk can be more accurately identified and cost estimation based on previous RW stakeholders can give resource priority to mapping data as well as data from other the area with high risk. agencies. FLOOD DAMAGES TANGIBLE INTANGIBLE COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL RESIDENTIAL DAMAGES AND PUBLIC SECTOR SOCIAL DAMAGES DAMAGES` DIRECT INDIRECT DIRECT INDIRECT DAMAGES DAMAGES DAMAGES DAMAGES INDIRECT DIRECT DIRECT INDIRECT DIRECT COMMERCIAL/ PROPERTY HOUSE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY SOCIAL DAMAGES INDUSTRIAL Figure 13: Flood Damages Components (Inteligensi Risiko, 2015) 12 Risk Information For Managing Urban Flood In Jakarta The plan to develop automatic DaLA calculator becomes possible by using InaSAFE software. The new software, called JakSAFE is augmenting InaSAFE with the ability to produce DaLA estimation from Jakarta flood based on the flood report data from BPBD DKI Jakarta’s information system and OpenStreetMap platform. In the development it has successfully solved several technical challenges on data Figure 14 : JakSAFE application on web (http://jaksafe.bpbd. jakarta.go.id/) format and improved performance for complex calculations while maintaining ease of use. JakSAFE logic is developed from overlaying hazard information with JakSAFE is a system designed to estimate exposed assets. In late 2015, the JakSAFE the damage and loss due to a flood prototype was launched and can provide event in DKI Jakarta. JakSAFE estimates rapid DaLA in a given time period of financial damage and losses due to flood flood. The platform was also integrated generated from estimation of a reported into Jakarta Smart City platform to flood event via BPBD team, people’s provide information on damage and report, social media, and confirmed loss due to floods. The availability of by field surveyors. The report is then detailed administrative boundaries aggregated by RW’s of Villages and information of Jakarta has enabled a attached to certain height of inundated more accurate and realistic estimation. and flood long (in days). The activities produced Jakarta exposure Figure 15: Jaksafe Integration Into Jakarta Smart City Platform (Pt. Geo Enviro Omega, 2015) Risk Information For Managing Urban Flood In Jakarta 13 Figure 16 : User Interface Of Jaksafe In Opendims information - a dataset consisting of land Therefore, the field survey is conducted parcels and building footprints gathered in order to collect the information of and processed from the City Land assets that are exposed by the flood, Administration Agency (Dinas Penataan value of damages and losses and Kota). distribution of flood points. The development of JakSAFE passed The existing JakSAFE needs supply throughout a few phases. The first of information produced by another version of JakSAFE has been improved to system called DIMS. DIMS publishes the get more accurate estimation. In version API that can be consumed by another 1.1, JakSAFE follows the administrative system. The challenge is on the quality boundaries to figure out the inundation of the existing API as it is not consistent area. For example, if there is a report with the raw data. The existing DIMS of flood in RW 05, the existing system is a closed-source software that cannot will consider the whole area in RW 05 be easily enhanced. The main function flooded. Therefore, JakSAFE will mark of DIMS is to record the disaster event that all the assets in the RW 05 to be report gathered from various information considered as affected. Then it will sources such as field surveyors, instant have the value of Damage and Loss. messaging groups, twitter or other useful Suspected flooding area is detailing resources and then to be confirmed by further in the latest version. The method the command center (coordinating with of determining suspected polygon flood Villages) so BPBD can publish the official area is done by contour localization version of the disaster event in Jakarta. method or using hydrodynamic models. The DIMS is in progress to transform into Open-DIMS to make it more manageable Sample result of estimation has been and inclusive. This system will later be compared with the real information integrated with JakSAFE, Command gathered from field survey data. The Center (that will record the manual water DaLA result has also verified with the real level in water gates), sensors (weather events and real damage and losses value. stations and automatic water level 14 Risk Information For Managing Urban Flood In Jakarta recorders), and it will serve Smart City potential scale-up in different location through the API. and hazards. In the recent development phase, The same nature of collaboration is JakSAFE will be merged with this new also demonstrated through the use DIMS. The previous JakSAFE is not yet of crowdsourcing platform and open fulfill the end-to-end business process source tools. Most of the boundary and of Rehabilitation and Reconstruction infrastructure data used in the tools Division in BPBD. It only consists of ad- above are retrieved from OpenStreetMap hoc reports in the form of tabular data. (OSM), the biggest crowdsourcing and JakSAFE has been newly enhanced. The open spatial platform. In April 2016, more feature now covers not only damage than 2.4 million users are registered in and loss estimation and exposure OSM and around 25,000 users actively identification but also extends to contribute every month . InaSAFE and development function for Rehabilitation JakSAFE are both open source projects, & Reconstruction module on Open-DIMS. where contributors around the world can use, learn the code, develop their own III.3. COLLABORATIVE APPROACHES version and improve the software. All of the efforts to strengthen the risk III.4. METHOD AND EFFECTIVENESS information presented above are the result of institutional collaboration to There are several methods used in reduce flood impact in Jakarta. Each strengthening the risk information of these institutions contributes their components in Jakarta flood expertise and resources to overcome management. It involves strengthening one of Jakarta most frequent disasters. human resources and software used by a The goal is to participate in providing disaster management agency. solutions that can sustainably reduce future disaster. These institutions also On the initial formation of BPBD DKI benefit from the lessons learnt and Jakarta, it relied on assistance from international institutions, such as Figure 17: Jaksafe Code Repository Is Publicly Available At Bitbucket Platform Risk Information For Managing Urban Flood In Jakarta 15 Figure 18: The Use Of Open Source Gis During Jakarta Flood Response (Source: Openstreetmap.id) World Bank, UN OCHA and AIFDR/HOT, Various data and software developed in to manage its geospatial data. These the chapters above have also transformed institutions provided seconded geospatial Jakarta disaster management capability information management officer to by using collaborative approaches versus assist during emergency response and conventional hiring of data or software produce maps of the flood situation, consultants. The use of open source which significantly supported emergency software significantly reduces the cost of relief operations. In the background, adoption and the effort can be focused institutional support and expert advice on the use of the software rather than its were also provided for the flood development aspect. analysis. Later it was extended to flood preparedness phase, by providing a team The use of participatory geospatial data of expert and skilled mappers for the RT has been consulted with the national Mapping project in 2014-2015. The same mapping authority (BIG), yet there is team also supported the flood response no prior experience from the agency to in 2015. deal with sub-village level boundaries or even beyond that. Therefore, Jakarta In parallel with this progress, BPBD is the first to initiate such detailed DKI has also started recruiting its own level data. Law number 11 of 2011 on information management personnel. Geospatial Information also allows the Starting with GIS officers in 2014 and use of multiple geospatial data sources in then continued with more GIS officers disaster management. and data management analysts in 2015. They have also continuously received III.5. RESULTS - COMPARING PAST transfer of knowledge from international AND RECENT PRACTICE OF USING institutions to increase the capacity as RISK INFORMATION IN DECISION well as to ensure the sustainability of MAKING the knowledge acquired in the previous Looking at the past challenges and the floods. efforts to overcome them, there are 16 Risk Information For Managing Urban Flood In Jakarta significant progresses in the area of information management to support decision making. First, a lot of manual and conventional processes are replaced by information system. In the past, disaster management personnel needed to record flood report in the spreadsheet and then used the aggregated number as an official report to the decision maker, this is exemplified by the figure below. The tabular format is useful to capture and aggregate flood report, it is also FIGURE 20: GEOPORTAL OF BPBD DKI JAKART used to identify flood prone villages/sub- (HTTP://GIS.BPBD.JAKARTA.GO.ID/) villages and then develop flood mitigation and preparedness strategy in the future. Yet there are challenges on how the the update on the extent of flood down manual input is prone to error and it is until sub-village administrative boundary. hard to generate automated analysis out In 2015, this effort leveraged further into of the format above. The development the development of geospatial portal so of Disaster Information Management that the map products and the source System (DIMS) in 2013 was aimed to can be stored and managed. The use of solve it by capturing the real-time flood web-based geo-portal ensures easier reports into the information system. The access for the stakeholders. This would system can process and provide quick certainly change the paradigm from data analysis of the flood situation. user to data provider. In 2014, BPBD DKI Jakarta started to The use of geospatial portal enables move into map from tabular report to more advance analysis of flood not communicate flood condition to the only internally but also by external public as well as for decision makers. stakeholders through its data sharing During heavy rainfall, the agency features. This will eventually lead to periodically released flood map to give better decision making before, during and after emergency. FIGURE 19: REGULAR FLOOD REPORT IN 2014 (SOURCE: OPENSTREETMAP.ID ) Risk Information For Managing Urban Flood In Jakarta 17 IV.WAY FORWARD IV.1.PLANNING AND MAINTAINING THE working on opening up its data and SYSTEM information to general public. DIMS is now in the process of being upgraded Establishing a system should not be the into OpenDIMS to support broader end goal as the system is expected to collaboration with existing and potential grow and adapt to user requirements and partners. changing environment. There are several ways on how current progress can be IV.2. DATA MANAGEMENT further leveraged. Existing administrative With the information system built and boundary and infrastructure data needs running, the next step is to have stronger to be periodically updated to reflect the internal capacity to manage the data real condition. So far only 35 out of 267 that are both produced internally and villages have the most detailed data down from external sources. This is something to RT level. This needs to be expanded to beyond most of the disaster management cover the entire village, with priority on agencies in Indonesia, where normally the disaster prone villages. Current internal the data management function is government funding mechanism will require outsourced to external companies or couple of years to continue this expansion consultants. This does not mean that and data update. Alternatively, collaboration data management needs to be closed with national and international institutions and isolated. It implies that collaboration could be sought to speed up the process. between internal capacity and external Information of assets is dynamic. They will institutions will result in bigger impact change as the city changes. Thus, a system as what have been demonstrated in the that enables data sharing and updating previous chapters. among agencies should be developed. Activities that encourage collaboration In the spirit of open data and open between institutions need to be platform, BPBD DKI Jakarta is currently integrated into data and information 18 Risk Information For Managing Urban Flood In Jakarta management agenda in the future. The goal is to have strong data management capability through collaboration among partners. This will eventually benefit all parties involved and result in a safer future for all. Public access to information is crucial. The Information should made accessible and visually communicable to people. It is expected that the information will benefit people to manage themselves to prepare before and during an event of disaster. V.3. USE OF THE SYSTEM FOR OPERATIONS The availability of accurate spatial data on boundaries, contour delineation, flood response assets and system for DaLA calculator provides a comprehensive basis to utilize the entire risk information tools for operational purposes. Different applications can take advantage of the data and system already built to respond to specific operational needs such as functional analysis of the existing flood control and mitigation system, or linking flood event monitoring and reporting to the citizen reporting application of the Jakarta Smart City. As an illustration of the application for functional review of the flood mitigation system, the city of Jakarta recently completed a series of measures to increase the capacity of the Ciliwung- Gunung Sahari canal through dredging and heightening of the embankment (see Figure 15A). While essential construction works have been completed, the canal system still has gaps in several locations due to the existence of permanent infrastructure crisscrossing the canal such as railroad and major roads that cannot be easily modified (see Figure 15B). Using a combination of various geospatial data including: field survey of the gap Risk Information For Managing Urban Flood In Jakarta 19 points, digital elevation model, cross (RWs) can also be used to alert the section from as-built-drawing of the citizens and increase their preparedness. canal, flood hydrograph and tidal data, and the RW maps, spatial distribution of The City of Jakarta currently also utilizes the potentially flood affected areas can an application that allows citizens to be identified (Figure 16). Based on this report various complaints, including the analysis, urgent measures to prevent occurrence of flood, to the Jakarta Smart and reduce the impacts of this predicted City portal (smartcity.jakarta.go.id). This flood/leakage could be properly planned application is also being used by the and carried out. Such measures may city administration to respond to such include construction of temporary complaint leading to the system being structure such as parapet wall to block very active and current. The application the leakage, or deployment of mobile also allows city officials to report back pump in areas where inundations are on the problems that are being handled expected. The resulted maps and lost of (Yellow color) and those that have been the potentially affected neighborhoods resolved (Green color) as shown in Figure 17. Such a dynamic system provides real- time source of live data that can be used to validate flood occurrence. All yellow flags, for instance, could be interpreted as confirmed flood report that can be used to generate official flood inundation maps more frequently during the time when there are many reports received on the same general geographic locations. Figure 21. Simulation of areas (RWs) potentially affected by floodwater coming from the gaps 20 Risk Information For Managing Urban Flood In Jakarta REFERENCES BPBD DKI Jakarta. (2013). Penilaian Kerusakan dan Kerugian, serta Kebutuhan Pemulihan Pasca Banjir di Jakarta Pada Januari 2013. Jakarta, DKI Jakarta, Indonesia. BPBD Provinsi DKI Jakarta. (2012). Buku RPB Prov DKI Jakarta 2013 - 2017. Retrieved from BPBD Provinsi DKI Jakarta: http://bpbd.jakarta.go.id/assets/attachment/ study/RPB_DKI_Jakarta_Final.pdf Chapman, K. (2012). Community Mapping for Exposure in Indonesia. Retrieved from OpenStreetMap Indonesia: http://openstreetmap.id/docs/Community_Mapping_ for_Exposure_in_Indonesia_EN.pdf Inteligensi Risiko. (2015). Laporan Kegiatan Pengembangan Perangkat Lunak Penilaian Kerusakan dan Kerugian Pasca Banjir di Jakarta (JakSAFE). Jakarta, Indonesia. Putra, B. S. (2014). Flood Information Management System During 2014 Flood. Retrieved from Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery: https://www. gfdrr.org/sites/gfdrr/files/EAP_Session%203_Mr%20Bambang%20Suryaputra_ JakartaFlood%20Information%20Management.pdf Statistics of DKI Jakarta Provinces. (2012). Jakarta in Figures. Retrieved from Statistics of DKI Jakarta Provinces: http://www.jakarta.go.id/v2/jakarta_dalam_angka/ browse/2012 http://bappedajakarta.go.id/?page_id=1270 http://dibi.bnpb.go.id/ http://inasafe.org http://openstreetmap.id/en/proses-pemetaan-banjir-jakarta-dengan-perangkat-lunak- bebas-terbuka-qgis-2-0/ http://gis.bpbd.jakarta.go.id/ http://jaksafe.bpbd.jakarta.go.id Risk Information For Managing Urban Flood In Jakarta 21 22 Risk Information For Managing Urban Flood In Jakarta Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia Trias Aditya, Iwan Gunawan Suryani Amin, Hoferdy Zawani, Ruby Mangunsong Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia Trias Aditya, Iwan Gunawan Suryani Amin, Hoferdy Zawani, Ruby Mangunsong The World Bank Office Jakarta Jakarta Stock Exchange Building, Tower II/12-13th Fl. Jl. Jend. Sudirman Kav. 52-53 Jakarta 12190, Indonesia This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Rights and Permissions The material in this work is subject to copyright. Because The World Bank encourages dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for noncommercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given. ISBN 978-979-16876-9-0 Authors: Trias Aditya Iwan Gunawan Hoferdy Zawani Suryani Amin Ruby Mangunsong Acknowledgements We would like to thank BPBD Sleman, Bappeda Sleman, Bappeda Yogyakarta, Bappeda Balikpapan, Sleman Land Office (BPN), Yogyakarta Land Office (BPN), and Balikpapan Land Office (BPN) for their great partnerships and their supporting technical data. We also would like to thank surveying and mapping teams of Merapi, Winongo, and Ampal studies for their helps. Finally, we would like to thank Prof. Dr. Budi Mulyanto, M.Sc for his valuable inputs. Photo Credit: Trias Aditya Design & layout: Indra Irnawan, Adhi Wibowo May 2017 PREFACE The purpose of this technical note on collaborative mapping is to serve as a reference and guidance in applying collaborative mapping approach to support the land governance and detailed spatial planning. Surveying and mapping activities are indispensable activities to provide detailed geospatial information as a good foundation to develop diagnostics and problem solving alternatives in multi-faceted urban development that deals with disaster management, slum and poverty eradication. The strategies and techniques for coordinated data compilation, validation and improvements involving government officers and community representatives through collaborative mapping are presented in three different case studies in post Merapi eruption rehabilitation, Winongo and Ampal river area redevelopment. Those three case studies represent their own environmental problems due to either natural disaster (e.g., in case of Merapi) or climate driven flood inundation. The maps and geospatial information produced are seen as unified base canvases for supporting detailed spatial planning. The provision and quality evaluation of base maps in collaborative mapping process are fundamental for accelerating geospatial data compilation and validation through participatory interaction. The information derived can contribute towards integrated and comprehensive spatial planning, disaster management, urban and rural land governance and development at site and local level. We hope that this technical note can be used as technical reference to many on-going national initiatives toward one map policy implementation. We would like to thank our local and national partners in Merapi area, Winongo and Ampal Riverbank during the implementation of pilot projects, the showcases reported in this technical note. Authors, May, 2017 Content I. Context........................................................................................................................................................................1 I.1. Definition.........................................................................................................................................................1 I.2. Rationale.........................................................................................................................................................1 I.3. Drivers..............................................................................................................................................................3 I.4. Gap....................................................................................................................................................................3 I.5. Reasonable Deliverables.........................................................................................................................4 II. Method.......................................................................................................................................................................9 II. 1. Approach......................................................................................................................................................9 II. 2. 1. Preliminary Survey................................................................................................................. 10 II. 2. 2. Use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Mapping When Necessary ............................. 11 II. 2. 3. Field Survey .............................................................................................................................. 11 II. 3. Cross agencies Data Collection and Compilation.................................................................... 11 II. 4. Participatory Mapping......................................................................................................................... 11 II. 5. Cartographic Work and Spatial Analysis ..................................................................................... 12 III. Base Map Options............................................................................................................................................. 13 IV. Case Studies....................................................................................................................................................... 15 IV. 1. Mount Merapi post-disaster recovery.......................................................................................... 15 IV. 2. Risk-Sensitive Urban Planning of Winongo River, Yogyakarta, Indonesia...................24 IV. 3. Risk-Sensitive Urban Planning of Ampal River, Balikpapan...............................................30 V. Utilization of Collaborative Mapping Projects........................................................................................37 V. 1. Land Consolidation in Mount Merapi’s Post Disaster Recovery........................................37 V. 2. Spatial Decision-Support in Risk-Sensitive Urban Development .....................................39 V. 2. 1. Calculating Building Density............................................................................................... 41 V. 2. 2. Calculating Imaginary Demarcation Lines on Riverside Areas...........................42 V. 2. 3. Identifying the Location of Waste Water Treatment Infrastructures.................45 V. 2. 4. Identifying Where to Put Hydrant ...................................................................................46 V. 2. 5. Calculting Best Evacuation Routes................................................................................. 47 V. 2. 6. Identifying Land Ownership...............................................................................................48 VI. Lesson Learned.................................................................................................................................................50 VI.1. Advantages...............................................................................................................................................50 VI. 1. 1. Efficient Way to Gather Good Quality Data.................................................................50 VI. 1. 2. Strengthening Spatial Awareness..................................................................................50 VI. 1. 3. Extending Possibilities and Outreach...........................................................................50 VI. 2. Real Challenges.................................................................................................................................... 51 References.................................................................................................................................................................52 Abbreviations & Accronyms...............................................................................................................................53 List of Figure Figure 1. A sequence of activities done in collaborative mapping process............................ 2 Figure 2. Collaborative mapping framework: the mapping processes and the product connects the trigger and the gap to provide requirements for effective and efficient disaster risk and climate change management................. 3 Figure 3. General flow of the processes............................................................................................... 8 Figure 4. GPS survey activity...................................................................................................................10 Figure 5. Participatory mapping workshops for validating and updating geometry and data attributes....................................................................................................................12 Figure 6. Rationale for conducting Merapi Detailed Risk Zone Mapping.............................16 Figure 7. Footprints of Merapi lava flow..............................................................................................16 Figure 8 Stages in collaborative mapping in post merapi eruption........................................ 17 Figure 9 Field validation activities.........................................................................................................18 Figure 10 Participatory mapping to validate the draft of maps at hamlet level....................19 Figure 11 Existing data available ............................................................................................................21 Figure 12 Sample of resulted detailed risk map...............................................................................22 Figure 13 The new settlement houses located in safer areas.....................................................23 Figure 14 Rationale for Winongo Disaster Risk and Climate Change Mapping...................24 Figure 15 Steps undertaken and parties involved in the mapping processes......................25 Figure 16 Mosaic orthophoto and DSM derived from UAV imagery........................................27 Figure 17 DSM (top left), Contour map (top right), Cross sections produced in the project (bottom).........................................................................................................................28 Figure 18 Land parcels with the legal status are differentiated with different hues, the red one indicates blocks traditionally registered as the Sultanate Ground .....................................................................................................................28 Figure 19 Some spatial analyses produced from the project......................................................29 Figure 21 Rationale for Ampal Collaborative Mapping Project..................................................30 Figure 20 Condition of Ampal River riverbank that experiences rapid development........30 Figure 22 One of collaborative mapping product on Flood and Landslide susceptibility ...............................................................................................................................33 Figure 23 Steps undertaken and parties involved in collaborative mapping process.......34 Figure 24 Flood prone areas map...........................................................................................................36 Figure 25 The resulted collaborative map of Pangukrejo, Umbulharjo...................................38 Figure 26 Using the resulted collaborative map (top), land parcels were identified and their boundaries were designed producing parcel-based block plan design in land consolidation project..................................................................................39 Figure 27 Flood inundation nearby the Ampal riverbank is frequent experience for local residents especially when heavy rain shower the city more than two hours......................................................................................................................................40 Figure 28 The green aggregated parcel blocks were identified as parcels potential to be included in land consolidation project to support city infrastructure improvement ..............................................................................................................................40 Figure 29 Density buidling heatmap of Segment 1 and 2 (left) as well as 3 and 4 (right) of Winongo River..........................................................................................................41 Figure 30 The demarcation lines of 15 meters right and left from the edge of the river on segment 1 and 2 (left) as well as 3 and 4 (right)..................................42 Figure 31 Buildings that virtually are fully within or partially within the 15 m of riverbanks zone ....................................................................................................................43 Figure 32 Land parcels (with various riights i.e. use rights/HP, private ownerships/HM, building use rights/HGB) that virtually are fully within or partially within (i.e. intersect) the 15 m of riverbanks zone ................. 44 Figure 33 The proposed location of IPAL to be installed in Segment 5 and 6 (left) as well as 7 and 8 (right) based on their access and the topography..................45 Figure 34 Proposed community hydrant installation in segment 1 and 2 (left) as well as 3 and 4 (right).........................................................................................................46 Figure 35 Best evacuation routes for Segments 1 and 2 (left) as well as 3 and 4 (right)..............................................................................................................................................47 Figure 36 Flood extent and threatened houses ...............................................................................48 Figure 37 Land ownership situation in Winongo river....................................................................49 List of Table Table 3.1 The scale of maps and its practical use............................................................................13 Table 3.2 Types of data sources for producing base layer in collaborative mapping........14 Table Numbers of buildings that are fully or partially selected in case of urban arrangement based upon riverside zonation (15 m.......................................43 Table. Composition of land tenureships based on their right types in the study area.....................................................................................................................................49 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia “Collaborative mapping creates a unified agreed- upon local basic and thematic maps usable to support planning and disaster management” 1 I. Context The chapter provides an introduction to the concept of collaborative mapping and justification on how the approach could be used to respond to the need for detailed geospatial data for planning and problem solving. The chapter elaborates the framework and sequencial process to come up with a solution. I.1. Definition on the design, process, and methods in utilizing geospatial data and explotatory tools as well Collaborative mapping denotes the process in as structured discussions in a community to producing a reference local map presenting basic produce spatial planning and problem solving as and thematic geospatial information that were well as decision making (Balram and Dragicevic acquired and compiled through joint survey and 2008). Collaborative mapping here is seen as an mapping activities involving local government, advancement of participatory mapping design and community and relevant stakeholders. The processes in order to ensure the acceptace and use collaborative processes encompass a series of joint of community maps into actions. data acquisition and compilation, synchronization, verification and presentation using corrected aerial imageries or high resolution satellite imageries as I.2. Rationale the base images. Collaborative mapping’s area The lack of detailed spatial data required for of interest may start from the smallest unit area supporting spatial plan and disaster responses (e.g. neighbourhood areas) to larger area (e.g., hinders quick and accurate responses. Yet, many block, corridor, or village) in a district or city blocks. data acquisition and compilation initiatives can Collaborative mapping processes may involve easily be found across the agencies, especially heterogeneous data (in the same level of detail) , after a disaster event, on which the data various organizations, different perspectives, but accessibility and its quality differ from one agency the product should be used as a single reference for to another agency. It has always been a challenging all parties, yet must comply with geometry quality task to deal with heterogeneity of the data and their requirements set out by the national mapping quality, avoiding possibilities for data sharing and agency. the joint use of the data. This can be exemplified in many disaster events. Right after the disaster The notion of collaborative mapping here should strikes, disaster responders and managers had be differentiated with participatory mapping. difficulties to find and access detailed map including Participatory mapping emerges as a tool to provide impacted areas, elevation data and detailed map convenient ways for community members to engage depicting exposure information such as buildings, and participapte in planning or decision-making infrastructures, land uses. These detailed map and processes (see Aditya 2010). Kryger (2002) specified other spatially referenced information are needed that participatory mapping utilizes a wide range by disaster responders and managers to support of graphics visualization to encourage community their plans and needs for coordination in the phase participation in expressing spatially referenced views of disaster responses, relief and reconstruction. and deliberation (Rinner 2001, Cai and Yu 2009). In case that the access is not a problem, the data While participatory mapping focuses on methods might be available partially from one agency but and processes in producing community-based maps might not be relevant to be integrated with other (Craig and Elwood 1998, Sieber 2006, Chambers specific data from another agency because of the 2006, Elwood 2006), collaborative mapping here different level of detail. focuses on methods and processes to facilitate integration of government and community maps The provision of a basic map seen as a base through field verification, structured discussions canvas in collaborative map production is crucial. involving community members and government An agreed and unified base map is the key asset to agencies. enable detailed thematic information integration. In that way, critical issues to city/district development The scientific foundation for Collaborative mapping such as flood risk mapping and slum mapping can closely related to Collabortive GIS which centered be draped into and analysed accordingly. 2 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia That prerequisite map is important to be available at The collaborative approach that follows this track of a city level in order to ensure that community-based actions has been proven to be effective and efficient spatial plan and government plan are using the in answering the need for a single reference map same base map. As a such, the collaborative map to be used for planning and development in post canvas mashes up community and field data with Merapi eruptions. The activities were done in 4 local government /technical agencies data, enabling months in total and the result is then used by local one map policy at local level (top-down and bottom- agencies, village officers, land office to support up data integration). The product of a collaborative many planning and development activities, including mapping activity can then be used to support land recertification for burnt areas. Collaborative response and development program such as detail maps that were produced were checked by both spatial planning, disaster risk planning, and land community representatives and local government/ development. The application of collaborative officers. Community representatives who inherit map represents in this book is focused on the local knowledge contribute to data acquisition and preparation of a detailed plan layout with oriented verification through multiple participatory mapping to, among others, the disaster risk reduction. sessions (see more in Chapter IV). Figure 1 depicts a sequence of activities executed Local managers/officers who own underlying in the collaborative mapping process. The activities data and information contribute to the provision involve various stakeholders including the local of secondary data and participate in the data disaster office, the local planning office, village verification activity. Collaborative maps are the officers, a community group of settlement planning, outcome of the integration of top-down and bottom- starting from data acquisition till validation. In each up approaches. It offers more trusted and accurate stages (acquisition-synchronization-verification- map representations than just participatory maps. dissemination), discussions and inputs are It creates a new information value attached to the annotated to geospatial features seen on the map, collaborative map which can be seen as a joint enabling the working map as a proxy to facilitate effort accomplished by various agencies and groups government-community communication and map in establishing a formalized geospatial information updating. reference to support city/district developments. Figure 1. A sequence of activities done in collaborative mapping process 3 I.3. Drivers I.4. Gap Local government is often required to provide Poor detailed geospatial data availability and appropriate and accurate spatial plans either in data management (e.g., low data availability, data response to disaster events or in support of city with varied quality, managed by different users, redevelopment. Unfortunately, as found in many not ready for spatial adjustment, lack capacity on cities and districts, those spatial plans are difficult spatial data management) cause local government to be gained as different data quality from various and community fail to deliver appropriate and agencies exist. Using existing practices and accurate responses and planning. For example, protocols, the data compilation and synchronization before Winongo collaborative map is available, will take place very slowly. In addition, the basic the province and local governments of Yogyakarta map and thematic information are either not had difficulties to calculate which and how many accessible or available. Yet, they have not been land parcels and buildings that will be affected by validated by community and relevant stakeholders. riverbank readjustment when the project is done. For that reason, in order to produce validated maps and information, government maps and community- based mapping needs to be integrated. This is where collaborative mapping offers a solution to fulfil the gap, as illustrated in Figure 2. Figure 2 Collaborative mapping framework: the mapping processes and the product connects the trigger and the gap to provide requirements for effective and efficient disaster risk and climate change management TRIGGER GAP REQUIREMENTS No detailed, accessible Spatial rezonation for Maps showing actual and suitable map is directly impacted flood condition related to existing available to and slum prone areas has physical environments facilitate spatial to be done immediately including built- areas, rezonation infrastructures & hazards SOLUTION Collaborative Mapping offers a solution that fill the gap 4 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia I.5. Reasonable Deliverables C. It supports the implementation of National One Map Policy (Single Reference, Database and System) at a city level, thus turning OMP into Some deliverables that can be produced from actions in support of local government. conducting collaborative mapping activities include: As the local government shows high A. Local government recognizes unified, agreed- commitment, the collaborative map fulfils upon geospatial datasets suited to planning and the demand for data access and data uses disaster management theme in a specified area. mandated by the Presidential Regulation No. Local government must be encouraged to 9/2016 about Acceleration on Implementation of take actions to use and endorse uses of good One Map Policy at Scale 1:50,000. Indonesia’s quality of geospatial data as a unified and One Map Policy is an effort to establish a formal resource in dealing with multipurpose unified, agreed-upon geospatial dataset (e.g., city planning and development problems. The land use, land tenure, disaster areas) that verification and involvement of national mapping informs decision making at the sub-national agency, in case the basic imagery is not with levels. A unified, agreed-upon set of thematic them, in quality assurance is crucial to justify geospatial datasets could benefit Indonesia the appropriateness of the imageries used in in many ways. By increasing integration and collaborative map. synchronization of geospatial boundaries and areas across themes, it would help avoid unnecessary overlapping claims, reducing B. It helps the government to realize development conflicts and inconsistencies. This is the first plans, to better address poverty, and to reduce step toward the creation of a unified basic map disaster vulnerability. of state lands, at least at scale 1:50,000, which Government has been troubled with currently not available. Critical to the One Map implementing development plans due to low efforts is to operationalize the data sharing quality of spatial datasets and management. mechanism that promotes (as much as is One map would help them reduce geographical possible) transparency, consistency, information uncertainty leading to increasing transparency sharing, and accountability. Acceleration to for investments, better program aligning, the provision of both basic map and thematic well targeting of beneficiaries and helping for information that suited to on map policy thus effective program’s monitoring and evaluation. becomes inevitable. Collaborative mapping support One Map Policy efforts by creating a unified agreed-upon local basic and thematic map (larger scale map than 1:50,000), usable to support sub-district and village-based spatial planning and disaster management. 5 What is collaborative mapping activity? Collaboration is a joint activity that involves multi parties in a mutual working group that involves task sharing and synchronization that aims to achieve an ultimate goal. In participation ladder perspective, collaboration is an activity that is one step ahead from coordination and two steps ahead from cooperation. Collaborative mapping in this case study is a kind of mash up that combine various resources into one final product which is agreed map on disaster zone, sub village boundary, and buildings for spatial planning purposes. What to collaborate? Here is example from Merapi Collaborative mapping in 2013: Data: Aerial photos, satellite imageries, GIS data, community spatial plans Tools: GPS/GNSS geodetic type for accurate positioning, GIS software (QGIS), and Mobile GPS Methods: Scientific data processing and participatory mapping/planning Stakeholders: BPBD DIY/Yogyakarta Provincial Disaster Management Agency (coordinator), BPPTKG/Research and Technology Development of Geological Disaster, BIG/Geospatial Information Agency, Bappeda Sleman/ Sleman District Development Planning Agency, BPBD Sleman/Sleman District Disaster Management Agency, DPPD Sleman/Sleman District land Control Department, BPN Sleman/Sleman District Land Office, PU ESDM DIY/Yogyakarta Provincial Public Works, Energy and Natural Resources Agency, Bappeda DIY/Yogyakarta Provincial Development Planning Agency, Balai Besar Serayu Opak/Serayu Opak River Basin Development Agency, Government of Umbulharjo, Kepuharjo, Glagaharjo villages of Cangkringan sub-district, REKOMPAK/Community-based Settlement Rehabilitation and Reconstruction, and university researchers 6 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia One Map Policy at a Glance The One Map Policy term has been known since 2011 but the action has been slow. There is a new momentum following the July 2014 election of President Joko Widodo. One Map was first introduced under the President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono Administration and was included in the Law on Geospatial Information (Law No. 4/2011). President Joko Widodo identified One Map Policy as a priority after taking office and re-confirmed his commitment as part of his CoP21 speech. In February 2016, the President issued a Presidential Regulation (9/2016) mandating acceleration of the implementation of One Map Policy at 1:50,000 of scale. Although not directly usable for collaborative mapping and detailed mapping at local level, this policy has been very positive to accelerate to the notion of one data for one development purpose. A working group lead by the Coordinating Ministry of Economics has been defining the scope of work for accelerating One Map Policy implementation that includes: • Compilation of thematic data collected from agencies and local governments, • Verification of data for data integration • Synchronization within integrated data The Geospatial Information Agency (BIG) chairs the Implementation Team, facilitating reconciliation upon conflicting data that requires cross-agency coordination. Coordination means collecting base maps and networks of survey control point and integrating thematic land information from various sources. Currently the Ministries of Energy and Mineral Resources, Environment and Forestry, Agriculture, Marine and Fisheries, Public Works and Housing, and Transportation, as well as the National Land Agencies all have authority to make sectoral maps. Under One Map, these agencies will continue to produce, maintain and update their respective datasets, but will make them accessible through a geoportal managed by BIG. 7 Objectives permits from transportation agency). The process to create the map can be divided into two main work, It mainly aims at producing a single yet unified technical work and non-technical work. Technical detailed map representing basic layers of the city/ work covers the development of orthorectified district (existing buildings and settlement areas, imageries (when the data has not been vertically transportation features, water and hydrographic corrected), raster to vector data conversion, and features, administrative and local areas e.g. across agencies’ data integration. Non-technical neighborhood area borders) plus focused thematic work include: engagement with local partners information depicting topic of interest including (government, local experts, and community), multi- disaster management, slum alleviation, land stakeholders dialogue, and multi-stakeholders’ development and city planning. The project activity verification and agreed upon. The general flow, is therefore enabling a collaborative platform within how the technical and non-technical work evolve in the city by which local governments and community the activity can be seen in Figure 3. representatives develop a large-scale risk mapping. The resulting map feeds into Neighbourhood Development Planning to increase resiliency towards The flow of processes can be summarized as a disaster and climate change. The maps should be follow: easy to use and updated by local governments. a. It starts with coordination and engagement with the local government and local partners. Engagement with local governments, local experts and community must be done before Process and Activities the project was really started. The collaborative map comprises of basic map and b. It must facilitate multi-stakholders’ dialogue thematic layers that are produced from digital high for data acquisition, compilation, verification resolution imageries. The source of imageries can and forum to resolve disputes over data be from aerial photographs, satellite imageries, or representation and quality. UAV (Unmanned Aerial Vehicle) images. The use of UAV is limited to some extent, mainly because c. It must integrate various data into a spatially the requirements to comply with national standard referenced platfrom admissible for planning is considered uneasy (e.g. extensive uses of high and development purposes. accuracy Ground Control Points (GCPs), additional terrestrial height survey to improve z values, 8 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia Figure 3 General flow of the processes Kick off meeting & Engagement Data collection from various stakeholders (local government & community data) Preliminary Survey with Mobile GPS Data integration into the work map Preparation of high-resolution imageries as the work map Place name, geometry, attribute verification Validation and field check regarding: disaster impacted area, Participatory mapping workshop climate change impacted objects, planning zones, and the planning implementation done by local Joint survey with using GPS/GNSS agencies and validated by community against Boundaries and ffected Areas representatives Expert & stakeholders meeting Database development and map presentation Final verification Map dissemination 9 II. Method The chapter presents required survey and mapping activities including participatory mapping activities for producing collaborative maps. One of essential items to be assessed is the availability of aerial imageries to be used as a base imagery to plot and combine multi theme geospatial data matches with community participatory data. e. It provides reliable yet simple methods for II. 1. Approach handling multiple data gained from different The keywords for the approaches undertaken in parties with various quality and levels of the collaborative mapping approach are: unified details (e.g. coordinate transformation, rubber and validated large-scale map for planning and sheet processes, map adjustments, and data development, integrating top-down and bottom-up selection and integration). data, compliance to national map standard. In order f. It provides spatial analysis for real world to produce an agreed and reliable collaborative problems found in the field (e.g. detailed map, the following activity should be undertaken. information on houses will be impacted directly a. The activity establishes a geometrically correct by lahar, houses and land parcels within the and thematically validated large scale map (at building-free river embankment zones) that is scale 1:2,500 or 1:5,000) produced from an useful to give insights to decision makers to orthorectified high resolution imagery to help plan scenarios for solutions. mainstreaming disaster risk management into The key challenge is to provide aerial imageries that development decisions. Given the relatively meet requirements to be used as the base layer for small area, this practice requires intensive detailed maps (scale 1:5,000 or larger). Currently, collaboration from related stakeholders to agree aerial imageries that are feasible to be used as the on method of data compilation, validation, base layer must be orthorectified imageries which improvement. means the imageries have been corrected from b. It formulates thematic information outputs where errors due to topography variation and due to images the quality of its underlying basic map (at scale distortion. The aerial imageries can be produced 1:2,500 or 1:5,000) are in compliance with from very high resolution satellite imageries (e.g. National Map Standard and Guidelines, thus having pixel size equals to 51 centimeters) or aerial adding more confidences to local government photographs taken from (UAV) or aerial plane. and stakeholders to accept the map as the The methods can be broken into sub activities of reference for follow-up disaster management spatial data collection, processing, validation and and planning activities. analysis. Technically the method include preparing c. It employs local engineers and technician, orthorectified imageries, doing field verification preferably with GIS and geomatics engineering survey, cross agencies data collection and background, who have knowledge and compilation, participatory mapping, and cartographic experiences in working with community and in work and analysis. facilitating the mapping processes, including in facilitating validation and participatory mapping II. 2. Preparation of Orthorectified sessions. Imageries d. It accommodates community participation In case satellite imageries have been orthorectified in populating thematic data and in validating (e.g., by BIG), then the imagery can be used as government data, enabling top-down and a canvas layer to enable data integration and bottom-up. verification. In case the imageries have been from aerial photographs, it should be assumed that the imageries have been geometrically corrected. 10 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia Geometrically corrected here means: their city/district areas is to contact the national mapping agency about this. Further when the data a. The imagery has been adjusted to local is available, a formal request should be submitted to horizontal position using highly accurate GCPs, BIG to get the data. measured using Geodetic GPS. The number of GCPs depends on the city/district area to be Orthorectified imageries must facilitate multi- surveyed. For instance, a city that are covered stakholders’ dialogue for data acquisition, by 2 scenes of high resolution satellite imageries compilation, verification and forum to resolve (e.g., 1 scene: 16 km x 16 km) require 20-30 disputes over data representation and quality. See points of GCPs for a scene, depending on the also Base map options terrain (topography surface) of the area. b. The set of imageries must then be tied into DEM II. 2. 1. Preliminary Survey (Digital Elevation Model) of the city/district area to remove earth curvature effect and to improve Preliminary survey are needed to check whether coordinate accuracy. This process can be the coordinates are correctly calculated. Further, achieved using Remote Sensing/GIS software the images radiometric quality should be checked utilizing rigorous orthorectification approach. in order to make sure the imageries can be used as the canvas for participatory mapping activities. The easiest way for local agencies to know whether Preliminary survey also include delineation of the high resolution imageries are available for neighborhood and villages’ boundary together with village officers. Joint Accurate GPS / GNSS Survey Joint GPS/GNSS survey sessions were executed to produce validated sub village (dusun) boundaries and validated ATL boundaries. GPS Surveys for sub village boundaries updating were done by local government officers and village officers and sub village leaders. ATL boundaries validation activities were done together lead by BPPTKG and followed by BPBD DIY, BPBD Sleman, village officers and sub village leaders. GPS researchers and assistants were acted as facilitator/GPS operator and analysis. All GPS surveys were documented using standard forms conveying detail implementation and signatures from representatives of stakeholders involved in the survey activities. Figure 4 GPS Survey Activity 11 II. 2. 2. Use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle II. 3. Cross agencies data collection Mapping when necessary and compilation UAV can be used to cover missing areas or to cover In order to collect all existing data regarding basic small areas (e.g. less than 1000 ha) where required layers (administrative boundaries, buildings, land imageries are not available or they are available uses, infrastructures) and disaster related zones but with bad quality (e.g. clouds cover). It can be (impacted areas, hazard prone areas zonation, used with maximum concerns (e.g. must comply planning zonation) from stakeholders in the city of with transportation agency and telecommunication Yogyakarta, a series of institutional visit to technical agency permit requirements). When it is done, field agencies is required. GCPs and additional field surveys especially for surveying terrain values are strictly required. The visit is intended to collect all available yet related data in the project area. Later, the collected UAV flight mission must be designed properly in data are compiled and then plotted into the order to produce good quality aerial imageries orthorectified imageries used as the base canvas. covering the project area. Flight height of UAV must be in compliance with Ministry of Transportation II. 4. Participatory mapping Regulation (specified in the regulation of Ministry of Participatory mapping is required to verify Transportation No. 90/2015). In this regulation, it is government spatial data and to collect views and specified that when the UAV’s flight height is above aspiration of community members in forms of maps. 150 meters, the flight mission must be done under In applying participatory mapping, the government the government’s permission. can involve actively as facilitators or participants. In GCPs must be installed on the field before the flight practice, participatory mapping can be utilized: mission starts to control the resulted photographs. a. To facilitate community groups to validate GCPs should be distributed in good numbers and geographic features, administrative boundaries of must be surveyed using Geodetic GPS devices. aerial imageries; UAV is equipped with high digital camera resolution b. To facilitate community inputs regarding hazards, to produce aerial photos and with GPS sensor to problems and proposed development; ease the flight control. In recent development of c. To convert community maps from community UAV devices, the camera can also be equipped mapping activities as spatial features plotted on with post processing kinematic GPS (PPK GPS) to top of the referenced aerial photos. enable better accuracy of UAV imageries. Participatory mapping can be done either through participatory mapping workshop or through II. 2. 3. Field survey joint field validation. In a participatory mapping Field survey is needed to gather information on workshop, a facilitator should provide guidelines administrative boundaries and to collect additional and directions to make communication and data. Administrative boundaries and neighborhood coordination among participants can be effective boundaries are surveyed together with community and efficient, producing an accurate and complete representatives and local government officers. participatory map (Aditya 2010). Participatory maps through photo maps were considered as the most Field survey is necessary in order to check effective means for community members to engage the produced imageries and to make sure that and produce maps. orthorectified imageries can be used as the reference background for collaborative mapping Additional data collection sometimes is necessary. For example additional topographic survey especially using Total Station survey instrument to validate the riverbank profile. 12 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia II. 5. Cartographic work and spatial c. To develop spatial analysis to investigate population density, building density, settlement analysis infrastructure suitability, and disaster Cartographic work and spatial analysis are required to be infrastructure needs in the project areas; done using Geographic Information System software. The work includes data compilation of secondary data and d. To visualize the results in forms of maps; georeferencing work, rubber sheeting as well as bound- The result of cartographic work and spatial analysis ary adjustment of multi theme geospatial data. For this is subject to be discussed and improved. For this purpose, orthorectified imageries can be seen as the ref- purposes, a focus group discussion is necessary. erence data. The complete cartographic work and spatial analysis may include the task: The discussion can be focused: a. To digitize spatial features of building and public a. To discuss with the expert on the infrastructures as vector data; recommendation based on the field activities; b. To symbolize detailed data on transportation, b. To conduct a mapping workshop at the end of the settlement infrastructure, land parcels effectively program; for visual communication purposes; c. To develop standards and protocols for conducting joint survey involving stakeholders and community. Participatory Mapping Workshops Participatory Mapping workshops were done involving sub village leaders, vilage officers, local government officers in order to : Validate and update the geometry of geospatial features of houses and buildings, roads, sub village boundaries and directly impaced areas (ATL) zones Validate and enrich geospatial attributes of buildings and houses in 3 villages including building construction parameters, building use, clean water source, electricty,name of house hold leaders. Figure 5. Participatory mapping workshops for validating and updating geometry and data attributes attributes 13 III. Base Map Options As stated earlier, one of motivating objectives imageries must have been orthorectified. It means for going with collaborative approaches is that that coordinates of the imageries must have been the availability of basic geospatial data (e.g. corrected against the ground control points and geospatially referenced data layers) is poor, have been adjusted into digital elevation model of especially the availability of large-scale maps the mapping area. suitable to support local planning and disaster mitigation. Large scale maps, e.g. maps with scale The lack of basic maps and satellite imageries 1:2,500 and 1:5,000 are essential to support local has pushed many local government initiate spatial plan or to develop detailed contingency own survey and mapping missions. In principle, plan (see Table 4.1.). Such large scale maps options for orthorectified imageries can be done mostly were produced either from LIDAR/aerial through photogrammetry mapping (producing photogrammetry mission or from satellite imageries aerial photographs using airplane or UAV), data acquisition. As of 2015, it is reported that satellite imageries acquisition and processing. In the coverage of large scale maps in Indonesia principle, the decision to choose which method is very minimum, far too low for supporting local to be implemented by local government highly government agenda to provide spatial plans and depend with the level of detail to be achieved and disaster risk plan. the budget allocated by the local government. For instance, for supporting spatial plan that require According to national law (UU No. 24/2007 on map at scale 1:5,000, the use of orthorectified high disaster management and No. 26/2009 on spatial resolution satellite imageries is sufficient. In order to planning), local government must provide plans produce maps with larger scale, local government represented in forms of planning maps. To fulfill need to have higher accuracy of imageries which this need, local agencies need to ask government only can be achieved using photogrammetry agencies (in this case BIG and LAPAN) to provide method (but not with UAV). Uses of UAV imageries the data. Most of data required by local agencies could still be accepted for relatively small areas are high resolution satellite imageries or aerial (e.g., not larger than 1,000 ha) or for corridor imageries. As required by the authority, the mapping where field control points and observations should be more than enough. Table 3.1 The scale of maps and its practical use Scale Description Uses 1:10,000 Houses and buildings look tiny tend to be grouped Micro zonation 1:5,000 Houses and buildings look small but still visible Detailed spatial plan 1:2,500 Houses and buildings look clear Preliminary design and block plan 14 Collaborative Mapping for Disaster and Climate Resilience in indonesia Table 3.2 Types of data sources for producing base layer in collaborative mapping Sensor/Sources Scope Output Budget Aerial Imageries+LIDAR Basically not limited but Aerial Photos+DEM 6-10 USD/ha, the larger will be efficient for > area the cheaper the 10,000 ha cost Satellite Imageries Not limited depending Imageries* Minimum 1,200 USD/ on the imageries scenes for archives availability UAV Smaller area (<1,000 Imageries ** 2-4 USD/ha ha), corridor shape area (5-8 km or smaller) * It can be converted into orthorectified imageries when high resolution Digital Elevation Model (e.g. Map Contour from 1:10,000, elevation data from active sensors (LIDAR, SAR) are available. ** It can be converted into orthorectified imageries GCPs and more height measurements on the field are required. Quality assurance The result of the analysis should meet the required accuracy, e.g., for a map with 1:5,000 scale, the Quality assurance is mandatory especially to horizontal and vertical accuracy must be less validate planimetric/horizontal quality of the base than 50 cm (for scale 1:5,000) and less than 50 map becomes crucial because the data will be used cm (1:2,300). In Winongo collaborative mapping by local government and local agencies. BIG owns mission, the basic map acquired from UAV a responsibility to assess and to check the base photographs were successfully assessed by BIG map quality. The result of the check will be the and accepted as base map for the Winongo area at document specifying whether the result meet the 1:5,000 (Type I) or at 1:2,500 (Type II). quality requirement or not. 15 IV. Case Studies The studies have been dealt a lot with riverbank IV. 1. Mount merapi post-disaster with disaster prone areas. Riverbank have been recovery the good example on how effective spatial plan and monitoring have been crucial point to prevent and mitigate disasters. Riverbank areas in both Context Yogyakarta and Balikpapan are vulnerable to Mount Merapi is a very active stratovolcano flood, landslides where settlement and disaster situated between Central Java and Yogyakarta mitigation infrastructures are not well in place. The Province. The last major eruption was happened in collaborative mapping cast stakeholders to explore 2010. The total damages and losses reached over problems and solutions through the map. The map four trillion rupiahs and have displaced more than is seen as a proxy to find best possible solutions for 200.000 people according to a joint assessment improved disaster risk reduction. study conducted by BNPB (National Disaster As the studies aim to produce a map to be used Management Authority), World Bank, UNDP in as a reference, the quality of the base map 2010. In 2011, community-based settlement becomes crucial. For that reason, the base map of rehabilitation and reconstruction project was collaborative map, developed from aerial imageries initiated. The families relocated from their burnt or aerial satellites, must comply with national villages to permanent houses in safer areas. The standard on the base map accuracy (BIG regulation relationship between trigger, gap, requirements No. 15/2014). This standard can be seen as quality that motivate the risk zone mapping in Merapi post assurance policy that the city and districts must eruption project is given in Figure 6. meet when utilizing base maps in developing city A hazard map depicting hazard prone areas has plan and block plan. been published by Center of Volcanology and The following parts will present case studies in Disaster Mitigation (PVMBG). However, projection utilizing collaborative mapping methods. The first of affected areas and hazard prone areas on the is utilization of collaborative mapping approach in field is difficult to confirm on its accuracy, due to villages in Sleman impacted by the Merapi eruption the small scale of the map, i.e. 1:50,000. Mapping for post disaster recovery. The second and third are of pyroclastic flow and lahar hazard prone areas the use case of collaborative mapping studies in using LIDAR Mapping and GIS modelling were Winongo and Ampal Rivers for risk sensitive urban done by the BNPB, PVMBG through Agency for redevelopment. Technological Development and Research of Volcanology (BPPTK). In addition, the Ministry of Public Works (PU) produce settlement zonation based on disaster risk zones. 16 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia Figure 6 Rationale for conducting Merapi GAP Detailed Risk Zone Mapping TRIGGER Lack of accurate map REQUIREMENTS depicting affected area A map that picture Relocation and while exiting maps are less actual environmental settlement plan in post detailed no georeferenced condition after the eruption Merapi eruption unintegrated, and the boundary inaccesible of affected area SOLUTION Collaborative Mapping offers a solution that fill the gaps for comprehensive mapping & analysis Figure 7 Footprints of Merapi lava flow 17 While there are many official maps concerning risk CollaboratoRS zones and safe settlements available, there are The mapping activities involved mainly BIG still difficulties to integrate and use the maps as for technical consultation. BNPB and BPBD, decision-making support for operational planning and Department of Public Work, River Authority reconstruction activities. Meanwhile community maps, (BBWS), BPPTK, National Land Agency provide although maps provide detailed information, have no existing hazard and thematic maps. Data gathering exact position on boundaries as the maps were not was facilitated by Bappeda of Yogyakarta province georeferenced. These facts raise two emerging needs and Sleman District. for data integration and for ground truthing. Facts that available maps produced by various institutions and Primary data collecting involving district/village organizations were not created based on the same leaders. The data taken through series of reference or standardised mapping system have discussion, interview and field survey. Community made these maps difficult, if not impossible,to be participation in the mapping processes became integrated. Further, the available maps are also not possible through the support from the team accessible to the public while the mechanism for data conducting Community-based Settlement dissemination is not effective and efficient. Thus, Rehabilitation and Reconstruction (REKOMPAK) data integration require georeferencing processes and project. data management to make the data seamless and The collaborators is working together in a joint ready to be tested on the field. survey and providing feedback during consultation Global Positioning Systems (GPS) and Geographic workshop in order to validate the map. A group Information Systems (GIS) technologies for of survey and mapping team from University of positioning and data management provide a Gadjah Mada (UGM) - a partner university was solution on ground truthing on the field in order to responsible to facilitate and implement technical develop collaborative maps depicting risk zones’ work of the mapping supported byWorld Bank and boundaries. GFDRR (Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery). . Figure 8 Stages in collaborative mapping in post merapi eruption BIG, BNPB, BIG, BNPB, COLLABORATORS BPBD, BPPTK, BPBD, BPPTK, BBWS, BPN. BBWS, BPN. BAPPEDA UGM Team Bappeda BAPPEDA (Sleman& REKOMPAK BPPTK (Sleman& DIY) BPBD DIY) ACQUISITION SYNCHONIZATION SOLUTION Base map preparation Collaborative Mapping Primary and secondary offers a solution VERIFICATION that fill the gap Data collection Georeferencing Participatory mapping Spatial adjustment Spatial Analysis Field survey DISSEMINATION Cartography Geometry quality check Public expose Offer site plan Camat & Lurah Village officers Village officers Camat & Lurah Village officers Hamlet leaders Hamlet leaders Village officers Hamlet leaders REKOMPAK REKOMPAK Hamlet leaders Community Community Community Community COMMUNITY GROUPS 18 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia Method infrastructures seen on the 2012 aerial photos as vector data, 5) To compile BPPTK maps on the The methods including :1) To collect all existing data potential hazards of pyroclastic flow and lahar regarding basic layers (administrative boundaries, flood, produced from LIDAR mapping and GIS building, land uses, infrastructures) and disaster modelling, 6) To develop standards and protocols for related zones (impacted areas, hazard prone areas conducting joint survey involving stakeholders and zonation, planning zonation) of Mt Merapi from community , 7) To conduct a series of precise GPS stakeholders , 2) To make uses of latest products survey to delineate: administrative boundaries, past of large-scale mapping on Mt Merapi, i.e. LIDAR impacted areas, predictive hazard zones together data and aerial photo maps produced by BPPTK with BPBD, Sleman’s Technical Agencies, BPPTK, and UGM (2012) as the reference background for Bappeda, Village Leaders, Hamlet/Dusun Leaders, collaborative mapping, 3) To convert community REKOMPAK, etc and 8) To discuss with the expert maps from REKOMPAK project as spatial features on the recommendation based on the result and field plotted on top of the referenced aerial photos, 4) activities. To digitize spatial features of building and public Figure 9 Field Validation activities 19 Figure 10 Participatory Mapping to validate the draft of maps at hamlet level 20 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia The following layers are secondary data coming from different technical agencies are compiled on top of the basemap on which the disaster related information are plotted. Type of data and format Sample of Data Preview Detailed Spatial Plan (RDTR/Rencana Detail Tata Ruang) from Public Works Agency (JPG) / Rencana Detil Tata Ruang dari Dinas PU (JPG) River and dam infrastructures from BBWS Serayu Opak (SHP) LIDAR and aerial photos of Merapi and Yogyakarta from BPPTK and UGM (SHP) 21 Type of data and format Sample of Data Preview Sleman District Land Controlling Department (SHP) Community Settlement Plan from REKOMPAK Sleman (PDF) Figure 11 Existing data available 22 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia Figure 12 Sample of resulted detailed risk map 23 RESULTS The resulted maps of risk zones were disseminated and discussed by 27 hamlet representatives. The collaborative mapping study of detailed risk Record has been made on community zones in Merapi includes three villages considered agreement regarding 27 hamlet boundaries, local to be the most villages at risk in Merapi namely infrastructures and risk zones. This spatial Umbulharjo, Kepuharjo and Glagaharjo. The database of Mount Merapi villages affected by experiment resulted a detailed map of 3 villages in disaster is disseminated to local stakeholders and scale of 1:5,000 and detailed map of 27 hamlets in managed by Yogyakarta Provincial Bappeda and scale of 1:2,000 – 1: 3,000. The map depicting risk BPBD. zone boundaries taken through the data integration, validation, ground truthing of the affected areas and The resulting data is converted into maps to enable consultation with experts. local village and government to communicate the risk zones to communities and stakeholders The map comprises of georeferenced information involved in recovery activities, particularly to support of administrative boundaries, houses, pubic the settlement plans. The maps have been used building and infrastructures. Delineation of hazard by the local government and REKOMPAK as the zones of pyroclastic flow, lahar, landslides as base information for decision-support in community- well as exposures such as houses and critical based settlement planning activities in the new infrastructure in the area within the hazard zones area. was resulted by community members. The result from participatory mapping was then validated The availability of such detailed map have led to and supported with spatial analysis in combination its use for BPN to conduct land consolidation and with local leader’s information and hazard expert’s manage land administration for tenure out of risk justification. The layers were then integrated with zone area. As a result, families relocated to the maps produced by PVMBG, BNPB, BPPTK, PU new settlement whose land parcels directly affected and REKOMPAK. by pyroclastic flow obtain certificates of ownership for their parcels. Figure 13 New Settlement environment 24 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia IV. 2. Risk-Sensitive Urban Planning with uncertainty of natural hazard occurrences. However, the ability to create such plans is often of Winongo River, Yogyakarta, constrained by the lack of available high resolution Indonesia geospatial data that meet both technical and legal requirements in developing a formal block plan. Recent development in geospatial technology Context such as the handheld GPS, coupled with growing The Winongo River is one of the major streams movement to involve citizens in local mapping that flow across the Javanese cultural rich city of activities have opened an opportunity to incorporate Yogyakarta. The river holds critical roles in urban community-generated geospatial information into a ecosystem and heritage yet it also overwhelmed with formal planning process. The collaborative process in carrying capacity issues due to fast and uncontrolled mapping offers solution to high resolution geospatial development of urban settlements. River pollution, information that could facilitate people-oriented and ineffective drainage system, poor domestic waste risk-sensitve urban development. water management and lack of access to fresh water The City of Yogyakarta named Winongo River as are daily problems people in the riverbanks have to locus to deliver Detailed Risk Mapping that assesses deal with. Even worse, they also threatened by flood vulnerability to flood and landslide. The selection inundation, landslides, and fires that come across of Winongo River represents growing area which frequently with almost knowledgeable pattern. The require updates while base map is not available. relationship between trigger, gap, requirements that Both hazards had been identified in the Bank’s prior motivate the project is given in Figure 14. rapid risk assessment in Yogyakarta i.e. the City The World Bank Disaster Risk Management (DRM) Risk Diagnostics which followed by the pre-feasibility team held engagement with the city of Yogyakarta study of Winongo River. The study recommends to figure out ways to address the gap. It is agreed concept of “the Winongo Riverwalk” to address to prioritize area that require immediate attention disasters and climate change issues that align such as settlement that regularly flooded. The with Yogyakarta City’s vision to further develop its development of detailed, risk-sensitive urban spatial education, cultural tourism, and services sectors in a plans is critical for cities to adapt to and cope sustainable manner. Figure 14 Rationale for Winongo Disaster TRIGGER GAP REQUIREMENTS Risk and Climate Change Absence or lack of access Recurrently flooded and Maps that picture actual to valid and detailed map Mapping slum area need urgent for urban stakeholders to condition of an area response of urban including built design program upgrading or environment, renewal program infrastructure and hazards SOLUTION Collaborative Mapping offers a solution that fill the gaps for comprehensive mapping & analysis 25 As the city was keen to showcase the Winongo with the city government in terms of community Riverwalk, one crucial step to realize the concept is building, environmental protection and disaster producing Detailed Risk Map that picture segments mitigation planning. of the river into high resolution spatial information, for In the study, a local team tied to Bappeda is needed instance a 1:1,000 scale of map, to allow vulnerability to compile and reconcile data from institutions and assessment be carried out with great detail. The community. In this study, the local team role was resulted map can be used as basic reference to undertaken by the UGM team, whose expertise enable integrated spatial planning adhering to is related to geomatics engineering (including suitable settlements’ structure and pattern in city field surveys and geospatial analytics, community planning to support sustainable development that mapping and communication strategy to public taken into account hazard potentials, slums related officials). The mapping team ensures the project problems (socio-economic, utilities, open space) and carried out in high level quality in terms of process climate change impacts. and outputs. collaborators METHODS The study can be seen as a business model of The methods implemented in the Winongo study collaborative mapping broken-down into four is following the general approach and methods steps based on input-output relationship (see discussed in part II on Methods. In this study, the Figure). Each step includes dialogue between data base map was acquired by utilizing UAV imageries representative which in many occasions had lead with additional field topographic survey survey. Field to data conflict resolutions. In Yogyakarta, Bappeda survey activities include a survey to conduct precise took responsibility in leading the process. Aside GPS measurement to provide control points for UAV from commitment of formal agencies, the study mission and topographic mapping and a terrestrial received support from the Winongo Community i.e. survey to measure riverbanks’ topographic profile FKWA (Forum Komunikasi Winongo Asri) which was considered most proactive and well engaged Figure 15 COLLABORATORS Bappeda Bappeda BPN Bappeda BIG BPN Steps undertaken and parties Dinas PU UGM UGM Dinas PU involved in the mapping BPBD BPBD processes ACQUISITION SYNCHONIZATION SOLUTION Base map preparation Collaborative Mapping Primary and secondary offers a solution VERIFICATION that fill the gap Data collection Georeferencing Participatory mapping Spatial adjustment Spatial Analysis Field survey DISSEMINATION Cartography Geometry quality check Public expose Offer site plan Kelurahan Kelurahan RT/RW RT/RW RT/RW FKWA/ FKWA/ FKWA/ Community Community Community COMMUNITY GROUPS 26 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia using digital total station for improved digital terrain built and problems that require solution. A detailed model. In regard to smallest unit of administrative planning is created upon such canvas. The same boundaries, while the case study in Merapi post reference allows technical agencies and community disaster recovery uses participatory mapping and participate in planning and monitoring. joint field survey to delineate dusun boundaries, here in the Winongo Case, participatory mapping Second, it creates connection between community activities were used to delineate neighborhood efforts in generating geospatial information with boundaries (RT and RW boundaries). formal planning process. The participatory/ Participatory mapping activities were attended by collaborative mapping generally serves two local representatives of 8 segments coordinated by purposes: 1) engagement between the community FKWA. In total there were two sessions allocated and government experts on natural hazards for participatory mapping activity in each segment. and increase awareness of hazard exposure to Each session was attended by 10-20 local community assets; and 2) updating and delineation representatives. The first meeting session mainly to of spatial objects to develop high resolution maps. acquire spatial boundaries of neighborhood areas Both processes constitute critical aspects in (RT, RW, block), settlement infrastructures, hazard participatory planning, especially in the context of areas and to copile spatially-referenced inputs redefining spatial layout to mitigate future disasters from representatives regarding settlement quality (in this case flooding and localized landslide). and disaster management. The second session of participatory mapping, done in the end of the result study after the final map is ready, was mainly done The Collaborative Mapping at Winongo Yogyakarta to disseminate the results and to accommodate delivers final outputs that include (1) data products corrections from the community members. both in the forms of high resolution base maps as well as the derived thematic maps from the Cartographic work and spatial analysis were collaborative process and (2) Module of Collaborative done iteratively to produce the base map and the Mapping procedure for future use. thematic map of risk-sensitive urban development in riverbank areas. A ready-installed online map is Risk-sensitive spatial plans can inform investment also provided to the local government. The spatial decisions including the definition of land-use analysis aims to illustrate the usefulness of the designation that control new development and resulted map to help local government to handle infrastructure layout in hazardous areas or the possible relocation issues, land administration identification of necessary mitigation investments and urban development integration as well as to (e.g., including through land/spatial consolidation) provide riverbank area upgrading scenarios to to protect existing or future development. However, improve disaster risk infrastructure and settlement majority of cities in Indonesia lack of official high infrastructure quality. resolution aerial satellites and spatial database, this include Yogyakarta. There are at least two benefits of implementing The critical point in project activities was to define the collaborative mapping: first, it rearranges spatial base map which is unavailable for Winongo River governance by integrating spatial data with special area. It was decided to produce high resolution aerial thematic objectives into one georeferenced base photos which serve as updated base maps, and to map accessible for urban stakeholders. Various utilize the ortho-rectified aerial photos in collaborative data and maps from different technical agencies mapping to delineate hazard zones and to map key are collected and integrated with community data infrastructures. which compiling community problems into one map. The map is a canvas to plot objects that have been The specific products that have been completed at the end of the project are outlined below: 27 Figure 16 Mosaic orthophoto and DSM derived from UAV imagery 28 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia Figure 17 DSM (top left), Contour map (top right), Cross sections produced in the project (bottom) 1. Mosaic of Orthophoto and Digital Surface Model (DSM) 2. Two dimensional cross-section of the river 3. Collaborative thematic maps. There are several basic themes produced, including: settlement, environmental condition, land Figure 18 Land parcel by the legal status, the red one indicates blocks traditionally registered as the Sultanate Ground 29 status, disaster response related facilities, and potential for tourism spots. 4. Spatial Analysis. The spatial analysis also constitutes as an important work and also as tool to engage stakeholders in building common understanding about hazards, risk and risk mitigation options. Several simple analyses to assess the overlap between space occupation and river buffer zone (as proxy to hazard boundary), population density of neighborhood blocks, evacuation route options, are among the examples of outputs produced by the analysisoverlap between space occupation and river buffer zone (as proxy to hazard boundary), population density of neighborhood blocks, evacuation route options, are among the examples of outputs produced by the analysis. The thematic maps produced in this project have spatial accuracy that meets the Government’s standard on provision of base map and the indicators as stipulated by the National Mapping Accuracy for the scale of 1:2,500. Figure 19 Some spatial analyses produced from the project Population Density Heat Map Estimation of structures affected by applying the River buffer zone 30 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia IV. 3. Risk-Sensitive Urban Planning of Ampal River, Balikpapan context Ampal River is one of the main rivers that flows through Balikpapan City, East Kalimantan. Areas surrounding the river is prone to floods and landslide due to excessive development in its upstream areas. A number of studies have demonstrated that changes in land use in the upper watershed areas of the river, from agricultural areas to settlement areas, have significantly reduced the water storage capacity of the land, thus increased the flooding intensity. A massive increase in the volume of surface runoff cannot be accommodated in Ampal River, which has already experienced severe siltation due to erosion at the upper stream. Increased concentration of suspended sediments has intensified from year to year and led to clogging in several points in Ampal River (Figure 20). Balikpapan City Government was committed to Figure 20 rearrange and improve land use management in Condition of Ampal River riverbank that areas around the riverbank of Ampal River. For that experiences rapid development purpose, the government needed a detailed mapping of the areas as a key instrument for spatial planning, which would need to be developed in a collaborative TRIGGER GAP REQUIREMENTS Recurrently flood and Absence or lack of access Maps that picture actual landslide disaster events to valid and detailed map condition of an area demand for urgent for practical uses including built response of urban environment, upgrading or infrastructure renewal program and hazards Figure 21 SOLUTION Rationale for Ampal Collaborative Mapping Project Collaborative Mapping offers a solution that fill the gaps for comprehensive mapping & analysis 31 manner involving the relevant stakeholders. The COLLABORATORS/STAKEHOLDERS rationale that motivates the project is given in Figure INVOLVED 21. Agency/ As a first step, a detailed map would be needed as Role organization a basic reference in spatial planning. Through the spatial planning the city government defined the spatial structure and settlement pattern appropriate Balikpapan City facilitated FGDs to identify • ­ to the city development plan, as part of the efforts Bappeda issues related to land-use in to achieve sustainable development. Bappeda of areas around Ampal River Balikpapan City involved a Mapping Consultant Team • ­ facilitated consultative from the Faculty of Civil Engineering and Planning of workshops with the multi- Balikpapan University to conduct a detailed mapping. stakeholders on the map and The goal of the pilot project in Ampal River was design of the target areas to build a collaboration platform among key • ­ coordinated geospatial data stakeholders in the city to jointly formulate detailed collection and other technical risk maps and recommendations for the spatial matters with the local sectoral planning of areas around the river. It was expected units that the resulting detailed map could be used as a Mapping Team made data inventory from • ­ reference in the preparation of detailed spatial plan from Faculty of relevant SKPD of Ampal River areas, with a view of making the Civil Engineering areas resilient to disaster and climate change-related • ­ inter-local agencies survey and Planning, risks. The map would be presented in a user-friendly Balikpapan field survey • ­ format that would be easy to understand, use and University data processing and analysis • ­ update by the city government. UGM mapping team Quality assurance prepared basic maps of Public Work Agency ­ of Balikpapan City Balikpapan City data verification and validation Camat/Head of Sub- ­ District data verification and validation Lurah/Head of Urban ­ Ward Community data verification and validation ­ Methods The methods implemented to complete the Ampal River case study is similar to ones implemented in Winongo and Merapi. Here the base map was produced from aerial imageries produced by BIG in 2015, thus capable in providing a better quality of geometry and radiometry aspects of imageries than the base map used in Winongo and Merapi. 32 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia While in Winongo, land parcel map representing and kelurahan areas, identify public and social land parcel boundaries and their corresponding facilities, validate these facilities, and provide missing ownership rights for the study area can be information in the basic map such as flood and integrated well, here in Ampal project the land landslide affected areas, and the boundaries of these parcel map cannot be used for analysis due to data hazard-prone areas. Together with the community, availability constraints. they also proposed measures to reduce flood and landslide risks in their respective areas. Stages in digital data processing from the primary results and secondary data and data that came from The Ampal River pilot project had 3 outputs as the field survey to make basic map included spatial following: adjustment of secondary data, survey inputs and a. Thematic map with a scale of 1:2,500 for the attribute data, and spatial analysis. The subsequent entire Ampal River areas process constituted validation workshop and b. Flood Risk Map and Landslide Risk Map of verification of thematic maps, and compilation Ampal River’s riverbank of data from new information obtained from the c. Design plan for Modern Market in Ampal River segment developed by stakeholders that would be areas used as pilot in the improvement of the land-use planning. The last stage was finalization of the collaborative Thematic map with a scale of 1:2500 map by the incorporation of corrections in the form for the entire Ampal River areas of addition of research areas, geometry of some objects, cartography, and map layout. The mapping team started to prepare detailed risk map of Ampal River areas by delineating areas The large scale thematic maps contain the following that used to be affected by flood. To facilitate information: discussion and overlaying of the map, mapped a. Administrative boundaries (urban wards, areas were divided into seven segments. The neighborhood areas/RT) mapping team used basic map and secondary data b. Land contour from Balikpapan City Bappeda and Public Works c. River demarcation areas Agency in the form of aerial photos from 2014, d. Critical infrastructures (education, health, topographical map from 2004, DED Normalization social and religious) map of Ampal River from 2012, DED Coastal Road e. Land ownership status map of Balikpapan City from 2012, and Spatial Plan f. Areas prone to flooding and landslide map of Balikpapan City from 2012. g. Social-economic status Digitation of basic map was done by making vector h. Land use classification (industry, settlement, data from aerial photographs of 2014, which were etc.) grouped into several layers including: street layer, i. Location of control dam/water catchment building layer, land-use layer, river layer, and j. Potential land for consolidation drainage layer. The thematic maps that had gone through Collaborative mapping was done after the field the process of validation and verification were survey activities were done. The process involved presented as a GIS database that would be used community and government apparatuses from the as reference by stakeholders in the planning and urban ward/kelurahan level. Local government officers development of Ampal River areas in Balikpapan helped delineate boundaries between neighborhood City. 33 Figure 22 One of collaborative mapping product on Flood and Landslide susceptibility 34 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia COLLABORATORS Bappeda Bappeda Bappeda BPN University of BPN BIG Dinas PU Balikpapan Dinas PU BPBD Team BPBD ACQUISITION SYNCHONIZATION SOLUTION Base map preparation Collaborative Mapping Primary and secondary offers a solution VERIFICATION that fill the gap Data collection Georeferencing Participatory mapping Spatial adjustment DISSEMINATION Field survey; Spatial Analysis Map geometry Cartography quality check Public expose of thematic maps; Camat, Camat, Camat, Offer site plan Mapping Lurah, Lurah, Lurah, Consultant Community Community Community COMMUNITY GROUPS Figure 23 Steps undertaken and parties involved in collaborative mapping process Flood Risk Map and Landslide Risk Segment 1 Map for areas around Ampal River Flooding usually occurred due to sea tides, but it The detailed risk maps contained information only affected a small section of settlement areas. about flood and landslide hazards that had been The width of the river was around 30 meter. consulted with experts and community leaders. Segment 2 Risk analysis was generated from the analysis to determine the level of risk based on the hazard and Flood-affected area in this segment covered an vulnerability. area of 36.17 Ha with height between 0.5 and 1.5 meter. Flooding was caused by heavy rain and The analysis of flood-prone areas around Ampal sea tide. Landslide was caused by erosion in the River was done by using community data gathered river. The width of the river was 10-18 meter. from participatory mapping activities and analysis of the topographical map. The data used from Segment 3 participatory mapping were mainly information Flood-affected area in this segment covered an related to extent and intensities of historical flood area of 22.45 Ha. This area was lower than the events. Locations and heights of floods were plotted surrounding streets and hence often inundated into collaborative map, and then overlaid with with the overflow from Ampal River. Besides topographical map to delineate flood-prone areas. rain intensity, narrowing of the river and heavy The analysis of landslide-prone areas was done sedimentation had played a significant role in by using data from the participatory mapping that triggering floods. were overlaid with slope elevation data. The results from the analysis of areas around Ampal River that are prone to flood and landslide hazards were elaborated in the following segments. 35 Segment 4 Design for Rearrangement of Ampal River’s Modern Market Area Flood-affected area in this segment covered an area of 20.73 Ha from a total of 91.24 Ha. The proposed design for spatial rearrangement This segment was also prone to landslide due of Ampal River areas took into consideration the to its steep slope. Flooding in this segment was technical appropriateness and the economic, caused by rain intensity and silting-up of the river social, cultural and environmental feasibility. The due to heavy sedimentation. The width of the recommendations covered issues related to land- river was 8-10 meter. use planning, infrastructure planning and spatial zoning. Segment 5 Ampal River pilot project utilized collaborative map Flood-affected area in this segment covered an in analyzing the Strength, Weaknesses, Opportunity area of 59.04 Ha. This area was the meeting and Threat of Modern Market development in point of three tributaries of Ampal River, and the form of Design for Spatial Rearrangement hence the area affected by flooding was quite of the Segment around Modern Market areas. significant. Flooding was mostly caused by Some strategic policies had been suggested to be increased intensity of rain, sedimentation, and implemented, there are: narrowing of the river in several locations. Also, in several places the river embankments had been a. The realization of one-map policy or decision- broken. making based on the same data and map was needed at city level to ensure the coherence of Segment 6 planning, implementation and maintenance Flood-affected area in this segment covered b. The realization of land acquisition in Modern an area of 32.55 Ha. Flooding occurred during Market/Fresh Market areas heavy rain with a duration of more than two c. The construction of control dam to contain hours. This was caused by the narrowing of the water flow to the three secondary rivers river that had greatly reduced its capacity to hold d. The follow up to conduct further study of the the excessive volume of rain water. proposal to develop Fresh Market Areas. Segment 7 lFlood-affected area in this segment covered an area of 8.0 Ha. Flooding was mostly caused by rain intensity and silting up of the river. There was also an area that was prone to landslide in RT 07 of Gunung Samarinda Baru ward. 36 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia Figure 24 Flood prone areas map 37 V. Utilization of Collaborative Mapping Projects From case studies elaborated in Part IV, the overall V. 1. Land Consolidation in Mount impression gained at the final workshop on the result Merapi’s Post Disaster Recovery dissemination has been the same. The collaborative maps gain positive feedback and interest from stakeholders. Mainly, stakeholders appreciate on After the Mount Merapi eruption 2010, the local the level of detail the map can offer and secondly on government unleashed a regulation that sub- the collaborative processes in data collection and villages affected directly by the eruption must not validation. Further, the potential uses of the map be used as settlement areas. This means villagers can be understood very well by stakeholders. As a that live in areas which were burnt or damaged by result, the sense of belonging and ownership of the pyroclastic flow must be relocated to new places. maps produced grow strong across the involved Local government and REKOMPAK then launched collaborators and stakeholders. a supporting program called community-based settlement planning activities aiming at providing This part will focus on the use of collaborative maps new settlements to impacted residents. Meanwhile produced. How the unified data and map produced the impacted areas defined as zero settlement and can be optimally used to support local government building units include land parcels owned by residents. needs in urban and rural development. Three post mapping activities will be showcases. First, the Land consolidation is a strategy to readjust and utilization of the collaborative map to support the rearrange the boundaries of land parcels and land consolidation in Mount Merapi after the 2010’s their ownerships for improved spatial plan that eruption. Secondly, the utilization of the collaborative provide among others better access to settlement map to provide decision-support for risk sensitive infrastructure and better preparedness for a disaster. urban development in Winongo and Ampal rivers. In case of Mount Merapi, the readjustment and rearrangement were initially to also accommodate needs for evacuation routes, community cattle ranch, local roads and drainages. In Indonesia, Numbers of land consolidation is a program activity that is done Villages Hamlet Land under auspices of BPN and DPPD (BPN 2014). The Subjects outcome of the land consolidation program is land Parcels Umbulharjo Pangukrejo 468 350 certificates to residents in the project area (or new ones for the land parcels that have been certificated). Umbulharjo Pelemsari 167 121 One condition is applied in Merapi land consolidation Kepuharjo Jambu 292 172 program which is that the land certificate is an Kepuharjo Kaliadem 230 173 ownership right with type of nonresidential use, such Kepuharjo Kopeng 205 154 as: farming land. With this certain type of certificates, Kepuharjo Petung 325 200 residents cannot rebuild or add building objects in their land parcels. In total there were 1,687 parcels Total 1,687 1,170 located at 6 hamlets (known as Dusun) in 2 villages certificated in December 2014 as the result of the land consolidation activity. The land certificates have been handed over to residents who are the subjects of the land parcels in December 2014. 38 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia The land consolidation project was done by These steps interact a lot with village officers, Yogyakarta Province and Sleman BPN from community leaders, and land owners. The required January to December 2014. The steps undertaken activity of topographic and land use mapping during the project include (Yogyakarta BPN 2014): was not done since the project agreed to use the collaborative map. The collaborative map resulted • Site identification from Mt. Merapi’s Post Disaster Recovery produced • Socialization and community meeting a reference map at scale 1:2,500 depicting • Agreement and consensus building topographic layers and thematic information, used • Site selection as a reference for National Land Office to do land • Subjects and objects identification consolidation in the area. In fact, the collaborative • Perimeter and boundaries’ measurements map resulted in 2013 was used in many steps to • Topographic and land use mapping support site identification, subjects and objects • Parcel-based block plan design identification and to be used as the base map in • Community discussion on land boundaries the process for parcel-based block design. The delineation end result of land parcel map resulted from lnd • Release and land consolidation Boundary consolidation project is seen as follow. Demarcation • Stake-out survey to apply land consolidation design and agreed land boundaries • Administration of land tenure process • Certificates production and hand-over Figure 25 The resulted collaborative map of Pangukrejo, Umbulharjo 39 Figure 26 Using the resulted collaborative map (top), land parcels were identified and their boundaries were designed producing parcel-based block plan design in land consolidation project From the land consolidation project implementation, V. 2. Spatial Decision-Support in Risk- it can be concluded that the base map resulted from collaborative mapping activity gave huge Sensitive Urban Development contribution not only for its initial purposes for Winongo river in Yogyakarta city and Ampal River settlement planning and detailed planning activities in Balikpapan city provide perfect examples about but also to support land consolidation project city rivers disturbed by business and settlement need for a detailed yet validated topographic map areas growth in the city, creating danger and of project area. Thus, one map can serve many vulnerability to residents living along the river purposes from land administration, spatial planning area. It is unfortunate that many settlement areas up to disaster management activities. As the maps in the riverbank are prone to flood inundation and were distributed to all stakeholders, village officers landslide events. Ampal dan Winongo projects and hamlet chiefs could use the collaborative map showcases the potential uses of the collaborative as a reference for their local references. map to produce spatial analysis regarding parcels and buildings to handle to support urban riverbank redevelopment for flood disaster mitigation. 40 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia Ampal riverbank area is experiencing fast In fact, the local government has allocated huge settlement and business areas grow. Unfortunately budget to revitalize and improve the city drainages the increase of houses and building objects near to make city areas less vulnerable to flood. This the river has increased the risk for wider flood plan however is difficult to be implemented as many inundation and more frequent landslide events (see land parcels are till in disputes or in uncertain status, the figure). thus make the improvement of the city infrastructure becomes difficult. One possible solution for this is the implementation of land consolidation project. Similar to the case of Merapi land consolidation, the site identification for urban land consolidation in Ampal River can be easily developed using the collaborative map produced for Ampal river (see Figure 28). As for Winongo case, the various technical data collected from technical agencies are valuable data that enable local government to do spatial analysis to implement risk-sensitive urban development in the riverbank areas. To illustrate the utilization of the map, here are some outcomes resulted from spatial Figure 27 analysis done on top of the collaborative map. The Flood inundation nearby the Ampal riverbank is frequent experience for following are illustrated usefulness for city planning local residents especially when heavy rain shower the city more than two hours resulted from spatial analyses done in Winongo Case study. Figure 28 The green aggregated parcel blocks were identified as parcels potential to be included in land consolidation project to support city infrastructure improvement 41 V. 2. 1. Calculating Building density Building density in a segment can be calculated by comparing the total area of built environments against the total area of a segment, seen as follow: total area of built environment Buidling density= x 100% total segment area Steps used to calculate building density are : a. To select building using spatial query (Within) of QGIS spatial query. b. To calculate building area. c. To calculate segment/block area. d. To calculate building density. Density building is then visualized using heatmap method with radius of determined circle is using the value of individual building area. The results of heatmap visualization of building density for each Segment. Figure 29 Density buidling heatmap of Segment 1 and 2 (left) as well as 3 and 4 (right) of Winongo River 42 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia V. 2. 2. Calculating imaginary demarcation lines on riverside areas The government regulation on River (PP. No. 38/2011) specifies that a city river like Winongo that has depth from 3 up to 20 meters, many are without riverbank structure, should be freed from settlements and has at a free space at least 15 meters from the left and right side of the edge of the river (see Figure 30). Such imaginary demarcation lines on the riverbanks can be seen as an awakening call to simulate how the regulation would affect the riverbank areas. Figure 30 The demarcation lines of 15 meters right and left from the edge of the river on segment 1 and 2 (left) as well as 3 and 4 (right). 43 From the analysis, it can be summarized that hundreds of houses need to be relocated and re- arranged (see Figure 31). Table Figure 31 Numbers of buildings that are fully or partially selected in case of urban Buildings that virtually are fully within or partially arrangement based upon riverside zonation (15 m within the 15 m of riverbanks zone Scope Within Intersect Segmen 1 4 67 Segmen 2 80 202 Segmen 3 16 94 Segmen 4 24 124 Segmen 5 42 137 Segmen 6 39 146 Segmen 7 37 126 Segmen 8 21 106 Total (sum) 263 1,002 Total buildings in all segments 263 1,002 44 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia Meanwhile the numbers of land parcels that need to be consolidated when urban arrangement will take place is shown in Figure 32. Figure 32 land parcels (with various riights i.e. use rights/HP, private ownerships/HM, building use rights/HGB) that virtually are fully within or partially within (i.e. intersect) the 15 m of riverbanks zone 45 V. 2. 3. Identifying the location of waste water treatment infrastructures The main concern in all segments is that the use of rain drainages is combined with waste water networks. In addition to that, there are some Waste Water Treatment Installation known as IPAL have been built and installed in the field but failed to beused. For this reason, waste water treatment seem essential to be provided in each community area. In this study, the location of IPAL is designed based upon its topographic features of each RW. The results of analysis are presented in Figure 33. Figure 33 The proposed location of IPAL to be installed in Segment 5 and 6 (left) as well as 7 and 8 (right) based on their access and the topography 46 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia V. 2. 4. Identifying where to put hydrant Optimal hydrants are proposed based upon community inputs and geospatial analysis considering the density of the buildings and accessibility of the local roads in the study area. Optimum hydrant locations were assumed to have a location that no later than 30 meters from the street. The hydrants should be able to reach all settlement blocks. The resulted analysis is shown in Figure 34. Figure 34 Proposed community hydrant installation in segment 1 and 2 (left) as well as 3 and 4 (right). 47 V. 2. 5. Calculting best evacuation routes Optimum evacuation routes were generated utilising tools road planning using GIS software. The destination of the evacuation routes is main public facilities and open space environment. Figure 35 Best evacuation routes for Segments 1 and 2 (left) as well as 3 and 4 (right) 48 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia The proposed routes for residents to move from V. 2. 6. Identifying land ownership settlements areas to targeted evacuation points in all segments were based upon the existing In regard to riverbank zonation, the existing condition of flood and landslide prone areas. All condition of land ownership in the study areas prone areas were successfully identified based shows that major types of rights are private upon historical data gathered during participatory ownerships (Hak Milik) and utilization right (Hak mapping activities and based upon flood discharge Pakai), the others are Building Use (HGB) and estimation from previous study (i.e. Feasibility Study not registered. There are actually many Sultanate of Winongo River by AECOM 2014). From the map Ground land ownerships in the study area but it can then be calculated numbers of buildings either mostly are not registered to BPN. The complete fully or partially threatened by landslide and floods. situation of land ownership in the study area can Figure 36 show the results. be calculated based upon the collaborative map produced. The corresponding numbers of buildings that are constantly threatened by flood events are 431 buildings. Figure 36 Flood extent and threatened houses 49 Table. Composition of land tenureships based on their right types in the study area Seg Land Private Use Building Land HM Hak HGB Ment without ownerships (Hak Use with no (%) pakai (%) deed (hak Milik) Pakai) (HGB) deed (%) (%) 1 2005 1990 54 142 4191 47.84 47.48 1.28 2 1568 2230 46 88 3932 39.87 56.71 1.169 3 517 684 229 61 1491 34.67 45.87 15.36 4 426 625 30 20 1101 38.69 56.76 2.72 5 103 706 120 16 945 10.89 74.70 12.69 6 86 649 134 50 919 9.35 70.62 14.58 7 437 1062 353 59 1911 22.86 55.57 18.47 8 451 824 57 72 1404 32.12 58.69 4.06 In order to illustrate the composition of the land ownerships as presented in Figure 37 shows the situation of land tenureships surrounding the Winongo river. The types of ownerships can be not registered (belum terdaftar), private ownership (hak milik), building use (hak guna bangunan), use right (hak pakai). Figure 37 Land ownership situation in Winongo river 50 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia VI. Lesson Learned From the showcases on the development of collaborative maps (Chapter IV) and their usefulness the lessons learned on advantages and challenges of collaborative mapping projects can be identified. These lessons learnt are expected to create awareness and comprehension to assess opportunities in applying collaborative mapping projects for supporting detailed spatial planning and risk zonation for disaster management. VI. 1. Advantages vI. 1. 2. Strengthening spatial awareness VI. 1. 1. Efficient way to gather good In addition to the rapidness to derive the outcome quality data and the reduced cost for data acquisition, the A significant advantage of this approach is outcome of the collaborative mapping creates a that it offers lower budget and shorter time of better ownership to stakeholders involved in the actions than conventional mapping approaches. process. Through participatory mapping activities Government and local government mapping at the community level and stakeholders meeting projects require more budget to hire experts and involved local agencies, data sharing and data professionals that are not from the area. Using validation become more familiar to stakeholders. conventional implementation, consultants need Good quality product can be offered as it requires more time to get to know the local area and more the quality assurance from BPN and the level of resources to mobilize the team, whereas in the detailed of the content is validated by all parties. collaborative mapping approach, the consultants In participatory mapping sessions and stakeholder are the community, local leaders, village officers, workshop, environmental problems related disaster technical agency leaders and staff with scientist and their proposed solutions are expressed and and students are installed as facilitators. Merapi documented in the draft map. It combines top- project that required 4 months of actions spent down and bottom approaches, so more than just about 330 millions rupiah or 110 million rupiah for participatory mapping activities. In this regard, each village, Winongo project that covered about community and local staff become more familiar 500 ha of corridor mapping areas spent about 250 with maps and geospatial information on their niche. million rupiah or 700 thousand rupiah per ha to get complete geospatial features of contours, building The resulting map is, at the same time, an effective footprints, neighbourhood infrastructures, hazard tool for program planning and monitoring. First, areas, etc. In summary, the advantages of the once the problems and drawbacks are all spatially mapping approach include: represented and documented, local community used the map as a base to propose community- • It offers faster and cost efficiently map based plans to be submitted to sub district products office. From the government perspective, those • It offers better ownership values to spatially referenced problems and drawbacks will stakeholders be straightforward resources to develop priority actions. Interestingly, the current planning system endorse bottom-up planning programs. 51 Monitoring and evaluation on land developments VI. 1. 3. Extending possibilities and and permit issuance could be very effective to be outreach done on top of the collaborative map. The challenge The collaborative map can also be easily turned will be on the institution support and resource into a “living spatial canvas” to present field allocation to make sure that the useful information developments’ updates and to gather community resources gained from the collaborative map is feedback. The Web 2.0 technology has opened up used for planning and decision-support. Here are possibilities to mash up the web collaborative map the opportunities it can offer: (WebGIS) with social media as a crowd application, • Basis for well targetted public investments, even to be accessed through Mobile Apps. This has regulate land use, and increase resiliency been exemplified by many smartcity applications • Unlimited themes: high adaptability and (e.g. QLUE in Jakarta) where human sensors are interoperability employed to support city services’ improvement. • System and data base integration by vertical Connecting the web collaborative map application and horizontal with field sensors and human sensors is a huge potential to offer. VI. 2. Real challenges It must be acknowledged, that the challenges to produce a collaborative map of an area are difficult and complex. Not only on the data availability, quality, but also on the heterogeneity of the data format. Here is the summary: Items Challenge Response Base Map Availability of physical and digital Practical regulation to accelerate base map map of national standard generation Data source Not spatially adjusted format, out Triangulation with primary data, build consensus and of date, low resolution, misplaced, understanding confidentiality Thematic Lack of guidance about thematic Sectors to decide and prepare guideline for each and model data model on attributes taken into every thematic map account include layer, class and category Data sharing Disconnection of local and national Introduce platform of national data management data management Human Varied capacity of local consultants Promote training, advisory, knowledge sharing and resource networking with national pool of talents 52 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia References Aditya, T., 2010. Usability Issues in Applying Participatory Mapping for Neighborhood Infrastructure Planning. Transactions in GIS 14(S1): 119–147 Cai G and Yu B, 2009. Spatial annotation technology for public deliberation. Transactions in GIS 13: 123–46 Chambers R., 2006. Participatory mapping and Geographic Information Systems: Whose map? Who is empowered and who disempowered? Who gains and who loses? Electronic Journal on Information Systems in Developing Countries 25(2): 1–11 Craig, W. J. and Elwood, S., 1998. How and why community groups use maps and geographic information. Cartography and Geographic Information Systems 25(2): 95–104 Elwood, S., 2006. Critical issues in participatory GIS: Deconstructions, reconstructions, and new research directions. Transactions in GIS 10: 693–708 Krygier, J. B., 2002. A praxis of public participation GIS and visualization. In Craig W J, Harris T M, and Weiner D (eds) Community Participation and Geographic Information Systems. London, Taylor and Francis: 331–45 Sieber, R.E., 2006. Public Participation Geographic Information Systems: A literature review and framework. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 96: 491–507. Project Reports Aditya, T., Istarno, Andaru, R., Widjadjanti, N. (2013). Final Report of Merapi Detailed Risk Zone Mapping. Department of Geodetic Engineering, Faculty of Engineering & Yogyakarta Disaster Management (BPBD) & World Bank. Aditya, T., Andaru, R. (2015). Final Report of Collaborating Mapping Activities in Winongo River. Department of Geodetic Engineering, Faculty of Engineering & Yogyakarta City local Planning (BAPPEDA) & World Bank. Rahmat, Mustakim, Harini, R., (2015). Final Report of Collaborating Mapping Activities in Ampal River. Faculty of Engineering, Balikpapan University & Balikpapan City Local Planning (BAPPEDA) & World Bank. National Land Agency (2014). Final Report of Land Consolidation in Merapi. Land Arrangement and Adjustment Unit, Yogyakarta Province’s Land Office. 53 Abbreviations & Acronyms BPBD DIY Yogyakarta Provincial Disaster Management Agency BAPPEDA Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Daerah/Regional Development Planning Agency BBWS Balai Besar Wilayah Sungai/River Basin Development Agency BIG Badan Informasi Geospasial/Geospatial Information Agency BNPB Badan Nasional Penanggulangan Bencana/National Disaster Management Authority BPN Badan Pertanahan Nasional /National Land Agency BPN Badan Pertanahan Nasional/National Land Agency BPPTK Badan Pengkajian dan Pengembangan Kegunungapian /Agency for Technological Development and Research of Volcanology BPPTKG Balai Penyelidikan dan Pengembangan Teknologi Kebencanaan Geologi/Research and Technology Development of Geological Disaster DED Detailed Engineering Design DEM Digital Elevation Model DIY Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta/Yogyakarta Special Region DPPD Dinas Pengendalian Pertanahan Daerah/Regional Land Control Department DRM Disaster Risk Management FKWA Forum Komunikasi Winongo Asri/Winongo Community GCP Ground Control Points GFDRR Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery GIS Geographic Information Systems GPS Global Positioning Systems IPAL Instalasi Pengolahan Air Limbah/Waste Water Treatment Installation LAPAN Lembaga Penerbangan dan Antariksa Nasional/National Institute of Aeronautics and Space PPK GPS Post Processing Kinematic GPS PU Pekerjaan Umum/Public Works PU ESDM Pekerjaan Umum, Energi dan Sumber Daya Mineral/Public Works, Energy and Natural Resources Agency PVMBG Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi/Center of Volcanology and Disaster Mitigation RDTR Rencana Detail Tata Ruang/Detailed Spatial Plan REKOMPAK Rehabilitasi dan Rekonstruksi Berbasis Masyarakat/Community-based Settlement Rehabilitation and Reconstruction RT and RW Rukun Tetangga and Rukun Warga/Neighborhood areas UAV Unmanned Aerial Vehicle 54 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia The Authors Trias Aditya is Associate Professor at the Department of Geodetic Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, UGM. Currently he is Head of Laboratory of Geoinformatics and Geospatial Information Infrastructure. He completed his Bachelor of Engineering in Geodetic Engineering from UGM (1998), received his MSc in Geoinformatics from ITC (2003) and PhD in Geoinformatics from ITC/Utrecht University (2007). His research interests include Cartography, Geospatial Data Infrastructure, Interoperable Geospatial Information System for Land Administration, Disaster Management, and Peatland Management Iwan Gunawan is Senior Natural Resources Specialist to the World Bank Environment and Landscapes program in Indonesia. Previously, he was leading the Disaster Risk Management team of the institution. He has a PhD from Texas A&M University in Regional Development (1994), an MS from Louisiana State University in Engineering Science (1991), and a BS in Geodetic Engineering from Universitas Gadjah Mada (1986). His engineering and planning background includes geospatial analysis, geospatial modeling, geographic information systems, spatial database management, and land use planning. Suryani Amin was a Climate Adaptation Consultant of the World Bank Disaster Risk Management program in Jakarta. She has her Msi from University of Indonesia in Environmental Sociology Study and was doing research on resources mobilization of peasant organization. Previously, she was Coordinator to Climate Resilient City with the Mercy Corps Indonesia. Currently She is Community-Based Climate Change Adaptation Advisor to USAID-DAI Climate Change Adaptation and Resilience (APIK) Program. Hoferdy Zawani was part of consultant team of the World Bank Disaster Risk Management team of Jakarta office. He facilitated in policy discussion on urban resilience framework. Mr. Zawani has solid ground of understanding in access to water and sanitation services, slum alleviation, and land for the urban poor. He is currently pursuing graduate school at the University of Florida, Gainesville. Ruby Mangunsong is a Disaster Risk Management consultant in World Bank Office Jakarta. She earned her master degree in Sociology of Social Changes from Saint Petersburg State University, Russia. She supports the mainstreaming DRM, knowledge sharing and knowledge exchange between Indonesian National Disaster Management Authority (BNPB) and the World Bank. Prior to joining the World Bank, she assisted the Jakarta Tsunami Information Center with the UNESCO Office in Jakarta. The Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and www.gfdrr.org Recovery (GFDRR) is a global partnership that helps developing countries better understand and reduce their vulnerabilities to natural hazards and adapt to climate change. Working with over 400 local, national, regional, and international partners, GFDRR provides grant financing, technical assistance, training and knowledge sharing activities to mainstream disaster and climate risk management in policies and strategies. Managed by the World Bank, GFDRR is supported by 34 countries and 9 international organizations. ISBN 978-979-16876-9-0 Technical Note 3 Mainstreaming Resilience in Community Driven Development in Indonesia ia es on Ind in ct oje Pr C DD in ce ien sil Re ng mi ea tr ins Ma The World Bank Office Jakarta Indonesia Stock Exchange Building, Tower II/12-13th Fl. Jl. Jend. Sudirman Kav.52-53 Printed September, 2016 © 2016 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank 1818 H Street NW Internet: www.worldbank.org This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Rights and Permissions The material in this work is subject to copyright. Because The World Bank encourages dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for noncommercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given. Authors: Risye Dwiyani Iwan Gunawan Ruby Mangunsong Photo Credit: Risye Dwiyani, Ruby Mangunsong, PNPM Urban CBDRM Team Documentation Copyright: World Bank Design, Layout, Infographic: Indra Irnawan First Edition, September 2016 Content I. Introduction.......................................................................................1 II. Issues and Gaps in Community Resilience.........................4 III. Community Driven Development as Entry Point ...........9 IV. Mainstreaming of Resilience into PNPM Urban............15 V. Achievement, Lessons and Way Forward........................ 21 iv ia es on Ind in ct oje Pr C DD in ce ien sil Re ng mi ea tr ins Ma Abbreviations & Acronyms AB Aturan Bersama /Community Rules BAPPEDA Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Daerah/Local Development Planning Board BIG Badan Informasi Geospasial/Geospatial Information Agency BKM Badan Keswadayaan Masyarakat/community-elected Board of Trustees BMKG Badan Meteorologi, Klimatologi, dan Geofisika/ Agency for Meteorology, Climatology, and Geophysics BNPB Badan Nasional Penanggulangan Bencana/National Disaster Management Authority BPBD Badan Penanggulangan Bencana Daerah/Local Disaster Management Agency BPS Badan Pusat Statistik/National Statistical Agency CBDRM Community-based disaster risk management CDD Community Driven Development CDP Community Development Plan CSS Community Self-Survey DRM Disaster Risk Management DRR Disaster Risk Reduction GFDRR Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery KSM Kelompok Swadaya Masyarakat/ LKM Lembaga Keswadayaan Masyarakat/community-elected Board of Trustees MIS Management Information System ND Neighborhood Development NMC National Management Consultant OM Operations and Maintenance Perda Peraturan Daerah/ Local Government Regulation PMU Project Management Unit PNPM Program Nasional Pemberdayaan Masyarakat/National Community Empowerment Program PRBBK Pengurangan Risiko Bencana Berbasis Komunitas/ Community based Disaster Risk Reduction PU Pekerjaan Umum/Public Works RPJMN Rencana Pembangunan Jangka Menengah Nasional/National Medium Term Development Plan TAPP Tim Ahli Perencanaan dan Pemasaran / Community Urban Planner TIPP Tim Inti Perencanaan Partisipatif/ Community Participatory Planning Core Team UPP Urban Poverty Project 1 Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION Indonesia is an archipelagic country that lies Figure 1 below illustrates the distribution of between three main tectonic plates, Eurasian, disaster risks among Indonesian cities. Pacific and Indian-Australian plates, and is part of the Pacific Ring of fire. The country has more Due to this rapid urbanization, many cities in than 17,000 islands1 and constitutes the biggest Indonesia face the problem of land scarcity. archipelagic country in the world. Indonesia has While population in urban areas continues 34 provinces, 416 districts, 98 cities, 7,024 to grow rapidly, land availability tends to be sub-districts, and 81,626 villages/urban wards. stagnant, and the needs for land areas for According to official statistics, in 2015 the total housing and settlements cannot be met. Many number of Indonesian population reached city dwellers cannot afford to buy land or livable 255.5 million and 57% of the population live houses because their prices keep increasing in- in the island of Java. Despite the abundant line with the inflation. Lower income population natural resources, fertile land, rich biodiversity often have no options other than residing in and scenic landscapes, this chain of islands informal settlement areas, which are frequently are highly prone to natural disasters. Indonesia also unsafe, such as in riverbanks, unstable is also highly urbanizing where the urban slopes and other hazard-prone zones. These population is currently accounts for 54% and it settlements gradually grow into densely- is expected to reach 67% by 2025, and there populated areas. are currently 98 municipalities in the country. Distribution of Disaster Risks in Indonesian Cities Source: World Bank analysis, 2016 1 Based on data from the Geospatial Information Agency (BIG) 2 ia es on Ind in ct oje Pr C DD in ce ien sil Re ng mi ea tr The Indonesian Disaster Risk Index issued ins Ma by BNPB (National Disaster Management Authority) in 2013 groups 136 districts/cities in Indonesia within the category of high risk. The risk has been assessed based on the probability of impacts occurring should a hazard event turns disastrous. During 2000-2015, 82% of disaster in Indonesia is categorized as prone to hydrometeorology type of hazards, such as flood, strong wind/typhoon, landslide, drought, and forest fire. Disasters can wipe away years of development gains in a matter of minutes or hours. Disaster events that often occur in areas with high population density in big cities in Indonesia include urban fires, floods, and strong winds. The capacity of the people in coping with these disasters tend to be very low due to their limited awareness and knowledge. Indonesia Urban Poor Community that is exposed to disaster 52% live in cities in d o n esia n s l saster sed l i o n s 2 9 m i l ive i to di m il on li ns lum 2 0 0 po x e s are Source: World Bank, BNPB, 2016 Figure 1. Flooding in densely populated areas in big cities 2 ”Experiences in Building Resilient Communities” (Pengalaman Membangun Masyarakat Tangguh), BNPB, 2013 3 Disasters may cause economics slow down, Building Resilience according to 2014 increase poverty and unemployment. The BNPB2 has to be characterized at least by poor are disproportionately exposed and have the following traits: 1) capacity to anticipate to bear the brunt of disaster impacts. Disaster hazards; 2) capacity to absorb or eliminate events also affect public service delivery such shocks by countering or adapting to them; as health, food security, water and sanitation, 3) capacity to manage or maintain certain and livelihood, which may further harm people basic functions and structures in times of living in poverty. There needs to be capacity disaster emergency, and 4) capacity to building to build the resilience of the community recover or bounce back in the aftermath of to disasters, particularly the poor who tend to a disaster event. Efforts to build community be concentrated in urban areas. resilience need to be focused on the empowerment of community’s roles in reducing the risks they are facing. Figure 2. Living environment in densely-populated areas in typical Indonesian cities 4 ia es on Ind in ct oje Pr C DD in ce Chapter 2 ien sil Re ng mi ea ISSUES AND GAPS IN COMMUNITY RESILIENCE tr ins Ma Indonesia ranked among the top ten fastest people), and the number of urban poor is urbanizing countries of the world during projected to be greater than that of rural poor 1990-2014 and has the second-largest urban by 2030, if current trends continue. The urban population in East Asia after China. poor are concentrated in the provinces of Java and Sumatra. The percentage of population In 2014, more than 28 million Indonesians live living in cities has increased nearly four-fold below the poverty line, or approximately almost since 1961, from 14.9% to 49.8% in 2010. In 11% of total population. According to the 2011 the population in Indonesia has become National Statistical Agency (BPS), the urban an urban population because more than half of poverty rate was 8.16% in 2014, compared the population have lived in urban areas. BPS to the national poverty rate of 10.9%. World estimated that by 2015 urban population in Bank estimates indicate that 36% of the poor Indonesia had reached 53.3%. in Indonesia live in urban areas (over 10 million Indonesia’s urban population Average rate of 4.1% increased per year 2000 2010 Population density increased 7,400 sharply per square kilometer 9,400 People People SIMILAR RATES OF INCREASE 68 % the largest IN URBANIZATION RELATED TO By 2025 Indonesians increase in LESS THAN 2% INCREASE will live OF PER CAPITA GDP in cities east asia Source: World Bank, BNPB, 2016 Figure 3. Road infrastructures that are not well built 5 the urban poor are concentrated 36% 10 Indonesians million in the provinces of java & sumatra poor live in urban area POVERTY RATE 28 million IF CURRENT TRENDS CONTINUE 11% Indonesians live below the 8.16% urban Number of urban poor is projected greater than poverty line 10.9% national rural poor by 2030 Population BPS ESTIMATED 1961 living in cities 2010 In 2011 by 2015 nerarly four-fold half of the population URBAN POPULATION 14.9 % 49.8% have lived in urban areas HAD REACHED 53.3% Source: World Bank, BNPB, 2016 According to BNPB’s data, in the past two unfavorable social-economic condition, and decades, disaster mostly hit Java, Sumatra, poor environmental management have also Sulawesi, Bali, and Nusa Tenggara where most increased the vulnerability and exposure of population is concentrated. The increase in urban population. The distribution of disaster urban population and natural hazard potentials events in Indonesia has also been increasing due has greatly increased community vulnerability. to climate change. The local governments, which Non-disaster resistant infrastructures, are at the forefront in facing disasters, have Figure 4. Settlements wiped out by landslide in Banjarnegara District, Central Java 6 ia es on Ind in ct oje Pr C DD in ce ien sil Re ng mi ea tr ins Ma THE MOST FREQUENT DISASTER more than 1,400 disaster events occur in 2015 = 3-4 events occur daily FLOODING LANDSLIDE STRONG WIND 250 MORE THAN more than 4,000 housing unit 243 education facilities 28 health facilities have been ONE MILLION LIVES NEEDED TO BE LOST RELOCATED damaged 131 worship facilities Source: World Bank, BNPB, 2016 mostly been unprepared in managing disaster country have not been made disaster-resistant. risks, such that disaster casualties and economic According to BNPB, more than 1,400 disaster losses and damages continue to be substantial. events occur in 2015 alone, meaning that between 3-4 events occur daily. The most Experiences from major disasters in Indonesia frequent disasters include flooding, landslide such as Aceh tsunami (2004), Yogyakarta and strong wind. The direct impacts of these earthquake (2006), Padang earthquake disasters include 250 lives lost and more than (2009), Jakarta floods (2013) have shown that one million people needed to be relocated. More the most affected sectors are housing and than 4,000 housing units have been destroyed, public facility. It means that this infrastructure and 243 units of education facilities, 131 worship has not been built with sufficient disaster- facilities and 28 health facilities have also been resistant fund. Disaster damage and loss data damaged. In the last 2 decades, the impacts of have demonstrated that housing infrastructures disaster on human settlements have increased and public facilities and infrastructures in the significantly particularly in urban areas. Figure 5. Flood-prone riverbank areas 7 Urban congestion and disaster risks (e.g. and taking into account all the existing flooding) are restricting growth in Indonesian and projected risks. In building community cities, leaving many Indonesians vulnerable to resilience, development is yet to be planned natural and man-made hazard risks. In Jakarta, as comprehensive and integrated that includes congestion is estimated to cost more than US$3 physical (infrastructures and housing), and billion annually and flooding affected 17.1% of social and economic elements that empower the metropolitan area in 2014. One week of the people. Awareness of the community flood in Jakarta in 2013 alone, for instance, cost to disaster remains weak and government more than IDR 7.5 trillion (USD 750 million). apparatus at the village level still needs to build closer networking with planners, local Although resilience including in urban disaster agencies (BPBDs), and other relevant development has now been mainstreamed development actors. in the National Medium Term Development Plan (RPJMN) for 2015-2019, commitment There is also major data gap in terms of official to concrete targets is yet determined at the data in disaster risk analysis, as the local local level. Such commitment needs to be governments seldom has the resources and supported by resources to invest in resilience capacity to engage the communities in such and strengthening capacity development at the exercise. In the past, village level plan was often local level. Disaster risk management also has formulated without involving local government not been considered as a shared responsibility units such as the Local Development Planning of different development stakeholders. The Board/Bappeda, Public Works Office and other national government has most of the time been sectoral units that can actually provide disaster- considered as the only entities that should related data, and information about hazard- bear the responsibilities in dealing with the prone areas, local bylaws related to disaster adverse impacts of disaster. As communities mitigation, and early warning system. are at the forefront in dealing with disaster, efforts to reduce risks should be focused on the To overcome the issues and gaps, communities communities, particularly through community- need to be empowered through a community- based awareness, capacity building and based programs to build their disaster resilience. structural measures to reduce, prevent or The Community Driven Development (CDD) eliminate disaster risks. approach can become an entry point for community-based disaster risk management At the village/urban ward level, planning that may include risk assessment, disaster risk documents are often not prepared in a management planning, capacity building and participatory manner and are not sensitive to concrete structural measures. The engagement disaster and climate risks. Urban settlement of the communities through the CDD process and land use planning and development are not may help reduce their vulnerability and at the built resilient to earthquake, flooding, landslide, same time build their resilience. 8 ia es on Ind in ct oje Pr C DD in ce ien sil Re ng mi ea tr ins Ma Issues Approach Expected Condition CDD Pre-disaster Community Disaster Post-disaster Resilience - No planning documents - Participatory planning - Enhanced capacity - No risk assessment - Risk assessment - Reduced risks - People living in densely - Multi-stakeholder - Preparedness populated and hazard-prone engagement - SOP areas - Infrastructure upgrading - Development plan - Poverty - Information system - Economic slowdown - On-call budget - Unemployment Scheme for mainstreaming CDD in building community resilience Community-driven development is an approach “… that gives control over planning decisions and investment resources to community groups and local governments.” Historically, programs using a CDD approach grew out of situations of crisis (financial shock, conflict, and even natural disasters) and were meant as transitional instruments for service delivery where governments (particularly newly installed administrations) lacked capacity to deliver services (Wong 2012). By optimizing the use of community actors, a CDD approach places less stress on government line agencies and at the same time is able to reach very large numbers of poor people. A CDD approach has traditionally been used by Social Funds, which are government agencies or programs that channel grants to communities for small-scale development projects. Social Funds typically finance a mixture of socioeconomic infrastructure (e.g., building or rehabilitating schools, water supply systems, and roads), productive investments (e.g., microfinance and income-generating projects), social services (e.g., supporting nutrition campaigns, literacy programs, youth training, and support to the elderly and disabled), or capacity-building programs (e.g., training for civil and local governments) (World Bank 2009). Source: Arnold, Margaret, Robin Mearns, Kaori Oshima, and Vivek Prasad. 2014. “Climate and Disaster Resilience: The Role for Community-Driven Development.” Social Development Department. World Bank, Washington, DC. 9 Chapter 3 COMMUNITY DRIVEN DEVELOPMENT AS ENTRY POINT Building Resilience from the Community A number of catastrophic events, from the wards (through PNPM Urban). This leading Indian Ocean Tsunami in December 2004 to Community-driven Development (CDD) program the Yogyakarta Earthquake in May 2006, have for poverty reduction3 in urban areas has been become a turning point for the Government operational since 1999, previously under the name of Urban Poverty Project (UPP)4. In its of Indonesia in reforming its national disaster management system. Throughout the response original design, however, the UPP had not focused its interventions on ex ante disaster risk and recovery phases of these disasters, the role of community as the first responder and main reduction, but the program has effectively been development actor was very evident. used as a platform for ex post village post-disaster recovery, preparedness building and resilience The Government of Indonesia has established a programs in disaster-affected areas where the national platform for community empowerment program operated such as in Aceh, Yogyakarta called the National Community Empowerment and Central Java, and West Sumatra. Program (Program Nasional Pemberdayaan Masyarakat or PNPM). To date the program With the enactment of Law Number 24/2007 has covered more than 60,000 villages on Disaster Management, the government has (through PNPM Rural) and 11,000 urban not only declared its responsibilities to protect Figure 6. A house in settlement area in northern Semarang city facing constant land subsidence 3 PNPM Urban has evolved from poverty reduction-focused to improvement of basic infrastructure and services. It is one of the largest CDD projects in the world, as stated in the “Indonesia: Evaluation of the Community Driven Development Program”, 2013 4 PNPM Urban itself was effective in 2007, scaling up from UPP. In the beginning, UPP covered only 5 provinces, focusing in Java Island. PNPM Urban expanded the coverage of the program to 33 provinces. 10 ia es on Ind in ct oje Pr C DD in ce ien sil Re ng mi ea tr ins Ma all citizens from disaster impacts, but also the As many community-based disaster risk rights of the people to obtain education, training, management (CBDRM) initiatives have and capacity building in disaster management. been developed and implemented by both The law also promotes participation of the government and non-government entities, communities in decision making in disaster BNPB launched an umbrella program for management, particularly related to programs CBDRM known as the Resilient Village/ and activities that may affect their resilience. Urban Ward program through Chief of BNPB Under this law, every citizen is now obliged to Regulation No. 1/2012. The regulation defines engage in disaster management activities. In a number of indicators as a point of reference 2008 the government established the National for any villages that want to build its resilience. Disaster Management Authority/BNPB, which The indicators consist of six aspects, i.e. has the mandate to command, coordinate and legislation, planning, institutional, financial, implement an integrated disaster management capacity building, and disaster management system, and which reports directly to the activities. The program to build resilient President. The Disaster Management Law village was initially piloted in 42 villages in 21 decentralizes disaster management to the provinces. Some other ministries and agencies provincial and municipal government levels, implement similar programs, for instance the and it mandates provinces and districts/cities to Ministry of Social Affairs with its Kampung Siaga establish a local disaster management agency/ Bencana (Disaster Prepared Village), and the BPBD. This new policy and legal framework Ministry of Health with its Desa Siaga (Ready/ on DRM is in fact consistent with community Prepared Village). There are quite a number of driven approach of PNPM. such village-based programs, but the activities were yet to link their risk assessment, DRM- mainstreamed planning, and structural and non-structural measures. Figure 7. A slum settlement in Makassar. 11 management into development down to the grassroots level, PNPM Urban initiated to incorporate disaster risk reduction components into its programming, taking advantage of its established CDD networks and mechanism. PNPM Urban: A Promising National Platform for Mainstreaming Resilience in CDD PNPM Urban covers all urban wards in Indonesia and lays the foundation for community participation in planning, decision making, and the mechanism to channel and manage funds at kelurahan5 level. Program management at the community level is led by a community-elected Board of Trustees called BKM/LKM (Badan/ Lembaga Keswadayaan Masyarakat). The program allocates kelurahan grant to facilitate local institutional development, capacity building, technical assistance, formulation of the Community Development Plan (CDP), and a stimulant funding for poverty reduction investments as defined in the CDP. The type of investments to alleviate poverty may include infrastructure, social, and economic projects. Employing a participatory approach, Figure 8. Tsunami Evacuation Route, Disabled-Friendly Design. community members would first set a vision of their communities, and accordingly identify Building on the lessons learned and issues and strengths of their areas in relations experiences from program implementation to their poverty situation. Subsequent to that, in disaster-affected areas, PNPM Urban can they will analyze the actual needs to improve provide a promising platform to address one their living conditions, formulate and implement point at the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk a plan to change those conditions. The program Reduction 2015-2030, that within the context is managed by a Project Management Unit of sustainable development and poverty (PMU), which is established under the Ministry eradication, there is a need to integrate disaster of Public Works as the executing agency. risk reduction into policies, programs, planning, Technical assistance is provided by the National and budgeting at all levels, as well as to invest Management Consultant (NMC), regional and disaster risk reduction through structural and provincial consultant teams, city coordinator non-structural measures. With the emerging teams, and assisted by more than 6,000 urgency of mainstreaming disaster risk facilitators. 5 Kelurahan is an administrative term for urban wards. A city would consist of several sub-district, and each sub-district consists of several kelurahans. 12 ia es on Ind in ct oje Pr C DD in ce ien sil Re ng mi ea tr ins Ma PNPM Urban has been a dynamic program a better partnership between communities that involves intensive learning processes and local governments, and introducing DRM at all levels, from the national down to the measures to the program, i.e. to ensure that the community levels. In the initial design, the urban poor in participating kelurahan benefit UPP’s objectives were: (1) to improve basic from improved local governance and living infrastructure in poor urban neighborhoods; conditions that will be achieved through: (1) (2) to promote sustainable income generation strengthening and institutionalization of elected for its poor urban residents who are mostly representative organizations or BKM (Badan long-term poor, have incomes eroded by Keswadayaan Masyarakat) at kelurahan level high inflation, or lost sources of income in the that are accountable to the communities, (2) economic downturn; and (3) to strengthen provision of direct block grants to communities the capability of local agencies to assist poor to finance poverty reduction activities; (3) communities, all to be done through a bottom- enhancement of the capacity of the central and up and transparent approach. Feedbacks local governments to partner with community and lessons learned obtained from regular organizations in public service delivery, and monitoring and evaluation were processed and (4) increasing DRM awareness of disaster shared for the constant improvement of the risk management and mainstreaming DRM to program. Later the objectives shifted, aiming strengthen resilience. Figure 9. An example of transformation made by PNPM Urban ND in a formerly slum area in Yogyakarta. 13 Several pilot projects to enhance the national The program has been growing and lately it platform have been conducted, embedded with has stronger involvement of local governments PNPM Urban program, locations, and BKMs. and is focused more on slum areas. PNPM-ND One of them is the Neighborhood Development provided lessons that resilience measures need (ND) program, an ‘advanced’ version of PNPM to be introduced in the design of the program, Urban. In each kelurahan that implements since there are many part of PNPM-ND cities, PNPM-ND, the Community Development particularly slums, are located in disaster prone Plan formulated earlier through PNPM Urban zones such as those on the coastal area and will be refined with the introduction of spatial riverbanks, making the cities more vulnerable to analysis and plan to create an orderly, safe disasters. Based on these needs, a pilot project and healthy neighborhood. The principles of which introduces DRM measures into PNPM PNPM-ND include comprehensive and spatial- Urban by adopting PNPM-ND cycle, named oriented planning, active involvement of local PNPM Urban – CBDRM, had been initiated. The governments, being creative and innovative, pilot project would be a learning base before and good governance. PNPM-ND began as a the introduction of a comprehensive effort to pilot initiative in 2008 and to-date it has been mainstream resilience into the PNPM Urban expanded to cover more than 700 urban wards national platform. across the country. Figure 10. Road built by the community along with the landslide mitigation. 14 ia es on Ind in ct oje Pr C DD in ce ien sil Re ng mi ea tr ins Ma Project Organization of PNPM Urban (Project Appraisal Document for the National Community Empowerment Program in Urban Areas for 2012-2015, 2015) MINISTRY OF PUBLIC WORKS National Steering national Head of PMU Committee DG Human Settlements (Team) Program Manager (SNVT) Director for Building and National Neighborhood Development Research & Evaluation Development Consultant NMC provincial Provincial Planning agency Provincial Coordinating and Head of Public Works Steering Team Provincial Team Under Provincial Project / Settlements Provincial Oversight Consultants Manager (Prov-SNVT) Dinas (OCs) district (kota/kab) Kota/Kab Planning agency Kota/kab Kota/Kab Project Coordinating and Manager (kota/kab Head of Public Works Steering Team -SNVT) / Settlements Provincial City Coordinator Dinas sub district (kecamatan) Sub-district Head of Sub-District Project Manager (PJOK) village (kelurahan) Facilitator Team Head of Village Board of Trustee (BKM) Volunteers Community Groups (KSM) Line of Control Line of Facilitation Line of Coordination Line of Reporting 15 Chapter 4 MAINSTREAMING OF RESILIENCE INTO PNPM URBAN Pilot initiatives on mainstreaming resilience into hazards, level of risk based on the National development through PNPM Urban platform, Action Plan for Disaster Risk Reduction 2010- known as CBDRM or Pengurangan Risiko 2012, poverty rate, and performance of BKMs. Bencana Berbasis Komunitas, that aims to improve capacity of community on disaster risk Each kelurahan review and revised its management, were launched in 2013. The pilot Community Development Plan (CDP) with a adopted PNPM-ND cycle model6 with some more comprehensive spatial plan, where risk modifications in the methods/instruments due to identification and analysis are incorporated the introduction of the DRM components. Through in the planning process. The revised CDP, or the initiatives, GFDRR (Global Facility for Disaster better known as Community Settlement Plan Reduction and Recovery) provided a grant of (CSP) as in PNPM-ND, is a five-year plan US$ 2.38 million to support capacity building in that will be implemented annually based on DRM for communities, participatory DRM-based the priorities for each particular year. The plan development planning, and implementation of includes investment plan (5-year and annual), DRM-based development model. contingency plan, and emergency SOPs (Standard Operating Procedures). It is further Six cities facing high disaster risks were selected equipped with Community Rules or Aturan as pilot locations7 namely Padang City, Bandar Bersama (AB) and Operations and Maintenance Lampung City, Gresik Regency, Manado City, (OM) Plan, which are formulated through series Surabaya City, and Sidoarjo City. The selection of meetings and discussions between the of the cities considered different typology of community and the local government. Location of Pilot PNPM Urban - CBDRM and PNPM Urban-ND Manado, flash flood Padang, earthquake Bandar Lampung, tsunami Gresik, floods Sidoarjo, fire Legend Surabaya, fire Location of Pilot PNPM Urban CBDRM Location of PNPM Urban ND 2007 - 2014 6 At that time there was a discussion on the possibility of replacing the traditional PNPM Urban model with the ND model 7 There were two stages for selecting the pilot locations; first in November 2013 (City of Padang, Bandar Lampung, Manado, and Regency of Gresik), and second in June 2015 (City of Surabaya and Sidoarjo) 16 ia es on Ind in ct oje Pr C DD in ce ien sil Re ng mi ea tr ins Ma Figure 11. Mud inside a house in Manado after the flashfloods in 2013; 17 In the beginning of the planning process, similar existing disaster risks in the planning process. to what PNPM Urban does, the community For instance, although Padang is a pilot city for would build and define shared vision or goals earthquake, considering tsunami risks in the for the settlement. As the basis for developing planning process is inevitable. Manado, the pilot CSP, communities would conduct a Community for landslide, experienced a very destructive Self-Survey (CSS) to map the problems and flashfloods in January 17, 2013, therefore potentials of their locality and to identify their local communities included floods in the actual needs in order to reach the goals. Simple analysis. The following figure illustrates PNPM tool to assess vulnerability, capacity, hazard, Urban ND Cycle and how DRM measures are and risks are introduced in the CSS through mainstreamed in the process. CBDRM, and the results would be mapped and superimposed with other features of the The overall program at community level is led settlement. Priority areas of intervention are by the Community Board of Trustees (BKM), defined according to a number of criteria set which also coordinates the implementation by the communities, which include, among of PNPM Urban, PNPM-ND, and other others, high risk areas and areas where the development programs. Assisted by PNPM poorest households and vulnerable groups Urban facilitators, the BKM works together (women, children, the elderly and people with with the Kelurahan government in mobilizing disability) live. The investments selected have local communities and setting-up Community to be robust enough to reduce disaster risks Participatory Planning Team (TIPP). TIPP is and increase resilience in the area. Despite the responsible for managing the whole planning designation of particular hazard for each city, process and coordinating formulation of the the communities may include other types of CSP. Kelompok Swadaya Masyarakat (KSM) Main Actors of CBDRM Pilot Project an City Level tional Level elurah Level Na K BKM - TIPP Bappeda, PU, BPBD Ministry of Head of Lurah Public Works & Other governmental Housing Community agencies involved in coordination Volunteers in the technical with BNPB team KSM 18 ia es on Ind in ct oje Pr C DD in ce ien sil Re ng mi ea tr ins Ma is a group of volunteers who managed the that will assist the local communities in implementation of sub-projects based on the planning, implementation and other supporting CSP. Tim Ahli Perencanaan dan Pemasaran activities, and in ensuring the sustainability of (TAPP) consists of urban planners hired by the the program. The project strongly promotes communities to help the communities improve coordination and collaboration with BNPB, the CDP into a CSP-standard, to ensure that BPBD and other relevant government the plans were spatially sound and incorporated agencies responsible for disaster management, DRM activities based on a disaster risk analysis. universities, NGOs working in DRM, and other They also advised communities about specific civil society organizations. Main actors of this technical design and construction techniques project and the coordination/control line are that could reduce disaster risks. illustrated in the following figure (simplified from real structure). At the city-level government, Technical Team (or Tim Teknis) was formed through City Technical assistance was provided by Mayor’s Decision Letter. The Team consists of the existing PNPM Urban facilitators and representatives from different local agencies consultants from kelurahan up to national Figure 12. The community settlement at the Code River side, Jogjakarta 19 Mainstreaming DRM Measures into PNPM Urban ND Cycle P n Com lann tio P mu ing ra ation d TAP P ni iz an Socialannin Ana ty arin Soc pa Pr lf Su P lM g l ark F Se is lation egy re oc rve g T ial e ys rmu Strat P IP e o ing ss + introducing t DRM measures + Risk components & analysis, y Prep Contingency Plan, SOP of en t tr u c t C S P To wanitori , Insno ural C ont M o uit y In it y tm o n S n o f r ds ng t Pla mun in o s i S a nt at nd t a in n m u me l & N s Co va uti Eval ability i t Imp l e ra e + DRR measures OM tio o n u a t i o t u I nv e n t d c mainstreamed in the n a li z a n Str u ti o n , e m an investments, emergency i n forc ules Re R simulations level. An expert of disaster risk management communities, local governments, and kelurahan was added at the national level, i.e. the NMC. facilitators. For service delivery, the PMU at the Ministry of Public Works formulated a set of guideline Monitoring and reporting on the CBDRM book as a reference to implement the project implementation was part of the existing PNPM at central level up to community level. The Urban monitoring and reporting system. The guidelines consist of (1) Main Guideline, which implementation was recorded in the same outlines basic information about the project, Management Information System (MIS) of the including the objectives, principles, expected PNPM-Urban. The project also continued the outputs, components, stages, and project ongoing PNPM Urban/ND complaints handling management; (2) Technical Guidelines, which process, which will allow community members explains the steps in conducting the project in and the general public to channel complaints and more details; and (3) a Supplement Guideline inquiries through SMS or email. The guidelines, for fire disaster8. Training was conducted by training modules, MIS and the record of complaints the PMU and NMC for provincial consultants were disclosed in the PNPM Urban’s website. and city coordinators, who further trained local 20 ia es on Ind in ct oje Pr C DD in ce ien sil Re ng mi ea tr ins Ma In each CBDRM kelurahan of the first four pilot grants were allocated to each kelurahan for cities9 (FY2013), community block grants to the similar purpose with those of the FY2013 pilot amount of IDR500 million (equal to $37,500) cities. were allocated for capacity building and participatory planning (IDR25million, (equal to The National Management Consultant of $1,875)), hiring the TAPP (IDR25million, (equal the PNPM Urban reported that the whole to $1,875)), operational cost of BKM (IDR10 community block grants for CBDRM had been million, (equal to $750)), and investments as fully utilized 1% for capacity building activities planned in the Community Settlement Plan at community level, 14% for planning process (IDR440 million or equal to $33,000). Whereas support, and 85% for implementation of priority for the two other pilot cities10 (FY2015), IDR200 investments based on CSP. million (equal to $15,000) of community block Utilization of Community Block Grants in PNPM-CBDRM Pilot Locations (NMC Report, 2016) 1% Capacity Building 14 % Planning Process Support 85 % Implementation of CSP 8 Fire was not included in the early stage of the project design, until the project management was convinced to add pilot location for fire, as one of the hazards with high probability of occurrence in dense settlements in urban areas. It is also one out of seven main indicators of slum as defined by the MPW. 9 Padang, Bandarlampung, Manado, Gresik 10 Surabaya and Sidoarjo 21 Chapter 5 ACHIEVEMENT, LESSONS AND WAY FORWARD In general, the pilot project has shown Local governments responded favorably to the positive results. Community participation is program and different stakeholders provided relatively higher than that in PNPM-ND. The various forms of support to the local communities. participation rate of poorest and vulnerable The following chapter will elaborate the project’s community members in planning and decision achievements, lessons learned and the further making meetings on CBDRM was 53%, and steps to be taken in mainstreaming resilience participation rate of women in planning and measures using the PNPM Urban platform. decision making meetings on CBDRM was 46% (MIS, December 2015). Figure 13. Evacuation route plan of Kelurahan Panjang Selatan, Bandar Lampung, made by local communities 22 ia es on Ind in ct oje Pr C DD in ce ien sil Re ng mi ea tr ins Ma Achievements MOBILIZATIONS OF COMMUNITIES AND RESOURCES FOR DISASTER RISK INCREASED AWARENESS OF DISASTER MANAGEMENT RISKS The CBDRM pilot project has mobilized Based on the workshop conducted by the communities and resources beyond what had Ministry of Public Works in December 2015, been provided by the PNPM Urban platform. The one perceived impact of CBDRM consistently program has successfully triggered concern that mentioned by all the participants11 from different disaster is everybody’s business, as the threats pilot areas was that the local communities are real for the entire communities, not only had experienced an increased awareness of the poor. Consequently, the program has been DRM. They learned that disaster casualties and successful in promoting participation of more damage can actually be reduced. People also community members, despite difficulty in finding learned that some hazards might exhibit early “fulltime” volunteers to work for the program. signs and the most important thing, they knew To illustrate, the CBDRM’s emergency exercise what to do in time of emergency. Early warning itself that were conducted in 19 (out of 26) pilot system were introduced through socialization, kelurahans, involved 2,375 participants12. The announcements, and simulations. Another program has triggered the communities to also perceived impact was that, through CSP, local contribute, both in cash and in-kind. The amount communities became aware of safer locations of community contribution in cash for capacity to evacuate and the routes. This learning building is about IDR 12 million or USD 900, for process has also been transferred to schools planning process is about IDR 40.5 million or in the vicinity of the pilot areas. For example, USD 3000, and for priority investments is about in Manado, students were taught on how to IDR 890 million or USD 67,000. In total, the prepare an emergency bag. community contribution triggered in the CBDRM pilot project is more than IDR 943 million or USD 71,000, or 9.43% of the community block grants. Figure 14. Emergency simulations in Kelurahan Lolong Belanti, Padang: collaborating with multi-agencies as shown in the banner. 11 Participants include BPBD, head of Kelurahans, BKM coordinator of the respective pilot area 12 MIS of CBDRM, May 2016 23 As in PNPM-ND, the community hired TAPP communities had a strong will to seek support (Urban Planner) to assist and build capacity of from DRM-related organizations or individuals TIPP in incorporating disaster risk management in their cities that were willing to collaborate into the planning process. Almost all BKMs voluntarily. Throughout series of socialization, reported that it was difficult to find persons with workshops, and capacity buildings, more people such expertise in their cities. Recruited TAPPs, from other organizations/agencies were involved. whose contracts are only 6 months, usually had More resources were also mobilized through good skill in data collection and analysis, but they collaboration with other organizations, in the lack capacity to lead formulation of scenarios, form of facilities, expertise, and funding. List of contingency plans, and SOPs for emergency. stakeholders and the form of collaboration are Despite the lack of expertise in DRM, local summarized in the following table. Table 1. Collaboration Promoted Throughout the Pilot Project STAKEHOLDERS WITH WHOM THE LOCAL FORM OF ACTIVITY COMMUNITIES COLLABORATE COLLABORATION Capacity BPBD, Universities, NGO/NPO/Community Organization, As a resource Bulding such as MPBI, HFI, Forum PRB, Kogami, Mercy Corps, KSB, organization Earth Hour), Indonesian Red Cross, Firefighting Department Local government from other city Study exchange Planning Various bodies in Local Government, such as: Lurah (head of Providing technical Process kelurahan), Public Works Agency, BPBD, BPM (Community inputs Empowerment Agency), Bappeda (In Surabaya and Sidoarjo’s case, Fire Fighting Office). In several locations, Bapedalda/BLH (Environmental Agency), BMKG (Agency for Meteorology, Climate and Geophysics), Education Agency, Tagana Implementation BPBD, Indonesian Red Cross, NGO/NPO/Community Monitor that the Organization, Police Force, Community Health Center DRM measures are (Puskesmas), Firefighting Department, Tagana, the Search taken into account and Rescue team (SAR) Local private companies Providing funding School committee Organizing DRR campaign 24 ia es on Ind in ct oje Pr C DD in ce ien sil Re ng mi ea tr ins Ma DRM-MAINSTREAMED INVESTMENTS buildings designated for temporary evacuation. CBDRM pilots have implemented priority • Infrastructure with better building investments based on their CSPs, which include materials, structure and technology. The both structural and non-structural investments. quality of engineering design, structure Priority investments had been used mostly and material are generally better than for tertiary roads and bridges, drainage, and those of the regular PNPM Urban, retaining walls, as shown in figure below. mostly because the infrastructure built Disaster risk management measures were has to meet specific conditions to be already incorporated in the investments. The disaster-proof. For example, drainage type of investments are summarized as follows: system improvement and water supply in dense settlement. Local public works • Infrastructure that are functioned for DRR agency helped the BKM and facilitator and emergency response, such as roads to modify the technical design, select the that may also be used for emergency material and supervise the construction. evacuation, dykes, shelter, and reinforced Positive impacts of the CBDRM pilot investments were felt in Gresik, where two neighborhoods which usually were Investments in PRBBK (MIS, December 2015) exposed to floods are now safe, since the drainages are now well-connected with 4% 11 % the city-wide drainage system which has Shelters and Other also been normalized. warning signs • Means of risk communication, such 30% as public information board, signage, 14% Tertiary roads and CBDRM awareness movie, socialization of Water early warning system procedures, disaster supply bridges education activities at schools, and systems emergency exercise. As per December 18 % 23 % 2015, based on the MIS, there were Retaining 17,804 units of shelters and warning signs walls Drainage provided through CBDRM. Figure 15. Fire disaster management exercise in Sidoarjo. 25 Lessons Learned from Mainstreaming Resilience Measures into CDD Project the consultation process took place beyond the formal meetings. In those locations, it took longer to complete the CSP, but results were LOCAL GOVERNMENT’S PRESENCE IS more satisfactory. ESSENTIAL Therefore, local government played an In several locations, it was indicated that most important role since the beginning of the data used for analysis were mostly those planning process, inter alia, by providing collected/ owned by local communities, and city level data and plan, technical guidance, less data from the local government (e.g. on confirming delineation of disaster prone local regulations related to DRM, early warning areas, technical design for disaster-proof systems). Consultations with local government, infrastructure, and building capacity of the local particularly BPBD, were done towards the end communities to synchronize their programs of the planning process. This has sometimes with the local government programs. led to not-so-robust risk analysis and lack of synchronization with larger/higher-level Challenges have also been found in the systems. In other locations, local government collaboration with local governments. The and local authority (village officers, community high turnover rate of government officers leaders) have paid more attention and were that were tasked to handle the project has technically involved since early planning often slowed down the pace of the project, as process until the emergency exercise. Data and consultation process need to be repeated to technical inputs were provided for TIPP, while different persons and efforts need to be further synchronized. Figure 16. Fire- fighting vehicle which fits narrow roads in dense settlements. 26 ia es on Ind in ct oje Pr C DD in ce ien sil Re ng mi ea tr ins Ma Figure 17. Community-made Maps in Sidoarjo, Providing Information on Risk. RISK MAPPING HAS BEEN A HELPFUL DECISION MAKING TOOL The risk mapping that was conducted prior to vulnerability and capacity map themselves the selection of the priority areas of intervention were made from scratch by the communities, has proven to be useful in minimizing the confirmed by the local government and other practice of bagi rata (distribute equally experts during the risk analysis, they realized the regardless of the needs). This practice, which real risk faced by each area of the kelurahan. In some local communities considered fair, were this way, community learned ways to prioritize found in some PNPM-ND locations. Since the based on data, maps, and visual evidence. 27 COMMUNITY-BASED APPROACH THE PROJECT EXTENDS LOCAL EMPOWERED LOCAL COMMUNITIES GOVERNMENT’S OUTREACH IN DISASTER RISK MANAGEMENT Small champions in disaster risk management in each pilot city were born from this project. The community-based approach was able to At least from TIPP members alone, there were extend the outreach of existing local government’s 955 persons (35.2% are women), who were programs related to disaster risk management. already trained to lead community self-survey, It is often that the participation to the local risk analysis, planning, and to build relationship government program’s socialization, planning, with local governments as well as other and decision making, reached only down to stakeholders. The number of small champions certain administrative government level (e.g. might reach beyond the number of TIPP kecamatan or kelurahan), while in CBDRM, those members, as there were more people involved activities had been progressing at the grassroot as volunteers. level with local government’s assistance. Table 2. Estimated Number of Persons In locations with high disaster risks where Empowered through the Pilot Project government services are not present, such as TOTAL % WOMEN dense settlements in Surabaya and Sidoarjo, that ACTIVITIES are usually unreachable to the fire brigades, tried PARTICIPANTS PARTICIPANTS to solve their own problems, with the technical TIPP 955 35.2 advice of the fire brigades. In Surabaya, the local members communities made an agreement with the fire Community 3390 49.8 brigades not to add road humps inside dense Self-Survey (279 events) settlements, as it may slow down the speed of Disaster Risk 1626 54.2 the fire brigades. In the areas with very narrow Analysis (66 events) roads, where the firetrucks would not fit in, the Source: MIS of CBDRM, May 2016 Figure 18. Disaster education through a film at a school in Sidoarjo. 28 ia es on Ind in ct oje Pr C DD in ce ien sil Re ng mi ea tr ins Ma fire brigades assisted local communities in COMMUNITY-BASED APPROACH setting up water source facilities to supply ENCOURAGED FURTHER EFFORTS AT water in case of fire. In the pilot area in Manado, CITY LEVEL. local communities made an agreement to the local government, that they would lend their Prior to the introduction of CBDRM, several vehicles in case of evacuation (as stated in their disaster-related initiatives have indeed contingency plan). Mosques and churches, already existed in the pilot cities, but they besides the Lurah (head of Kelurahan) himself, tend to be stand-alone programs by particular were in charge of disseminating the local government sector, rather top-down, and communities’ rule that prohibits people to build have not been mainstreamed into regular new houses on disaster prone areas, which development. The existing local government supports the local government’s regulation programs were mainly related to emergency (Perda). Local government of Lampung stated response and preparedness, such as capacity that participatory risk mapping done through building, socialization, simulation, provision of CBDRM was indeed effective and replicable, emergency facilities (e.g. firefighting trucks, since to date they have just relied on maps given siren, and communication tools for kelurahan/ by BMKG (Indonesian Agency for Meteorology, kecamatan), provision of emergency response Climatology, and Geophysics) training for volunteers, and formulation of SOPs for particular hazards. Figure 19. Community Self-Survey (CSS) activity in Manado 29 Most of the pilot cities (and cities in Indonesia) and SOP. The community movements during have no complete set of Disaster Management the planning process have encouraged the local Plan, Contingency Plan and SOPs yet. Padang government to formulate city-level disaster and Surabaya are among cities that already have management plan in the near future. Disaster Management Plan for earthquake and fire respectively. Bandar Lampung, the pilot city In Manado, the absence of disaster for tsunami, had not issued any contingency management plan and contingency plan at the plans related to tsunami, despite the high risk. city level has led to uncoordinated policies for Due to low occurrence (latest tsunami was in flood and landslide mitigation by a number of 1883), the local government perceived higher local government agencies. Efforts by different risk for floods and earthquake which occurred local government agencies were mapped only several times lately. Therefore, local communities when the TIPP conducted data collection and in the pilot areas did not have the city-level plan analysis through CBDRM. In the end, CBDRM regarding tsunami for them to refer to during adds value to the synchronization of local the formulation of tsunami contingency plan government programs for floods and landslide Figure 20. An example of a earthquake-resistance house in Jogjakarta, built after the Mount Merapi eruption (2010) with the community-based approach. 30 ia es on Ind in ct oje Pr C DD in ce ien sil Re ng mi ea tr ins Ma LAND ISSUES AND CITY PLANNING the high landslide risk, they recommended the SHALL NOT BE OVERLOOKED WHEN local communities to eliminate several proposed MAINSTREAMING RESILIENCE MEASURES priority areas that are illegal, and to replace with INTO DEVELOPMENT those having legal land status yet lower landslide risks. In a long term, shifting only the priority into Illegal land and building without permits in some the less prone area to disaster will not solve the cases became one of the reasons why an area was main problem. Local government needs to revisit not chosen as priority area of intervention. On the the city plans, regulations and finally deal with other hand, such areas are often located on disaster illegal settlements somehow, in order to achieve prone area. For instance, in Manado, the pilot city resilience. As for the CBDRM practice by local for landslide, low income settlements are built communities, identification of land ownership and on steep slopes, but since the local government legal status, as well as the city plans, need to be referred to the city regulation or Perda, despite considered throughout the planning process. Figure 21. The Priority Area Map of Sidokare, District of Sidoarjo, prepared by the community. 31 Way Forward wide planning for slum upgrading and prevention. At the time this report is being written, a new The objectives of KOTAKU is to improve access national platform on slum upgrading and slum to urban infrastructure and services in targeted prevention that puts the local governments in urban slums, in order to achieve zero slum within the central role, and holds ‘collaboration’ as the the next five years. This could be considered as main principle, has just been launched. The national scale up from initially only 6 cities in 4 platform, i.e. Kota Tanpa Kumuh13 or KOTAKU, provinces to 271 cities in 34 provinces. will build upon the existing PNPM Urban platform. KOTAKU will mainly work at two levels, The following table show the least measures to i.e. city and community levels, while ensuring be introduced throughout the KOTAKU project good coordination with national and provincial cycle to ensure that the DRM is mainstreamed, as government and collaboration with all relevant stated in the KOTAKU’s Environmental and Social stakeholders. It will adopt the lessons learned Management Framework (ESMF). from PNPM-ND and PNPM Urban’s pilot projects, including CBDRM, with additional focus on city- Table 3. Measures to Mainstream DRM in KOTAKU PROJECT CYCLE/ NO DRM MEASURES TO BE INTRODUCED COMPONENTS 1 Training Provide the project participants knowledge, skills and tools to take DRM measures as necessary in each project cycle 2 Preparation of SIAP and Include assessment of disaster risks (hazard, vulnerability and CSP capacity) in the analysis and consider disaster risks in the subproject design and budgeting. Formulation of Contingency Plan and SOP for hazard in the respective areas and regular simulation, need to be taken should high disaster risk with high probability of occurrence are identified. 3 Preparation of DED Ensure that the design and materials used are appropriate for disaster-resistant infrastructure 4 Implementation Monitor that the DRM measures are taken into account 5 Operation and Retrofitting existing infrastructure, maintain the quality and Maintenance effectiveness of the infrastructure/activity 6 Institutional Effective collaboration with all stakeholders Arrangement Source: Environmental and Social Management Framework of KOTAKU, 2016 13 Kota tanpa kumuh means “city without slum” Technical Note 4 SAFE SCHOOL Contents I. Economic Impact of Disasters in Indonesia 1 1.1 . Overview 1 1.2. The Impact of Disaster to Education Sector 2 II. Problem, Challenge and Opportunity in Managing Big Number 5 1. Problem 5 2. Challenge 6 3. Opportunity 7 III. Safe School Momentum and Initiatives 9 3.1. One Million Safe Schools and Hospitals Campaign 9 3.2. National Program for School Building Rehabilitation 9 3.3. DAK Program for School Rehabilitation 11 3.4. Safe School National Secretariat Establishment 12 3.5. Asian Ministerial Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction 12 3.6 Safe School related Programs 14 3.7. Safe School Stakeholder Collaboration 18 IV. Safe School Initiative Implementation 22 4.1. Mainstreaming DRM in Education Sector 22 4.2. Pilot Safe School Project Implementation 22 4.3. Influencing Government Financing Scheme (DAK). 27 4.4. Indonesian School Infrastructures Typology 31 4.5. Safe School Risk Mapping 33 4.6. Government Program Initiatives on Safe School 34 4.7. School Stakeholders Collaboration 37 6. Integration into Government Policies 37 V. Safe School Results and Way Forwards 40 Annex: 1. Chronology of Safe School Initiatives 45 Chapter SAFE SCHOOL 01 Economic Impact of Disasters in Indonesia 1.1 Overview with about 40 percent population living in areas at risk. For a country that has more Indonesia is one of the most disaster-prone than 230 million population this percentage countries in the world. The Indonesian gives a very large nominal number of more archipelago, recognized to be one of the than 90 million population potentially largest in the world, has more than 13,000 at risk of creating a major humanitarian islands out of which 6,000 are inhabited. catastrophe should large disasters occur. Situated on the Pacific Ring of Fire and at According to data from the National Agency the meeting of the active Indo-Australian for Disaster Management (BNPB), over the plate in the South, the Eurasian plate in last 30 years there has been on average the North and the Pacific plate in the East, 289 significant natural disasters per year the country is highly exposed to numerous with the average death toll from such different hazards and vulnerabilities and events reaching approximately 8,000. have differing levels of disaster response capacity and ability to manage the The relatively high death toll associated consequences of crises. with natural disasters in Indonesia was partly driven by rapid uncontrolled Indonesia is situated in one of the urbanization and construction practices world’s most active disaster hot spots that disregard proper hazard zoning and where several types of disasters such as building codes. Many public infrastructure earthquake, tsunami, volcanic eruption, facilities were built before new information flood, landslide, drought and forest fires on risk zoning was available. With the frequently occurred. According to the Government recently issued a new World Bank global risk analysis, Indonesia earthquake zoning map and revised the is among the top 35 countries that have building code, many buildings including high mortality risks from multiple hazards Fact Sheet – Indonesia • 13,466 islands (largest archipelago in the world) • 34 provinces, 416 districts, 98 municipalities and 7,024 sub-districts, and 81,626 villages/urban villages • 81,000 km coastline (2nd longest in the world) • Population of 237 million people (4th most populated in the world) • Mega Biodiversity (10% plants, 12% of mammals, 16% of reptiles, 15% fish,17% of bird in the world live in Indonesia) – 3rd largest in the world • 13% or 129 active volcanoes in the world (1st in the world) 1 SAFE SCHOOL most public schools, for example, are the fiscal capacity of the affected region considered sub-standard to the proper have been significant. In many cases of the earthquake resistant requirements. disaster events, the regional government requested the assistance from the central Historical data from damage and losses government for emergency response and assessments (DaLA) from Indonesia’s post disaster reconstruction and recovery. recent natural disasters, from the Aceh Tsunami in 2004 to the recent earthquake 1.2 The Impact of Disaster to in Central Aceh on July 2013, consistently Education Sector demonstrate that the greatest negative In many earthquakes, the impact on school impact of such disasters is on i) housing/ infrastructure was very significant. The settlement; ii) essential infrastructure 2004 earthquake and tsunami in Aceh such as roads; and iii) social infrastructure, damaged more than 2,000 schools, while particularly schools and hospitals. the West Java earthquake of 2009 also The economic impact of disasters event for Tabel 1. Disaster Damage and Loss in 2004-2014 Year Damage/Loss Disaster Event 2004 41.400 Gempa Bumi dan tsunami Aceh dan Nias 2006 26.100 Gempa bumi Yogyakarta 2007 9.600 Gempa bumi Sumatera Barat, Banjir Jakarta, Gempa bumi Bengkulu 2009 20.900 Gempa Bumi di Padang 2010 7.930 Gempa Bumi dan tsunami di Mentawai, banjir bandang di wasior, erupsi gunung Merapi 2013 7.500 Banjir DKI Jakarta 2014 17.530 Erupsi Gunung Sinabung, Banjir DKI Jakarta, Banjir di Jawa Tengah, Banjir Bandang Sulawesi, Banjir di Pantai Utara Pulau Jawa dan erupsi gunung Kelud. 2 SAFE SCHOOL damaged more than 2,000 schools, and the one in West Sumatra also in 2009 damaged 2,800 schools. Indonesia can be considered as lucky, as these earthquakes had so far occurred outside of school hours. But the risk is very alarming as the above events alone could have killed more than 2 million children. The high vulnerability and exposure of school infrastructure to disaster is influenced by a combination of poor construction practices and the lack of awareness on disaster risks among the school communities, particularly those living in disaster prone areas. Most Schools built under a special Presidential public elementary schools in Indonesia, Instruction). for example, were built in the 70s when The impact of disaster is also on the building code was insufficient and continuation of the learning and teaching enforcement was practically absent. With process. A disaster event caused a halt the Government at that time only had to the education process. The disruption limited resources relative to its ambitious to the education process can last up to goal for constructing new schools under a 3 month. The temporary school made of program known as SD Inpres (Elementary salvaged materials will also influence the 3 SAFE SCHOOL quality of teaching delivery and learning were severly impacted by the eruption, process. The reconstruction of the school and iv) many unaffceted school buildings facilities impacted by disaster also takes were used as temporary refuge shelters. time due to the system of government budget planning. The capacity of the local Similar to the one in Merapi eruption government is very limited to respond to event, in many disaster events, the schools the impact of disaster on the education unaffected by disaster directly was usually sector. utilized as the refuge area. The refugee would stay in the school building in months In the Merapi eruption event, the disaster till the government could provide the caused the negative impact to the temporary shelters. The temporary refugee education sector including the continuity, facility also influenced the teaching and due to the following issues: i) students and learning process. There is no hard evidence teachers were also impacted by disaster, ii) to the direct impact of the student’s students became refugees together with achievement, but the impact is eminent. their parents, iii) school infrastructures 4 Chapter SAFE SCHOOL 02 Problem, Challenge and Opportunity in Managing Big Number Provision of the safe education system the Presidential Instruction (SD INPRES). in Indonesia being a prone country to The issues with this INPRES was that the disasters, has always been challenging. The school location selected was prone to spread of geographic location, typology disaster. Within each fiscal year of this of school buidling structures and available program, between 10,000-20,000 new funding capacity of the government are schools were constructed and roughly among the prolematic existing condition equal numbers of existing school were being faced by the Indonesia education repaired. sector. Under the current decentralized system, Despite the abovementioned issues, the constructions of new elementary and existing condition of education including secondary schools were financed through the government programs poses some block grants to local governments with challenges and opportunities toward implementation managed by school achieving the safe school initiative construction committees. In recent years, mainstreaming and implementation. school improvements and rehabilitations were financed through transfer to local 1. Problem governments under the Special Allocation Education sector in Numbers. According Fund (DAK). to the 2016 Statistic and Data Center of Ministry of Education and Culture, Financing the school resilience. The there are 212, 814 school ranging from provision of funding for constructions elementary education, primary education, and/or repairs of school facilities have high school, vocational school, school for not specifically been targeted to building special need in Indonesia. The schools resilience structures and facilities to are managed by 2, 922, 498 teachers disasters, although construction and repair and school principals. The total students of schools in disaster impacted areas were from all level of education is 44,510, 563. given priorities. This number, of course, poses problems Issues in building code compliance. The and challenges but at the sama time Government of Indonesia had taken the opportunity to improve the eduction need for major school rehabilitation very quality. seriously. Between 2010 and 2012, more School construction financing mechanism. than US$ 3 billion had been allocated to Constructions of public schools in rehabilitate heavily damaged classrooms Indonesia have been financed through around the country, mostly through different mechanisms. In the 1970s-1980s fiscal transfer mechanism to district most elementary school constructions and governments (DAK). According to education repairs were financed through grants from official statistics, between 2007 and 2009, the National to local governments under more than 10,000 new schools were also 5 SAFE SCHOOL constructed. However, given the sheer supervision process by school management number of schools to be rehabilitated and and school community was emphasized built, ensuring compliance to the proper to ensure the compliance to building code construction standards especially for with the assistance from the trained and earthquake resistance, is a major challenge. capacitated safe school facilitators. Low safe school construction capacity. 2. Challenge In the past, most school rehabilitation Large number of school in disaster prone projects including those funded by the areas. There are more than 258,000 DAK in its earlier year were carried by local schools in Indonesia, it is estimated that contractors which were deemed prone to 75% schools are located in disaster prone mark up and low quality construction. In areas. Most primary schools were built 2012, the Ministry of Education and Culture in the 1980s, where DRR aspect was not promoted school managed construction considered. To this end, a programmatic where school management and approach must be formulated to response committees, parents and local community to this challenge. The fiscal capacity of the are more involved in ensuring quality of government is limited. In that case, priority rehabilitation projects. The monitoring and determination must be be also made. The school risk-based approach can be optioned addressing this very imperative challenge. Missing coordination among relevant sectors. Issues of lack in coordination between central, provincial and local government. Policies are in place at the national level. As the education involves various government, many stakeholders has different role. This needs also leadership in leading the task. BNPB should take role in this position to ensure the operationalization of the safe school Picture 2.1 School with limited open space initiative. Scaling-up and evaluation and monitoring issues. Up to 2014, more than 25.620 pilot schools have been completed, but scaling up are still a major challenge. The challenge is due to the limited fiscal capacity, baseline, map and programmable approach toward complete problem solution. Evaluation to those pilot schools should be conducted to be considered for certification requirements. The methodology, applicable mechanism and tools must be created linking to the Picture 2.2. School with limited access to clean database system in Ministry of Education water and Culture. To date, assessment and 6 SAFE SCHOOL evaluation of school condition is conducted reduction. Schools have been targetted by school principals without capacity in for the implementation of this issues. To engineering. schools and principals, this quite confusing. In line with the above, to ensure the Importance of Partnership. Strengthening success of acceptance and internalization of partnership with related stakeholders of the safe school initiative agenda- for mainstreaming Safe School in Disaster standards and principles in school level, Risk Reduction during the transition of the process must factor the mentioned the new government become imperative. competing issues. Integration and inclusion This partnership can fill the government of other issues into the safe school gap in fiscal and technical capacity. initiative could also be considered. Pushing the agenda of safe school initiative sustainability will also require 3. Opportunity this partnership. The non-government Integration of safe school initiative to parties can be sourced for skills, tools and education agenda in Indonesia. The technical assistance the government has opportunity that can be utilized in the limited capacity to provide. implementation of the safe school Competing Issues. Lately, there have been program and agendas in Indonesia. The various issues emerged in Indonesia, effort to integrate safe school initiative namely gender, environment, narcotics, and program in Ministry of Education and sex education, health and disaster risk 7 SAFE SCHOOL Culture Strategic Plan must be pushed. Formulation of the regulation, guidelines The integration to regular development imperative. The dissemination of the plan will ensure the implementation of current regulation, guidelines and the safe school program with government build capacity to local governments at modalities. This will also ensure the sub-national level must be conducted. continuity and sustainability of the initiative Integration of the safe school knowledge in country wide. into curricula is also important. This knowledge must be internalized toward Utilizing the establishment of safe complete comprehension of the school school secretariat. In line with the management on the safe school initiatives above, revitalizing and strengthening the and program as well as the principles. National Safe School Secretariat to better Toward this end, the continuous training coordinate stakeholders and Safe School to local government and school principals Implementation is also important. Safe must be conducted. In particular to the School secretariat will manage the issues schools that are not involved in pilot and problems to be pushed. The safe program. School related data can be coordinated by the secretariat through coordination with Implementation of safe school standards DAPODIK center. The intervention that and principles. According to the 2014 data, needs to be undertaken is the development there are 747,358 classroom for primary of the risk map in effort to support the school (SD) and 231,643 classrooms for risk-informed decision and policy making junior high school (SMP) are damaged. related to education program in Indonesia. This poses problems but at the same time opportunity to implement the safe school Evaluation and monitoring mechanism. standards and principles. The capacity of Development of the monitoring and the government to construct new school is evaluation system and mechanism aimed around 300 schools per years. The demand at better planning and better safe school for new school for SMP is 4700 school program implementation and new school reflecting 34,900 classrooms to be built construction and retrofitting of exiting old for the next 5 years. In fulfilling the need schools. The standardized evaluation and of new schools construction, safe school monitoring tools factoring the building approach in particular retrofitting old codes stipulated by the government, schools can be implemented to fill the gap. Indonesia school typology, and school risk identified, would be important and urgent in addressing problems in school structures and school construction practices. 8 Chapter SAFE SCHOOL 03 Safe School Momentum and Initiatives 3.1. One Million Safe Schools and National Education pledged to ensure that Hospitals Campaign more than 3000 of schools would comply with school safety standards, adding he One Million Safe Schools and Hospitals would urge the education departments at Campaign was conducted in May 2010 district and province level to participate in by United Nations International Strategy the campaign. for Disaster Reduction (UNISDR). An important action following to the campaign The National Agency for Disaster was a National Campaign on Safe Schools Management also pledge so socialize and Hospitals that was launched by the and promote safe school and hospital Coordinating Minister for People’s Welfare awareness in schools and hospitals, starting accompanied by the Head of National with a meeting involving five districts in Disaster Management Agency (BNPB), Sumatera. The Coordinating Minister for Minister of Health and the Vice Minister People’s Welfare, would encourage the of National Education in July 2010. This heads of local government to allocate activities involved among others Ministry funding for programmes and activities of Home Affairs, Ministry of Religion, that will support the establishment of safe Ministry of Public Works and stakeholders schools and hospitals. from NGOs, Academicians, International 3.2. National Program for School Development Partners, independent e Building Rehabilitation This national campaign was supported by stakeholder working disaster risk The Safe School campaign has monumental reeducation in education sector. impacts; the Ministry of National Education has worked very hard identifying damaged The Vice Minister for National Education of schools/classrooms nationally, starting Indonesia pledged 3,000 schools to ensure with West Java, in 2010-2011. Below is compliance with school safety standards, the charts presenting number of damages and the Education Office at provincial and classrooms. The heavily damaged district/ municipality level were urged classrooms showed significant numbers to participate in the campaign and its that needs great amount of budget for school safety standards implementation. rehabilitation. The Minister of Health pledged 100 safe hospitals and promised to instruct local The identification of damaged classrooms departments of health at provincial and in 2010-2011 was a great momentum district level to establish safe hospital to obtain the overall picture on school and other health facilities with funding building condition in the country. The allocation. Both private and public hospitals results of the identification showed would be encouraged to ensure disaster significant numbers 132,317 (14,7%) of preparedness. The Vice Minister for heavily damaged classrooms of primary 9 SAFE SCHOOL Source: Presentation of MoEC in Bangkok, June 2014 10 SAFE SCHOOL school (SD) and 41,027 (13.76%) of heavily sector into their curriculum to establish damaged classrooms for junior high school safe school. (SMP). This has triggered the Government to develop a National Program for School Based on request of the Ministry of Rehabilitation and construction of New National Education to BNPB and the World School Unit Program. The new school unit Bank, the mapping was conducted and program to address the totally damaged resulted to 75% schools are located in schools and increase access to school, disaster prone areas. This has made more especially with obligation for 12 year confident of the government to invest in schooling. a massive National Program for School Rehabilitation in stages from 2011-2014. According to the 2014 data, there are The budget for 2011-2012 is focused 747,358 classrooms for primary school (SD) mostly to rehabilitate the heavily damaged and 231,643 classrooms for junior high classrooms with total amount IDR 17.4 school (SMP) are damaged. The capacity of Trillion equivalent to USD 1.6 Billion. the government to construct new school is only around 300 schools per years. The 3.3. DAK Program for School demand for new school for SMP is 4700 Rehabilitation school reflecting 34,900 classrooms to be One of School rehabilitation program built for the next 5 years. is financed through Specific Allocation Fund (DAK-Dana Alokasi Khusus). In In 2015, the Directorate of Primary 2011, the central government allocates Education targeted to rehab 9,811 80% for primary education (SD) and 20% classrooms (medium and heavily damaged for Junior High School (SMP) for DAK classrooms) with budget of 2015 IDR 751.2 implementation in 2012. 80% allocated for Million, though at the end of 2015 there primary education and Junior High School were still significant numbers of damaged are directed for rehabilitation of heavily classrooms according to National Education damaged schools. This is for supporting Data (Dapodik), 59,490 schools or 246.316 the national school rehabilitation program, classrooms (72,549 totally damaged focusing on heavily damaged schools. The classrooms; 77, 232 heavily and 96,535 proportion of DAK 2013, 16% for Senior medium damaged classrooms. The above High School (SMA) and SMK (Vocational situation on damaged schools have been a School) 24%, 40% out of each earmarked good momentum to implement safe school for rehabilitation of heavily damaged standards schools ; while the proportion for primary A National Workshop on Safe School education is 35% and for Junior High School conducted in December 2010 in is 25%, out of each, 35%-65% can be used cooperation with Ministry of National for rehabilitation of medium damaged Education, National Agency for Disaster schools. Management (BNPB-Badan Nasional The Safe School stakeholders (BNPB, Penanggulangan Bencana) and Plan Ministry of Public Works, BPPT-State Indonesia supported by other DRR Ministry of Research and Technology, stakeholders. This workshop resulted Bappenas, Planas (National Platform), to among others the need to identify Kerlips, Plan Indonesia, UNESCO Jakarta schools located in disaster risk areas and a Office, PPMB ITB and the World Bank) circular letter to inform the regions head supported the development of technical for mainstreaming disasters in education guideline for DAK 2012, which include 11 SAFE SCHOOL safe school principles, structural and non- National Education Commemoration Day in structural issues. For the first time the May 2012. Technical Guideline for DAK 2012 contained instruction for construction of earthquake Since the Perka BNPB No. 4/2012 on Safe resistance building. School/Madrasah issued, the Vice Minister requested the World Bank to support School Rehabilitation Self-Management the Pilot implementation. 180 Schools (Swakelola). The DAK 20212 for the school in West Sumatra, West Java and West rehabilitation is implemented by self Nusa Tenggara have been piloted for Safe management (swakelola). Usually a team School implementation. The Result will be consist of school community under the in this Chapter below. Since then, many leadership of School Principals established other actors work in Safe School tried to as committee for School Rehabilitation or implement the guidelines and some other construction. On the other side, a parallel work to increase Safe School awareness program financed by Bansos program, among others Plan Indonesia, Save the APBN from Ministry of Education and Children, Kerlips, ASSI and many others. Culture take contractual mechanism using the third party services from planning, 3.5. Asian Ministerial Conference on detail design and the construction. The Disaster Risk Reduction self-managed school rehabilitation The three events related to Safe School program has more freedom to design and during the 5th AMCDRR, 22th – 25th implement the construction, though it has October 2012 has gained momentum to follow the technical guideline provided. as the basis for the current program The District Education Office provided the Global Program for Safe School in several Management and Technical consultants for countries including Indonesia. The both program usually has no knowledge on Government of Indonesia hosted the 5th the Safe School yet. Asian Ministerial Conference for Disaster Risk Reduction (AMCDRR) in Yogyakarta. 3.4. Safe School National Secretariat The three events on Safe Schools were Establishment conducted at the 5th AMCDRR are: The National Secretariat for Safe School was established in August 2011, under a. Pre-conference session on Sharing supervision of Vice Minister for Education, Experiences of Safe Schools and Ministry of Education and Culture and Hospitals the World Bank funded a personnel b. Special Session on Global Program for and its operation. Many discussions Safe Schools and Hospitals for formulation of Guideline for Safe c. Side event session on Children’s School/Madrasah led by the Secretariat Participation on Safe School and consulted to the Vice Minister for A Yogyakarta Declaration – endorsed Education, at the end, the Vice Minister of by Heads of Government, Ministers, Education decided that the guideline would and Heads of Delegation of countries be more appropriate to be issued by BNPB. in Asia and the Pacific, as an outcome BNPB supported by the Secretariat and the of the 5th Asian Ministerial Conference GFDRR/World Bank team finalized the draft on Disaster Risk Reduction (AMCDRR), guideline. In May 2012, the Guidelines for calling on disaster risk reduction (DRR) Safe School/Madrasah was issued by Head stakeholders among others to build local of BNPB Decree No. 4/2012 and launched community resilience which contains by the Minister of Education on the 12 SAFE SCHOOL of promote, replicate and scale up 6th AMCDRR, has adopted the Children’s successful community-based DRR and CCA Charter for DRR, developed and endorsed initiatives at the national and local levels; by more than 1,200 children around the develop common disaggregated targets world that was launched at the UNISDR’s and indicators for resilient communities Global Platform for DRR in 2011. The that can be used by governments, civil Children’s Charter consists of the children’s society organizations and practitioners five priorities for DRR which include safe in developing disaster-resilient villages schools; child protection; information and communities; enhance the adaptive and participation; safe community capacity of communities and local infrastructure and ‘building back better, institutions to respond to emerging and safer and fairer’; and reaching the most future risks; support local level efforts for vulnerable. The statement was promoted safe schools and hospitals in cost-effective by children-centered agencies to raise manners and initiate the global programs; the profile of children and youth, both and refocus development priorities as those affected by disasters and as towards building overall local resilience agents for change in risk reduction and that includes natural, social and economic resilience building. Among the key targets aspects as well as infrastructure capacities for inclusion in HFA2 (Sendai Framework), through community-based mechanisms. the Education sector stated that no child dies due to disaster in a school built or The 6th AMCDRR was conducted in modified after 2015; and number of school Bangkok on 22-26 June 2014. The 2014 days missed as results of shocks or stresses Bangkok Declaration appreciated all is reduced by 50%. countries which have been hosted the implementation of AMCDRR, including In contribution towards the realization the Government of Republic Indonesia of these targets above, the stakeholder’s for the 5th AMCDRR in Yogyakarta. The group is committed towards creating a declaration also call on all Government space at the regional level for discussion and stakeholders to enhancing resilience and sharing of technical resources, 
good at local level among others to promote practices/ lessons learned and model comprehensive school safety. policies on safe schools to minimize the 
impacts of disasters to children’s The 2014 Bangkok Declaration, Annex I education; and coordinating and on Statement of Voluntary Commitments promoting the adoption, development and of Children, Youth and Child-Centered implementation of the
Comprehensive Organizations Stakeholder Group for the School Safety Framework (CSSF). Picture; 5th AMCDRR 2012 in Yogyakarta 13 SAFE SCHOOL 3.6 Safe School related Programs community on the progress of Safe School implementation in Indonesia and many Many efforts have been done by times Indonesia was appreciated for its Government, among others hosting and advance progress, this has boosting the participating in Safe School international Government of Indonesia further efforts to and national events. Beside the hosting implement Safe School more seriously. and participated the 5th AMCDRR in Yogyakarta and participated the 6th In 2014, 2011, the Government through AMCDRR in Bangkok as described above, the Secretariat for DRR in Education Sector the Ministry of Education and Culture which is at the same time manage the Safe participated and presented the Safe School School Secretariat and activities supported updates in the events of , the first Safe by UNICEF produced three Modules to School Leaders meetings in Turkey (2013), implement the Comprehensive Safe School Worldwide Safe School Initiatives in Geneva and produced a Roadmap for Safe School (2014), Education Forum in Bangkok In 2014, a pilot survey for Typology (2014), Presentation and participation of School Construction in Indonesia at the Video Conference on Safe School was conducted and in 2016, Ministry Workshop in Tokyo organized by the of Education and Culture and BNPB World Bank (Dec 2014), UNWCDRR in developed a School Risk Map, these are as Sendai (March 2015), Technical Workshop part of activity in the Roadmap, both are on Safe School in Tokyo (March 2015). contributed and supported by the GFDRR/ The acknowledgement of international World Bank through Global Program for Safe School. Safe School Initiatives in Indonesia, Timeline 2010 - 2016 Campaign and Socialization of Implementation Safe School 1. National Campaign on Safe Damaged Schools in Data System Schools and Hospital in July 2010 led by Coordinating • Integration of data on damaged schools into the Minister of People’s Welfare Dapodik/EMIS (2010 until now) following UNISDR campaign Institutional on One Million Safe School and Hospital (May 2010) • Establishment of the initial Safe School Secretariat (August 2011) 2. National Conference on Safe • Institutionalized Stakeholders Coordination by National Schools (December 2010) Secretariat Safe School 3. Identification of 75% • Development of National Secretariat for Safe School of school buildings in Blueprint by BNPB (2013-2014) Indonesia are located in • MoEC’s Secretariat for Disaster Management was disaster prone areas (2011) established at Bureau of Planning and International Cooperation, Ministry of Education and Culture (June 2014) • New National Secretariat for Safe School at MoEC (in process) 14 SAFE SCHOOL 2010-2011 2011 – 2016 Government’s National Policies • Development of Guideline for Safe School using Education Special Allocation Fund or DAK (2011 for DAK 2012) • National Program on School Rehabilitation by Ministry of Education and Culture (2011-now) • Development of Guideline for Safe School and Madrasah or Perka BNPB No. 4 Year 2012 (May 2012). • Development of MoEC’s Safe School Roadmap document (2015) Government Program and Activities • School Rehabilitation National Program (2011-now) • Pilot Implementation of Safe School in 180 schools, 3 provinces, 4 districts, 2 cities. (2012) Supported by GFDRR/World Bank (DRM and Education n Units) • MoEC - Australian Education for new schools Construction program for Junior High School (SMP)- 2012-2014 • Moe – 15 Shelter School (2013) • Moe developed community based construction model and built 764 new safe schools in 28 provinces (2012- 2013) supported by AEPI. • Conduct survey on typology School Construction in Indonesia (Dec 2014) • BNPB facilitated the adoption of Safe School/ Madrasah for 10 schools in 10 districts/ municipalities at North Aceh district, West Pasaman district, Bengkulu, Bandung district, Badung district, South Minahasa district, Bima, Ternate, Ambon, Gorontalo (Oct-Dec 2015) • BNPB facilitated Sister School program in disaster-prone areas in Sleman district. (Oct-Nov 2015) • MoEC preparing Roadmap of Safe School (2015) • School Risk Map supported by WB (2016) • Discussions on VISUS for School Assessment instrument supported by UNESCO (September 2015, 2016) • National Conference on Safe School: “Obtaining Commitment on Safe School in Relation with Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction” in Jakarta (September 2015) 15 SAFE SCHOOL Participation of Ministry of Education and Culture, on behalf of Government of Indonesia in International Events • Hosted the 5th AMCDRR in Yogyakarta, Indonesia and hosted two events on Safe School (October 2012) • Joined the 6th AMCDRR in Bangkok, Thailand and presented Safe School(June 2014) • Attended the First Meeting of Safe School Country Leaders in Istanbul, Turkey (October 2014) • Joined the Regional Consultation Meeting on Education and Resilience in East Asia and the Pacific in Quezon City, Philippines (November 2014) • Joined the Tele-workshop on Safe School, Jakarta-Tokyo (December 2014) • Joined the technical meeting on the Istanbul Roadmap for the Worldwide Initiative for Safe School in Geneva, Switzerland (February 2015) • Joined the 3rd UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction in Sendai, Japan (March 2015) • Attended the Technical Workshop on Safer School Facilities in Tokyo, Japan (March 2015) Participation of Ministry of Education and Culture in National Safe School Events • Participated in Safe School Working Sessions during National Commemoration for DRR Month events conducted by BNPB in NTB (2013) in Bengkulu (2014) and in Solo (2015). 2010-2011 2011 – 2016 Training • Conduct training facilitator for Safe School from BPBD by BNPB (2015) • MoEC prepared 3 Module on Safe School for Comprehensive Safe School Implementation (Jan-June 2015) • MoEC trained 35 schools SMP for School Revitalization- Retrofitting (April 2016) 16 SAFE SCHOOL 2010 -2016 Results Data: • Inventory of Damaged Schools in 2010-2011; 2015 Organization: • The first National Secretariat of Safe School established at Ministry of Education and Culture (August 2011) • Blueprint for National Secretariat Safe School by BNPB (2014) • National Secretariat for Safe School concept (included in the Roadmap) developed by Ministry of Education and Culture Government Policies and Program • Guideline for School Rehabilitation for Disaster Resistance Building – Safe School for DAK 2012 (Permendikbud. 2011) • Perka BNPB No. 4 Year 2012 on Safe School/Madrasah • Roadmap on Safe School Implementation (2015) Training • 3 Modules on Comprehensive Safe School were produced, printed and distributed by MoEC assisted by UNICEF and used as training material. • More than 100 of Facilitators from BPBD were trained by BNPB (2015) cover 34 provinces. • 35 selected School junior high school (SMP) trained on Retrofitting for the School Revitalization Program (2016) • Socialization, Pilot and Facilitation: • Structural and non Structural: 180 School pilot (supported by WB) and more than 20 (supported by Plan Indonesia) • Non Structural: more than twenty thousand Schools from 60 institutions (Directory Safe School.BNPB) School Risk Map • School Risk Map with data PDSP December 2015 is available (April 2016) 17 SAFE SCHOOL 3.7. Safe School Stakeholder Ministry of Education and Culture Ministry Collaboration of Education is responsible for the implementation of the education process Reducing the risks of natural hazards and in Indonesia, including the formulation of preparing for disasters requires collective curriculum, mechanism, norms standard, action. Disaster risk management stretches procedure, and criteria. In safe school across many horizontal sectors, such as program, the ministry is responsible for social, financial, economic, water, energy, the integration of the safe school initiative and infrastructure, and the vertical private principles into the education system and and public sectors. This necessitates mechanism of Indonesia. In pushing this coordination among the actors, such as agenda, the various stakeholders support ministries and economic entities. the ministry in form of technical assistance. Moreover, many stakeholders are involved. The following are the supporting From the local and municipal levels to stakeholders from various institutions. the regional and global levels, actors such National Agency for Disaster Management. as non-governmental and community Dissemination of disaster information to organizations, those from the public various government stakeholders has been and private sectors, and international conducted. National Agency for Disaster organizations need to work together. A Management conducted the coordination strong institutional basis for coordinating of disaster-responsive programs in line and implementing effective disaster risk ministries toward risk-informed decision management is crucial. and policy making in respective ministries. In effort to build coordination among Provision of risk map, disaster data the government institution towards and baseline toward achieving the risk- formulation of an orchestrated informed decision and policymaking has implementation has its own challenge. also been conducted. In local level, the The overlapped programs and fragmented agency closely coordinates the disaster development system have led to different management efforts with local disaster objectives and implementations of the safe management agency in 34 provinces and school program. more than 450 districts. In dealing with this issue, the effort Ministry of Religion Affairs. Being conducted by GFDRR is to push the responsible for the provision and importance of the coordination among the formulation of the norms, standards, sectors involved. GFDRR works together guidelines and criteria of the operation of with the line ministries with mandate Islamic schools in Indonesia, the Ministry in education and disaster and various of Religion Affairs have been active in the stakeholders through technical assistance implementation of safe school agenda. The and support to the National Secretariat safe school standards and principles have for Safe Schools. All of them have been adopted and disseminated to more programs related to safe school but lack of than 7000 Islamic Schools in Indonesia. coordination. The programs implemented In evaluation and monitoring side, the by the respective line ministries and Ministry also adopted the tools developed agency has not been on the same direction by Ministry of Education. in terms of objective of education Ministry of public works. Being responsible development in Indonesia. for the formulation of the building codes 18 SAFE SCHOOL for construction of the earthquake- NGOs and INGOs continue to be involved resistant state building. School as stipulated in education infrastructures in Indonesia, in the regulation is the state building. but the MoEC have indicated that their Ministry of Public Works is also tasked potential impact at scale is typically fairly to supervise the construction of schools limited. and to implement the evaluation and monitoring the maintenance. KPB or Consortium for Disaster Education. Consortium for Disaster Education (CDE Ministry of Home Affairs. In or KPB) was established in October 2006 decentralization system in Indonesia, as a follow-up of the International Risk the Ministry of Home Affairs has role to Reduction Day 2006 with the theme: ensure the implantation of the program “Disaster Risk Reduction Begins at in local government through supervision School.” The main specific aim of CDE is to mechanism. This huge role is fundamental support the development of sustainable in pushing the agenda of the safe school to policy and DRR education practices local government. The role of the Ministry at national and local levels through of Home Affairs in safe school initiative can formal, non formal, as well as informal be in formulation of the implementation approaches by improving the capacity, of safe school guidelines and funding coordination, and synergy among parties mechanism in local budget. and making the commitment for DRR education. The consortium is open to all Government of Australia. Government of interested agencies and membership is Australia (DFAT) have provided technical on an institutional basis. Board members assistance to the Ministry of Education and represent a mix of UN agencies, Indonesian Culture (MoEC) school building program and international NGOs, the Red Cross and for approximately 1200 schools since LIPI (the National Institute of Science). 2010. DFAT identified quality of design and construction as their key concern Asean Safe School Initiative. Ten ASEAN and centered their technical assistance countries including Indonesia in 2009 on the provision of a quality assurance have signed regional ASEAN Agreement team. DFAT developed a checklist and on Disaster Management and Emergency guidance of information to be gathered of Response (AADMER). The ASEAN Safe the proposed site for a new school. DFAT School Initiatives (ASSI) project aims also developed thorough quality assurance to support the implementation of the checklists containing well-illustrated school safety components of the AADMER seismic construction details. This guidance Work Programme and the Asia Pacific’s appeared to be used exclusively on the initiative on One Million Safe Schools. ASSI DFAT supported schools but could also be project is implemented in four countries: used to improve the quality assurance at Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar and Indonesia. larger scale. In Indonesia, AADMER Partnership Group (APG) which consists of Plan International International Non-Governmental Indonesia, World Vision International Organization. Plan International and Save and Save the Children, is developing a the Children are involved in school safety partnership to support ASSI development initiatives targeting pillars two and three of and implementation in Indonesia comprehensive safe school, namely school disaster management and risk reduction UNICEF1 . In 2010, The United Nations and resilience education areas. Other 1 Sourced from “Towards Safer Schools – Methodol- 19 SAFE SCHOOL Children’s Fund (UNICEF) and the United UNESCO. Since 2006, UNESCO in Indonesia Nations International Strategy for Disaster has started working on Disaster Risk Risk Reduction (UNISDR), the Secretariat Reduction issues. Later in 2015, working for ISDR initiative, jointly developed a together with University of Udine in multi-dimensional analytical framework Italy who has developed VISUS method and a methodology to assess school (Visual Inspection for defining the Safety safety – as a follow-up to the conclusions Upgrading Strategies), UNESCO starts to of the 2009 session of the ISDR Global adopt VISUS method for Indonesia context Platform, which stated: “It was proposed and pilot tested this method at 50 schools that by 2011 national assessments of the in Bandung district and 10 schools in safety of existing education and health Pangandaran District – both are part of facilities should be undertaken, and that West Java province. For 2015 activities, by 2015 concrete action plans for safer UNESCO used their own funding, but schools and hospitals should be developed for 2016, UNESCO also received funding and implemented in all disaster prone GFDRR. countries”. This goal was established as part of a wider national and international VISUS aims to assess schools using a effort to reduce vulnerabilities and build holistic and multi-hazard approach that resilience of communities, which will save considers five issues: site conditions, the lives of many boys and girls, men and structural performance, local structural women. criticalities, non-structural components and functional aspects. Each issue is analyzed The scoping study Assessing World-wide using a pre-codified expert approach that Progress on School Safety was released splits the assessment into two main steps: in June 2010. The study proposes that the characterization and the evaluation. the safety of each individual school is Simple graphical indicators summarize assessed through 17 indicators grouped the evaluation, pointing out the main under four main dimensions. In 2011, weaknesses and the needs for intervention. UNICEF developed a methodology for the nationwide assessment of school safety Safe School National Secretariat. On 25 at an individual school level. In 2012, August 2011, National Secretariat for Safe in partnership with UNESCO, UNISDR, School was established. This National Save the Children and Plan International, Secretariat reported directly to the Vice UNICEF formed the Asian Coalition for Minister for Education and Culture and was School Safety (ACSS). Through ACSS, managed by Kerlip (local NGO). The World UNICEF has advanced the three pillars of Bank funded a personnel and the operation Comprehensive School Safety Framework. cost of the Secretariat. However, on 2013, the National Secretariat for Safe School was In Indonesia, begin from end of 2014 handed over to BNPB and between 2013- UNICEF provides technical support for 2014 BNPB tried to develop Blue Print for MoEC related to Education Sector Disaster National Secretariat for Safe School. Management through Education in Emergencies program, and part of this Later, in October 2014, during the DRR program is to support Safe School program. month commemoration at Bengkulu province, BNPB handed over the National Secretariat for Safe School back to the ogy for Nationwide Benchmarking of School Safety, Ministry of Education and Culture (under UNICEF Central and the Commonwealth and responsibility of the Bureau for Planning Eastern Europe of Independent States, 2011. 20 SAFE SCHOOL and International Cooperation, Secretariat 50 institutions involved in Safe Schools General). During 2015, the Bureau for and more than 3 platform (KPB, Planas, Planning and International Cooperation MPB etc.) working in Safe schools. Most of supported by UNICEF developed Indonesia them are working on non-structural issues, Safe School Roadmap together with emergency response in education sector, all education stakeholders in which while for the structural issues are only institutionalization of National Secretariat few players (World Bank, UNESCO, Build for Safe School was addressed. In 2016, Change and Plan Indonesia). The other the responsibility of managing National players are as seen below. There might be Secretariat for Safe School is under the several actors are not mentioned there due Directorate of Special Education and to too many and space is limited, those are Special Services, Directorate General for not there among others ASSI, Asian Safe Basic and Secondary Education. School Initiatives that collaborate with Plan International/Indonesia, Build Change, an The wide range stakeholders of Safe NGO who supported the structural issue Schoolwork are the strength gained to initially for houses only, and later for school continue working and create new ideas on as well. Safe School. Currently there are more than 21 Chapter SAFE SCHOOL 04 Safe School Initiative Implementation 4.1. Mainstreaming DRM in initiatives as part of the global and Education Sector national campaign, was the initiative that could fit the strategy and program Effective mainstreaming of disaster risk of Ministry of Education and Culture. management is a complex task. It involves In operational level, the World Bank in working in the short and long-term, collaboration with various stakeholders, working in strategic papers articulating risk worked to influence the government on reduction across development policy and implementing the safe school standards planning, down to individual communities and principles in its program and strategy. undertaking simple risk assessments and The operationalization of this concept making preparedness to manage hazards. was through integration of the safe There is work to be done in policy and school initiative in government school technology, politics and advocacy, and rehabilitation program funded with Special public awareness. Allocation Fund (DAK) mechanism. The basis for the Bank’s involvement in the 4.2. Pilot Safe School Project development of Indonesia’s DRM systems Implementation relates to its ability to leverage existing engagements and financing instruments Post the issuance of Regulation of Head of and its access to international best BNPB Number 4, in May, 2012 on Guideline practices that will serve as the foundation for Safe Schools/Madrasah from Disaster to support the building of a disaster and (Perka BNPB No. 4/2012), the Vice Minister climate resilient Indonesia. The policies, of Education, Ministry of Education and budget allocations and institutional Culture requested support to the World capacities required to achieve this will be Bank to piloting the implementation of developed through: i) mainstreaming DRM Safe School Guideline in Perka BNPB No. into regular development initiatives; ii) 4/2012. The guideline was issued by Perka building the capacities of DRM institutions BNPB No. 4/2012 but launched by the and governance; iii) implementing Minister of Education and Culture on the comprehensive risk financing and insurance National Education Day in May 2012. This policy framework; and iv) linking DRR, reflected very good coordination between climate adaptation measures and area- the two major government institutions for based resilient development. managing Safe Schools. The World Bank in pushing the agenda In 2012-2013, the World Bank with of Safe School Initiative, collaborate with funding from the GFDRR and Basic Ministry of Education in ensuring the Education Capacity Building Trust Fund risk-based approach can be integrated (BEC-TF) conducted pilot project to in education sector. The safe school provide community facilitators to assist 22 SAFE SCHOOL school managed rehabilitation project Structural retrofitting, for example, in 180 schools to implement Safe School although is proven to be cost effective and Guideline issued by the National Agency easily implementable by local masons, is for Disaster Management (BNPB). The Safe not yet explicitly required by the existing School Guidelines included both retrofitting procedures because of perception that technique for earthquake resistance, is case-by-case specific. Similarly, the use and school disaster preparedness to of facilitator type of technical assistance raise awareness and culture of safety. expert is not prohibited, but it was not part The Safe School Pilot focused on of the standard implementation modality school rehabilitation where the capital where its budget is allocated and/or expenditure was allocated through the DAK required. independent of the facilitators’ contract. Pilot Project’s Locations and its Criteria. A preliminary survey of the impact of Totally 180 Elementary School (and Junior this pilot suggests that school managed High School) from three Province in rehabilitation can also lead to Safe School Indonesia: West Sumatera (Padang City given the proper timing of technical and Padang Pariaman Regency), West Java assistance and advisory provided by the (Bandung City and Bandung Regency), and facilitators relative to the timing of the West Nusa Tenggara (East Lombok Regency DAK disbursement. It is important to note and West Lombok Regency). Those Cities that both DFAT and World Bank supported and Regencies having high or medium risk initiatives recommended the importance of earthquacke and tsunami (except for of considering not a one-size standard/ Bandung city and Bandung Regency, no blueprint to cater to varying needs of tsunami risk). different schools, and the useful addition of technical advisory assistance (as means of Schools of pilot project, were the empowerment) provided to schools during Elementary Schools which listed on the construction process. Ministry of Education’s list of Dana Alokasi Khusus (Special Allocation Fund) The above consistent recommendations beneficiaries, year 2012, for Elementary were deemed proven in addressing the schools (except for West Lombok regency weak risk awareness and poor construction and East Lombok regency, according to the practice and compliance to standard, Bupati request: three junior high schools which were the underlying factors of had included as pilot’s locations). school vulnerability in Indonesia. The challenge moving forward for Indonesia, With the assisstance of Local education however, is not to simply replicate a new ministry officials, the shotlist of the pilot construction or rehabilitation program project’s schools assigned with several which is dedicated to building safe considerations: school, but rather to institutionalize • Area distribution (represented all the proper construction, maintenance, Kelurahan/ Desa in each cities/ upgrading/retrofitting and school safety regencies) practices through more explicit policy and procedures, as well as empowerment of • Different geographical conditions existing local extension and community (beach area, flat, mountains) advisory services to support local • Represent schools from remote areas implementation of safe schools across the country. Focus of Pilot Project. In accordance 23 SAFE SCHOOL Perka BNPB no. 4 year 2012, Safe School West Java, and West Nusa Tenggara from assessment includes two main aspects, July 2012 – February 2013. namely the structural (school buildings / structures, school architecture, school lay Facilitation Process. Facilitation had been out, and utilities) and social/non-structural done in the planning, implementation and (school policy, resource mobilization, monitoring evaluation process both of planning, disaster preparedness).Those two structural and non-structural components aspects became focus of the pilot project. through the participatory approach. The Therefore the facilitator divided into facilitators worked with key actors at school technical facilitator to provide structural community level and stakeholders at aspect assisstance, and social facilitator to district/city level. provide non-structural aspects assisstance. The first step of this project was training To monitor progress reached, each aspect and socialization for the school principals analyze by some parameters as follows: in the district/city level. These activities Structural aspect include building structure, purposed to increase knowledge and architecture, Layout, and Utilities. Non- awareness of the school principals on safe structural aspects are: knowledge, attitudes school and disaster risk management. and actions, policies that support the In the school level the process had started achievement of a safe school, resource to establish of the Anti-Disaster and Safe mobilization, and a plan that supports the School Committee (Komite Bencana dan achievement of safe schools Keselamatan Sekolah, KBKS) in West Nusa All parameters consists of several Tenggara and organized existing school indicators. Totally almost 48 indicators community organization such as Pramuka (most from PERKA, with several additional and UKS in West Java and West Sumatera. from project), to prove the progress of the The KBKS /School community organization safe school achievement. comprehends series of task forces, such as: school rehabilitation and development Project Stakeholders. In general, the awareness campaign, Disaster Awareness rehabilitation of primary school buildings in Team, Energy committee, etc., depends on the pilot sites will be developed following the schools need. an school-based management. These processes will be conducted jointly with The next stage facilitated by the KBKS/ the involvement of various stakeholders, school community organization, this at school level (students, teachers, school comprise of designing the planning committees and the District Bureaus documents such as below. of Education) and city/ regency level • Assessment of structural and non- (District Education Office, District Disaster structural components Management Office, Education officers in sub-District level). All activities facilitated • Model of Safe School which adopted by facilitators who have competencies to the School Master Plan and Safe in advocacy, awareness campaigns and School Medium Term Plan (Rancangan facilitation, as well as the facilitators who Perencanaan Jangka Menengah Sekolah have competence in civil engineering Aman/RPJMSA) for 5 years period in the (infrastructures building). form of drawing and/or mock-up. Timeline. The Pilot Project assisstance • The Detail Engineering Design (DED), coverage Provinces of West Sumatera, and financial plan (RAB) for class 24 SAFE SCHOOL rehabilitation using the DAK fund 2012. conducted through formal and informal discussion. More intensive campaign • Action Plan 2012/2013 which contains carried out to the KBKS members in capacity development for disaster planning and implementation process. readiness by making the Standard Students’ awareness campaign procedure for Early Warning System implemented through games and and Evacuation, Evacuation Simulation competition suitable with children. (Training), making the Evacuation Map, For example: singing, drawing, and students and community awareness storytelling. The themes related to campaign, and the Standard procedure disaster issues such as earthquake for school maintenance. and tsunami, as well as the safe • Building and Development phase in school concept. These activities were the implementation comprised of encouraging students to understand two rehabilitation stages, including the issues better. structural and non-structural components. In this stage KBKS/school community organized implementing of 1st year action plan. The purposed of this stage was rehabilitation based on DED, Operational Standard Procedure of Early Warning System and Evacuation, Evacuation map, awareness campaign, evacuation training would have done. • Awareness campaign and training executed through teaching and facilitation process depends on the target group. The teacher and the school principal awareness campaign 25 SAFE SCHOOL Actor’s knowledge and attitude had been increased then actor-to-actor campaign happened such as: • Ali Syahid, KBKS coordinator at Sembung Primary School, East Lombok has been campaign to PGRI (Teachers Union) members. • Sri Yuliasih , the principal of Cijerokaso Primary School, Bandung city and Neni Nuraeni, the principal of Mekarwangi Primary School, Bandung district have been campaign to other principals primary school in the meeting. • Nurmansyah, Head of School Committee of Primary School 02, Padang City has been campaign to Pasar Gadangs’ Primary School 04 and 11 even primary school 11 didn’t include DAK’s beneficiary. • The Students informed their parents the safe school activities at school. • Some schools invited community to attend evacuation training. Some schools willing to add disaster issues done by province coordinator and Team in the curriculum, both in class or extra leader; 2) online evaluation monitoring curricula like at Kresna , Cijerokaso and using the monkey survey system; and 3) Sembung Primary School. Syamsuhaidi, Participatory monitoring that involving head of Education Office of Lombok Timur stakeholders at district/city level and KBKS. District stated that integrating disaster The stakeholders involved at district/ issues to school curricula is needed with city level are Local Development Board the local content. (Bappeda), The Public Works Office (Dinas PU), Education and Cultural Office (Dinas Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan), and the BPBD. Instrument of monitoring based on “I understand more about retrofitting the indicators, which used in this program, techniques after the facilitators showed including the structure that refers to the some pictures. I want to implement the Ministry Public Work policy (Permen PU technique at my own house because 2005). I’m currently doing rehabilitation. I also want to inform the mosque Participatory evaluation implemented development committee at my village, through FGD at KBKS/school community so that they can use the retrofitting level and workshop at district/city level. In techniques” (Halimatussadiah, teacher this event participant have been discussed of Anjani Primary School). what condition that found from the monitoring and follow up action for the next step. The project and school community including stakeholders at city/district level has done monitoring and evaluation. Monitoring implemented through different level 1) routine monitoring by visiting the pilot schools, this activity 26 SAFE SCHOOL Sloop Ring Column Retrofitting techniques were applied in the pilot schools rehabilitation. 4.3. Influencing Government planning consultants, and also from the Financing Scheme (DAK). principals. There were no accurate data about the school damage and planning that There were some modification in should have used as reference for District Government Financing management Education Office to select the schools. In both of on implementation and planning. some cases that problem causes some Financing management in school level had mistake in the decision making and the DAK changed before and after the intervention. of rehabilitation gone to the school that not In previous were limited transparency really needed rehabilitation. This problem in allocation and implementation of was reveal in the final workshop at East DAK. This problem was cause of misused Lombok and West Lombok. The District fund such as lower quality of building Education Office would have changed the materials, expenditure some materials scheme of submission. The schools which that not included on building structures. attached the RPJMSA (Mid-term planning Through participatory approaches in this of Safe School) in their proposal would be program was increasing school community priority for the next DAK. involvement such as the parents, village leaders, students, and teachers on the Another source of the budget for safe planning and decision making. Through school reveal on APBS (routine school community workshop the principal and budget), APBD (Local government team must have opened the budget to the budget), and also some schools had audience, making planning together and it had fund from the school community. means the transparency happened and the Karyawinata primary school in quality of the building had been increased. Bandung district had gotten the Submission of DAK proposal for school budget from APBD around one billion rehabilitation is done by the District IDR for 3 classes. In Padang and Education Office to Ministry of Education. Padang Pariaman some international The District Education Sectors collect the and national organizations and data schools in different way such as from companies, also became valuable the sub district education officers, from the resources for school rehabilitations. 27 SAFE SCHOOL Project Achievement and The pilot schools moved from lower to higher Recapitulation of Achievements Indicator category. Based on the category developed in the West Sumatera, at the beginning of the PERKA BNPB No 4/2012, the analyses of project, has better condition. Because the initial/ baseline condition of the 180 they have an experience with earthquake pilot’s schools base on this criteria. on 2009. Response for the disaster, many program from government or non- The first category refers to the schools government support school building which meet at least 1 structural and 1 non rehabilitation and preparedness aspect. structural aspect. The second category West Java, especially in Bandung Regency, for those schools which meet at least 2 had already finding DAK’s fund at the structural and 2 non structural aspects. And beginning of the project (several schools the third category devoted to those schools had already renovates the building before that meet all aspect of the structural and the project began). That’s why, they also non structural aspects. According to the have better initial condition than West PERKA, the baseline condition of 180 pilot Nusa Tenggara. schools as folow: Generally, in all pilot’s schools it can be concluded that all assisted schools have met the requirements of 2nd category. However, none of the pilot schools meet the 3rd category because of some reasons: 1) The facilitation of structural components put more emphasized on architectural and building structure based on the Rehabilitation DAK fund 2012; 2) There are only 20% to 30% classrooms rehabilitated; 3) the process of facilitating non structural Figure # Comparison of Pilot Project’s School components needs more time, especially Condition Before and After Project, According to designing the safe school mid term plan PERKA’s Category (RPJMSA), Operation Procedure Standard (SOP) and the simulation process. In West Nusa Tenggara experience, The baseline graph above shows that none According to the Team experiences during of the pilot schools meet the expected the need assessment stages, PERKA’s standards, the highest precentage of the method will become sharpened if the pilot schools are in the first category (97%). analyses more details. Details of structural This means that the team need extra and non structural indicators will give more efforts to achieve the safe school program information on the pilot schools condition. in the pilot schools. As a result, at the The initial assesment developed details end of the SEES program implementation, indicators and categorized the schools most of the school have met at least some based on 3 different scales poor, middle of the PERKA standard. The category 1 and high as described below: for example, decreased from 97% to 0%. On the other hand, the school in the second category, sharply increased from 0% to 100%. This means that all of the 28 SAFE SCHOOL Number of Indicators Component Category Achieved Structural 0 -10 Poor Number of Indicators = 34 11- 21 Middle 21 -33 High Non Structural 0–4 Poor Number of Indicators = 14 5 -9 Middle 9 -14 High According to PERKA’s indicators, the project adopted it become project indicators as described by graphic below: Figure # Parameters and its Indicators of Safe School 29 SAFE SCHOOL The indicators lead the project to identified application of retrofitting technique. school’s conditions, categorize it, and The builders worked at the front line, deliver proper treatment for each pilot’s they are strategic group to implement schools. The indicators also become the retrofitting technique in building monitoring and evaluation’s indicator, to rehabilitation control progress of the project. While in architectures, the strong points The final achievement of the pilot project were usage of standard materials of can be present in general as follow. Notes, ceiling, floor, and furniture. One thing for parameters of: knowledge, Attitude and from architectures that commonly didn’t Action, more present as qualitative data. follow by most of the school was: the door Several quantitative result, inserted in to didn’t open widely to the outside direction Resources Mobilizations. instead inside.. Figure # Comparison of Baseline Condition and Final Achievement of Safe School Pilot Project in 180 Schools According to the graphic above, the The right campaigning approach and project gave more impact on Non- method encourages understanding, Structure Aspects. The achievement awareness, and participation from school was significant. Some strong points that communities. The campaign methods contributed the most were: formations should be used appropriately based on of KBKS (School committee for disaster the target group characteristic. This will readiness), implementations of emergency increase the capacity and the awareness evacuations procedures regularly, and of the stakeholders involved. For example, formulation of safe school’s master plan the campaign for the students is more document. In Policy parameters, all school acceptable by utilizing games and attractive had develop SOP of early warning system, competitions. For the teachers formal and and operational and maintenance’s plan of informal discussion considered as effective school building. campaign method. And for the decision makers the campaign method will be In Structural aspects, the project gave more effective when they are positioned significant progress in architecture and as a resource person, Monitoring and structures. In structures, usually the strong Evaluation team and other activities related points was on retrofitting implementations, to their positions adding slopes, ring beam, column. The builders’ capacity and skill is the key in 30 SAFE SCHOOL 4.4. Indonesian School to conduct a rapid visual assessment using Infrastructures Typology FEMA 154 on at least one building from each school. In cooperation with Arup International and support from Global Facility for Disaster The purpose of this assessment was to Reduction and Recovery (GFDRR), a survey obtain a high level understanding of the on school typology in Indonesia was vulnerability of school infrastructure in conducted. The survey process involved the Indonesia to earthquake risk. The objective site visit to a total of 21 schools to gain an of the survey was formulated as follows: understanding of the different construction 1. To understand the range of hazards and typologies and vulnerabilities 9 schools drivers of risk that may compromise around Padang, West Sumatera and 12 the planning, design, construction, schools around in Lombok, Nusa Tenggara repair and retrofitting, and operation of Barat. school infrastructure projects. Key stakeholder consultations included 2. To understand the number and national and district government construction typology of existing departments, school teachers, schools in Indonesia, including the engineers, contractors, academics, number of damaged schools, and those donor organizations and INGOs, was also that will be constructed. conducted. The schools were chosen to represent a variety of typical school 3. To understand the current safe school facilities in terms of the school size, practices in Indonesia, which relate construction typology, building condition to in disaster preparedness, repair, and exposure to hazards. The data rehabilitation and retrofitting. collected during the school visits was used 31 SAFE SCHOOL 4. To understand the institutional constructed using reinforced concrete environment and regulatory framework moment frames with infill masonry wall within which school infrastructure panels. SND 23, 24, Kota Padang, was is planned, designed, constructed, a 3 story tsunami shelter built by JICA operated, maintained, repaired and (Japan International Cooperation Agency) retrofitted in Indonesia. on the coast of Padang. Another double storey classroom block was seen under 5. To make recommendations to the construction in Padang. Moment frame WB country task team to prioritize construction is often more expensive the GPSS investment for a structural to build than unreinforced or confined resilience program of construction masonry, and requires a high level of and rehabilitation for public schools quality control to ensure the concrete facilities. frame is constructed with special seismic Construction Typology of Surveyed and moment connection reinforcement Schools detailing, which is often unfamiliar to local construction teams. The infill wall panels Unreinforced Masonry. Unreinforced are not required to provide stability which Masonry is the most vulnerable means larger window openings can be construction typology seen during the provided. However, the wall panels must be field mission. Many of the unreinforced detailed to prevent them falling out during masonry schools visited were more than a seismic event. 30 years old, and were not adequately maintained or repaired following damage. Timber Frame. The timber frame school This increases their vulnerability to future we visited was constructed using an events; for example, cracked walls have engineered haunched frame with low less capacity and are less stable during level masonry infill walls allowing for large subsequent earthquakes. window openings. This lightweight frame performs well in a seismic event because Confined Masonry. Confined masonry there is little mass to excite, and the consists of masonry wall panels structure can accommodate movements (unreinforced) anchored into reinforced without being damaged. The building was concrete stiffener columns at regular generally in good condition for its age intervals with a concrete ring beam at the (over 70 years old), although some of the top of the wall. Confined masonry is more timber elements had degraded significantly complicated to build than unreinforced from insect attack, and these should be masonry as it introduces reinforced removed and replaced with new treated concrete into the masonry wall panel. The timber. It was not clear if the masonry infill reinforced concrete elements are often panels were connected to the surrounding small and can be difficult to achieve good timber frame (e.g. through protruding nails quality workmanship as seen on some sites or similar). If not, there is a risk of local during the school visits. The concrete can collapse of the masonry infill panels in a be difficult to compact, often resulting in seismic event. air voids and exposed reinforcement which compromises the durability and capacity of Steel Frame. Similar to timber frame the building structure. buildings, this lightweight form of construction is less excitable during an Concrete Moment Frame. Two of earthquake and therefore less vulnerable the schools we visited had buildings to damage than a heavier masonry 32 SAFE SCHOOL building. The steel sections were badly operation and procedures for evacuation, corroded due to the age of the building and in particular for schools located in highly lack of maintenance and treatment. The disaster prone areas. panel walls were asbestos which can be extremely hazardous to health if the dust The detailed objectives of the school from the material is inhaled. risk map development is to identify the districts, cities requiring the 4.5. Safe School Risk Mapping special attention in education facility The school risk map factoring the rehabilitation and reconstruction toward earthquake is based on the fact that more the achievement of safe school initiative in than 80% of areas in Indonesia is prone to Indonesia as formulated below: earthquake as reported by National Agency • To provide the national scale risk map for Disaster Management. In last 10 years, presenting the distribution of districts the occurrence of the earthquake is more and cities with earthquake highly prone frequent with various scales. This present area and information of vulnerable risk to the population and if not addressed, schools if earthquake occurs, the potential loss to lives and assets will damaged and in long run causing more • To provide spatial based baseline data massive loss. capturing the level of earthquake risk to schools in district and city level The risk map development started in July as reference to safe school priority 2015 and presented in a focused group determination, discussion in September 2015 to agree on the parameters utilized. The discussion • To provide risk map for district and was attended by sectors including National cities describing information on Agency for Disaster Management, relevant school location distribution with high Directorates of Ministry of Education. In earthquake risk for monitoring of safe October 2015, the second discussion was school progress in the respective areas. held in Jakarta and attended by Ministry The risk map also helps the Ministry of Education and Culture, coordinated of Education and Culture in policy by the Safe School Secretariat, Planning making related to education sectors, Bureau of Ministry of Education and priority program determination and the Culture and attended by head of sub- implementation of the programs. The map directorates of Elementary, Junior High, also helps Ministry of Religion Affairs in Senior High, Vocational, Special Need and policy making and monitoring mechanism Early Childhood Education. The objective development of Islamic schools, managed of the second discussion was to review the and monitored by the ministry. parameters utilized. Ministry of Religion Affairs manages almost The Director General is interested in more than 7200 schools Islamic Schools the utilization of the school risk map to in Indonesia with school population more prioritize program in disaster highly than 350,000 consisting of teachers, earthquake prone area, especially students, and supporting personnel. This rehabilitation of the damaged schools and is a huge assets that their safety must classrooms, new-classroom construction be ensured. Using the school risk map, priority determination, using retrofitting the Ministry of Religion Affairs can also methods. This also includes the non- determine if the location of the school is in structural activities such as standard earthquake prone area. 33 SAFE SCHOOL It is expected that with the availability organizations in DRR created after 2004 of the risk map, the following can be Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami. As achieved: part of the preparedness for DRR, a Safe School global campaign given direction • The clear picture of school location in was conducted by UNISDR in May 2010, earthquake prone areas this was followed by a National Safe School • The concise approach and focus in Campaign led by Coordinating Ministries managing the school with highly for People’s Welfares accompanied by earthquake prone schools Head of BNPB, Minister of Health, and Vice Minister of National Education in July 2010 • The concise intervention and programs organized by National Platform for DRR with adjustment to the requirement to involving wide stakeholders as mentioned reduce the risk identified structurally previously, including schools. and non-structurally. Several Indonesian organizations that are • Realization of the safe school and actively working on disaster have also madrasah in Indonesia. involved and work in the area of Safe 4.6. Government Program School, e.g. CDE or KPB, MPBI (Indonesian Initiatives on Safe School Society for Disaster Management), Planas (National Platform for DRR), which each The uniqueness of working on Safe School of them has more than 50 members. issues in Indonesia has been recognized Now, all of them are included in the as great collaboration among stakeholders Education Cluster coordinated by Ministry either cross sector ministries, NGOs, of Education and Culture supported by academician, international development UNICEF. partners, as well as media. It was influenced by huge collaboration of various The main players of Safe School which have 34 SAFE SCHOOL done some pilot and facilitated central management program, 2) MoEC’s government, local government and schools Education Sector Disaster Management are ASSI (consists of Plan International Standard Operating Procedure document Indonesia, World Vision International and – followed with facilitating 7 provinces to Save the Children), CDE, Kerlip, World Bank, develop their own provincial Education UNESCO, and UNICEF. At the government Sector Disaster Management SOP level, Ministry of Education and Culture, document, 3) Indonesia Education Cluster BNPB-National Agency for Disaster TOR, 4) Comprehensive School Safety Management, Ministry of Home Affairs, modules (consist of three modules: Pillar Ministry of Religion, Ministry of Public 1 – Safe Learning Facilities, Pillar 2 – School Works especially Directorate General of Disaster Management, and Pillar 3 – Risk Cipta Karya, local government institutions Reduction and Resilience Education), and (Provincial/District/Municipality) Education 4) Indonesia Safe School Roadmap. Office, BPBDs (Local Disaster Management Agency at provincial and/ or district/ National Secretariat for Safe School. municipality). Following the handed over of National Secretariat for Safe School from BNBP Disaster Management Secretariat of back to MoEC, as mentioned previously, Ministry of Education and Culture. June begin from 2016 the National Secretariat 2014 – Ministry of Education and Culture for Safe School under the leadership of formed MoEC’s Secretariat for Disaster the Directorate of Special Education and Management (MoEC’s DM Secretariat) Special Services, Directorate General for – under the Bureau of Planning and Basic and Secondary Education together International Cooperation, Secretariat with education stakeholders has started General’s responsibility. The main function implementing activities written in the of MoEC’s DM Secretariat, which consists roadmap document. The roadmap of all MoEC’s Key Units’ representatives, document and its action plan for 2015- are to coordinate MoEC’s Key Units and 2019 will become the guidance/ reference external parties (UN agencies, local/ for implementing Safe School program national NGOs and International NGOs) with an expectation that planned activities related to activities of preparedness, which have not been executed will be emergency response and post-disaster for addressed by stakeholders who have education (and culture) sector, to develop budget availability to implement it. policies, strategies, and 2015-2019 action plans related to education sector’s disaster BNPB – Safe School and Sister School. As management program; and also to perform mentioned previously, in the last quarter the education cluster coordinator function of 2015 BNPB facilitated the adoption of as MoEC has been formally appointed by Safe School/ Madrasah from disasters in GoI (through BNPB – National Disaster 10 schools in 10 districts/ municipalities at Management Agency) as the coordinator North Aceh district, West Pasaman district, for Education Cluster which is part of Bengkulu, Bandung district, Badung district, National Cluster in the early 2014. Through South Minahasa district, Bima, Ternate, this MoEC’s DM Secretariat, Safe School Ambon, Gorontalo. BNPB facilitated Sister implementations have been strengthening. School program in disaster-prone areas in Sleman district. Sister School (program) Between 2014 – 2015, MoEC’s DM is a commitment between two schools Secretariat produced 1) MoEC’s Action in disaster risk reduction, preparedness Plan on Education Sector’s disaster and emergency response at school, as 35 SAFE SCHOOL well as a development/ modification of to prepare guidance and socialization school disaster preparedness activities for emergency post, providing training and Safe School/ Madrasah from Disasters. for leadership how to lead the team for Implementation of Sister School program disaster emergency and management, aims to provide a convenient and feasible preparing guideline for deconcentration teaching and learning environment fund for disaster emergency. According to for students whose schools have been National Plan for Disaster Management affected by disaster, so that the teaching (Renas PB) 2015-2019, the task and and learning process can continue to run function of Ministry of Home Affairs is to effectively at support schools that are not control regional development programs affected by a disaster. Ten pairs of school at and activities related to disaster mitigation. Sleman district, consisted of ten disaster- affected schools and ten support schools On Safe School work, Ministry of Home signed MoUs for this purpose. affairs actively being members of cross- ministerial team to support the Safe Ministry of Religion Affairs. The Ministry School Pilot in 3 provinces in 2012, of Religion that was in charge for Islamic facilitating the communicating with the schools/ Madrasah managing more than Head of Local Governments. Based on 7,200 schools has been very active in this experience, the ministry supposed to Safe School activities starting from 2012, integrate the required of safe school work participated in the formulation of material in the technical guidelines for provincial/ for the Perka BNPB No. 4, 2012 on Safe district planning, so that this safe school School/ Madrasah that was issued by BNPB investment become priority for local and launched by Minister of Education government to present not only loosing and Culture on the National Education life of students but also safe the school celebration Day, May 2012. In 2013, building investment. Currently the Ministry the Ministry of Religion issued its own has included disaster risk reduction in Technical Guideline for new classroom regional development guideline to be construction to apply safe school principles. prioritized especially in the high-risk Recently Ministry of Religion representative disaster areas, not specifically for Safe also joined FGD of Safe School Mapping School. Hopefully in the coming technical and would like to be included as well in the guidelines prioritization for safe school will mapping. The data for the map is being be appeared. prepared and it is expected that the first draft map will be ready in mid of 2016. BPPT. BPPT (Badan Penelitian dan Penerapan Teknologi or National Agency for Ministry of Home Affairs. The Directorate Research and Application of Technology) of Disaster and Fire Management was also active in participating safe school under Directorate General Regional pilot in 2012, they are interested in Administration, Ministry of Home Affairs is researching for disaster resistance school in charge for facilitation and supervision, building. The experience of pilot school coordination of facilitation, monitoring, would be input for further research in evaluation and reporting of disaster risk retrofitting of damaged school building into reduction, disaster infrastructure and disaster resistance school building – Safe information, disaster emergency and post School for structural issues. disaster, this is to include fire management, and increase capacity of resources for fire management. This tasks specifically 36 SAFE SCHOOL 4.7. School Stakeholders development in Indonesia. Collaboration In the government side, the stakeholders Reducing the risks of natural hazards and include Ministry of Education and Culture preparing for disasters requires collective (MoEC), National Agency for Disaster action. Disaster risk management stretches Management (BNPB), Ministry of Religion across many horizontal sectors, such as Affairs (MoRA), Ministry of Public Works social, financial, economic, water, energy, (MoPW). Ministry of Home Affairs (MoHA), and infrastructure, and the vertical private Safe School National Secretariat under and public sectors. This necessitates Ministry of Education and Culture. coordination among the actors, such as Partners from foreign government, ministries and economic entities. International NGO and National NGO are Moreover, many stakeholders are involved. also in supporting the government of From the local and municipal levels to Indonesia in pushing the agenda of safe the regional and global levels, actors such school initiative. Programs are formulated as non-governmental and community towards the translation of safe school organizations, those from the public initiative. The programs are implemented and private sectors, and international nationally and locally. Among the partners organizations need to work together. A include Government of Australia (DFAT), strong institutional basis for coordinating KPB or Consortium for Disaster Education, and implementing effective disaster risk Plan International, Save The Children, management is crucial. UNICEF, and UNESCO. In effort to build coordination among 6. Integration into Government the government institution towards Policies formulation of an orchestrated The Safe School program ideally should implementation has its own challenge. be included in the midterm planning The overlapped programs and fragmented documents RPJMN, Renstra of Ministry development system have led to different of Education and Culture and the annual objectives and implementations of the safe planning document RKP, APBN of the school program. Ministry of Education and Culture. In dealing with this issue, the effort From the experiences of the pilot project conducted by the World Bank-GFDRR is to and the exercises during the last few years, push the importance of the coordination safe school principals and mechanism among the sectors involved. The World have been adopted in different form of Bank-GFDRR works together with the line policies, technical guidelines, circular ministries with mandate in education and letter, regulation, training module etc. disaster and various stakeholders through This covered non-structural and structural technical assistance. The current National issues, those are among others: Secretariat for Safe School should play more role in coordination of all players in • Introduction of Safe School in the Safe School. All of them have programs Circular Letter of the Minister of related to safe school but still lack of National Education address to Heads coordination. The programs implemented of Region to request for mainstreaming by the respective line ministries and DRR into Curricula (2010) agency has not been on the same direction • Integrated safe school principles and in terms of objective of education 37 SAFE SCHOOL mechanism into the technical guideline • Introduction facilitators for new for Specific Allocation Grant – DAK school construction by Directorate 2012 formulation by BNPB supported SMP to facilitate the implementation by stakeholders including GFDRR/World of the guidelines. The effectiveness Bank. of the safe school trained technical and social facilitators for the 180 • Integrated the safe school and major pilot school to facilitate the School content of the technical guideline Building Rehabilitation/construction above into the Regulation of Head team under DAK program was the BNPB for Guideline of Safe Schools/ very successful implementation. The Hospitals, Perka BNPB 4/2012. existing consultants recruited by local • Integration of retrofitting for safer government for DAK program has school into the technical guideline of no functions as facilitator, instead Revitalization Program in 35 pilot Junior provision of construction design and High Schools (SMP) by Directorate for not much sharing the knowledge and SMP, Ministry of Education and Culture facilitation processes. (2016). Directorate of SMP-Junior High School • Integration of Safe School principles is implementing School Revitalization into a training module for BOS – School Program in 35 Schools for 2016, this Operation Fund Assistance. Module 2: includes introduction of retrofitting Healthy, Safe, Friendly and Pleasantly mechanism to rehabilitate damaged School explains about definition of schools/classrooms. This Directorate Safe School, which has two meaning; SMP issued a Training Module for BOS- (1) safe from disasters; (2) safe from School Operation Fund 2015, which bullying, criminal, smoke of cigarettes, includes Safe School non-structural pornography. The Module also issues (Module 2: Healthy, Safe, introduced different type of disasters, Friendly and Pleasantly School). and how is the evacuation procedures • Directorate PKLK, Sub Directorate during earthquake, tsunami, flooding for Infrastructure and Directorate for (2015) Early Childhood Facilitation have been 38 SAFE SCHOOL in charge for emergency response so structural Safe School principles. The far, providing support during disaster, DAK has consultants (management school equipment (books), arranging and technique) to support the school place for temporary study, providing rehabilitation program that are uniform and conduct counseling for provided by Local Government. The post disasters. Those have guideline for role of consultant should be added to its SOP. facilitate and transfer the knowledge of safe school. • The Roadmap for Safe School Implementation prepared by Safe • Training of Safe School principles and School stakeholder under the practice for facilitators/consultants leadership of Ministry of Education who will involve in the construction, and Culture and financed by UNICEF. rehabilitation and reconstruction school The roadmap has four goals, each building program has strategic objectives and policy direction. The goals are: i) to protect • Include the Safe School program into learners, teachers, and education the Mid Term and annual plan in the personnel from death and injury in different level national, province, schools, ii) to improve the quality of district and event in school level and educational facilities and infrastructure guideline for local government in to make them safe from disasters, iii) preparing APBD. Educational continuity in emergencies • Integrated monitoring and evaluation (during response phase up to recovery by MoEC, BNPB, Cipta Karya phase), iv) Strengthening the school (KemenPUpera) in selected targeted community’s resilience in the face of schools and routine monitoring and disasters through education evaluation by Dinas Education and Scale – up and Way Forward Sport, BPBD, Cipta Karya at district level using the same monitoring and There are some good practices from the evaluation instrument. Formalize the safe school pilot implementation and other monitoring and evaluation instrument relevant Safe School programs. Some good into the guideline. practices would need to be scale up to gain wider impacts, among others: • Stakeholder coordination as managed by National Secretariat of Safe School at • The important role of facilitators to central level should also be replicated transfer the knowledge of safe school at regional level.to better coordinate principles and practices for Central and the stakeholders. Provincial and District construction, rehabilitation, and reconstruction • The typology survey on school school building program. The construction in Indonesia has resulted New School construction program several type of school construction, introduced facilitators to facilitate which will need different treatment. the self-managed school construction This classification could be used to or through 3rd party. The successful allocate fund for school rehabilitation. of the pilot Safe School had also The survey will need to be scale up to influenced by the role of technical national level. and social facilitators to guide the implementation of structural and non- 39 Chapter SAFE SCHOOL 05 Safe School Results and Way Forwards Sendai Framework 100,000 global mortality rate and lower the average global figure in the decade The Government of Indonesia reported the 2020–2030 compared to the period 2005- implementation of disaster risk reduction in 2015. A large amount of school facilities Indonesia in the Third World Conference on with more than 250 thousand schools Disaster Risk Reduction (UNWCDRR) held will substantially reduce disaster damage from 14 to 18 March 2015 in Sendai City, to critical infrastructure and disruption Miyagi prefecture, Japan and also reported of basic services, especially educational the achievement of Safe School which was facilities, including through developing considered quite progressive. their resilience by 2030 as stated in the Indonesia has met its first commitment target number four. towards the implementation of the Among the key targets for inclusion in HFA2 Worldwide Initiative on Safe Schools, (Sendai Framework), the Education sector particularly through the development of stated that no child dies due to disaster in national plans for safe schools. The country a school built or modified after 2015; and has also been engaged in advocacy with number of school days missed as results of other countries and other leaders in the shocks or stresses is reduced by 50%. promotion of safe schools at the global level through participation in safe schools- In contribution towards the realization related events at the regional and global of these targets above, the stakeholder’s levels. In addition to passing the Safe group is committed towards creating a School Roadmap, the country will also space at the regional level for discussion adopt a set of national targets based on and sharing of technical resources, 
good our national priorities as set out in the new practices/ lessons learned and model Middle-term Development Plan 2015-2019. policies on safe schools to minimize the 
impacts of disasters to children’s The conference has resulted 7 targets, safe education; and coordinating and school initiatives could contribute to those promoting the adoption, development and targets, and nevertheless the most relevant implementation of the
Comprehensive are targets number one, two and four. If a School Safety Framework (CSSF). big number of schools communities with Specifically, those groups has been students more than 40 million know how focusing on the work of Safe Schools that to evacuate when disaster happened and guided by the Comprehensive School applied the safe school principles, this Safety Framework (CSSF); and children are can contribute significantly to the target supported to participate meaningfully in number one and two to reduce global local level DRR and development planning disaster mortality and reduce figure by processes. 2030, aiming to lower the average per 40 SAFE SCHOOL Results school committee, provincial and district education staff, central level staff (BNPB, The results have been achieved to date Ministry of Education and Ministry of covers policies, programs, pilot projects, Religion) from 2010-2016. Unfortunately training and its modules, capacity building. no collective data can be obtained for all On the policies. The policies have been those participation in the socialization issued are ranging from a circular letter, and trainings. Wider participants were regulations, guideline, for example a socialized during the annual working circular letter of the Ministry of National meeting conducted by the Ministry of Education on mainstreaming the DRR Education which were participated by head in education sector through curriculum of provinces and district education office (No. 70a Year 2010); the monumental from all over Indonesia, as well as during Regulation of National Agency for Disaster the training for BOS (Bantuan Operational Management (BNPB on Safe Schools/ Sekolah - School Operational Assistant Madrasah (No 12 year 2012); and technical Fund), similar by the Ministry of Religion. guidelines for Specific Allocation Fund – Specific training was conducted for regional DAK (2011, for DAK implementation in facilitators by BNPB covering participant for 2012), guideline for healthy, safe, friendly 31 provinces (2015). and pleasantly school (2015); guideline for Some of those training conducted within revitalized schools (2015). the pilot projects; some were post pilot On the program. In line with the guidelines projects as the impact of the pilot for above, the program and budget were more dissemination, e.g. the 180 pilot allocated through Specific Allocation Safe School projects supported by GFDRR/ Fund for School Rehabilitation and Social BEC-Trust Fund, World Bank to support the Assistance Fund from the Ministry of BNPB and the Ministry of Education and Education and Culture to address identified Culture. The pilot project of 2012, in 2013 damaged schools, Revitalization program the provincial education office requested for 35 Junior High School (2016) include to socialization and training for the non- the application of ‘retrofitting’; Pilot safe pilot participated district in West Nusa schools for structural and non structural Tenggara. In 2016 several school principals issues to implement the Regulation still requested for books related for safe of BNPB No. 4/2012 on Safe Schools/ schools that he/she learnt from the pilot Madrasah; integration of safe school for project, either for different schools and/or non structural issues in BOS – School for a new school where he/she assigned. Operational Assistant Fund program; The The thought of the school principals to Roadmap on Safe School (2015-2020) implement safe school in the new school is has reflected how the Safe School will be very important message for sustainability implemented in Indonesia. post pilot project. For socialization, training and the There have been produced several books, training modules. There have been many modules for further use in the training as socialization and trainings on Safe School guideline. The Ministry of Education and conducted by different parties (Ministries Culture, led by the Bureau of Planning and of Education and Culture, BNPB, Ministry Foreign Cooperation, National Secretariat of Religion, international development for Safe School produced three modules partners, NGOs) for different target groups to explain more details the comprehensive ranging from teachers, school principles, safe school supported by Safe School 41 SAFE SCHOOL stakeholders team financed by UNICEF disaster prone areas has also produced a in 2015, i.e. Module 1 on Safe Learning Risk School Map and its report. Facilities; Module 2 on School Disaster Management; Module 3 on Risk Reduction Institutional set up. National Secretariat and Resilience Education. The World Bank of Safe School has been very effective in Team also produced Practical Guideline coordinating the stakeholders on Safe for Safer School that was formulated School. Internal program coordination based on experiences from the 180 pilot should be improved to integrate safe schools project (2015 revised in 2016). school implementation in the existing This practical guideline could be used as program by working units. extension of the Module 1 on Safe Learning Participation in International Events. The Facilities for the training. participation of Indonesian Government Others. Arup Consultant financed by representative in the international GFDRR/World Bank has produced the event related to Safe School has gained report of Survey for typology of school recognition by International community construction in Indonesia. This result could on the safe school implementation in be replicated at national level, and this Indonesia, which is considered a head than could be used to improve the pattern of other developing countries. financing school construction based on Way forwards their typology for the whole countries. The GFDRR/World Bank team to support The Sendai Framework produced in the BNPB and Ministry of Education and the World Conference for Disaster Risk Culture in prioritizing their program in the Reduction (2015) defined seven global 42 SAFE SCHOOL targets that have been agreed to support structural strengthening and school safety; the assessment of global progress in Develop school risk mapping in disaster achieving the framework outcome and prone areas to rank program priorities; goal (2015). This will be measured at the Develop tools to prepare baseline global level and will be complemented by data and its verification for improving work to develop appropriate indicators, the national education database (Dapodik); National targets and indicators. Review relevant issues on construction, rehabilitation and reconstruction of Indonesia is committed in advancing the disaster resilient school facilities and Worldwide Initiative for Safe Schools infrastructure to be integrated in the and committed to translate the Sendai existing regulation Framework into concrete target, roadmap, procedural and the program framework Assessment and Recognition system and built upon the existing Government instrument; Develop assessment and school construction and rehabilitation recognition system and tools to ensure program and schemes. The commitment compliance with the safe school facilities of Government Indonesia reflected in the and infrastructure standards. Implement provision of significant amount of budget assessment and recognition system for the improvement quality of school for school facilities and infrastructure facilities. e.g. the tranferred budget to compliance with the safe school/ local government for 2016 (DAK) directed madrasah standards; This will need (1) for improving infrastructure of primary Instrument Checklist for assessment of education and special need primary school facilities and infrastructure and education. 40% of the budget will be its standard guideline (picture, photos); allocated for physical infrastructure for Visual Observation Sketch in assessment heavily damaged classroom rehabilitation of school physical condition (sampling); (3) and new school construction. instrument for recognition (certification) for the implementation of school facilities Policy and program. Implement the and infrastructure compliance with the Roadmap 2015-2020 and integrate the safe school building standards refer to activities with the existing program; structural, non-structural, functional Integrate the Safe School principles into and area situation and its hazards; (4) the technical guideline of each program Certificate for Safe School facilities and related to construction, rehabilitation infrastructure; (5) Number of certified and reconstruction e.g. DAK for school schools are safe school from disaster. rehabilitation and construction of new schools 2016; Ideally safe school shall Capacity Building, Socialization and be integrated in the mid term plan and Training. Once the safe school principles annual planning both in central, local level, integrated into the existing government and school level. A pocket guideline for program and its guideline (procedure and safe school procedures and technique for technical), the annual working meeting school level is required to make easier the usually will be conducted to socialize the safe school implemention. program and the training for mastering the technical guideline will be conducted, Preparation of School Vulnerability this will include the integrated safe school Assessment. Diagnostic to update school principles in the guideline. The technical vulnerability assessment as the basis for training should include district education, typology of construction and options for school principal/teacher responsible for 43 SAFE SCHOOL the school construction/rehabilitation, Key Messages of Succesful reconstruction. Beside socialization and Implementation training, facilitation by technical and management facilitators or consultants The successful implementation of (who should have facilitation function) Safe School will depend on the budget for school and district level l, to improve provision for the national program on capacity of actors, institutions involved School construction, rehabilitation and in the construction, rehabilitation, reconstruction and integrate the safe reconstruction school and district school principles into the program education office. At School level, the procedure and technical guidelines. The school community shall be trained and source of budget could come from central practice evacuation drill regularly following level APBN, earmarked transfer from the evacuation path and signed established central to local govern (specific allocation purposely. fund), Local Government budget (APBD) and could also from private donation or Monitoring and Evaluation. Monitoring CSR fund. and evaluation of school facilities and infrastructure; Develop instrument, Other important aspect is capacity building method, system and mechanism for during the Safe school implementation monitoring and evaluation of school through facilitation and supervision, facilities and infrastructure and integrated training, socialization and ensuring the with the existing system and instrument, regular practice especially for equation this should be able to be accessed by drill. public and updated; In district level joint The roadmap for Safe School monitoring and evaluation shall involved Implementation formulated as a joint district education office, district disaster collaboration among the Safe School management office and district Cipta Karya stakeholders led by Ministry of Education or Public Works office. and Culture, as management of National Knowledge Management and Sharing. Secretariat for Safe School, and financed Gather the experiences of safe school by UNICEF. The collaboration processes implementation and structure the in the formulation will strenghten information and knowledge and preparing the realization for implementation, for knowledge sharing, updated and ready as some program contributed by the to be used in the international comparison implementation of the parties involved on and lesson learnt for other countries. the Roadmap formulation. The challenges for full implementation of the roadmap still remain, the National Secretariat for Safe School stilll need to ensuring the implementation by working unit in the Ministry and local level. 44 SAFE SCHOOL Annex: 1. Chronology of Safe School Initiatives 1. July 2010 – Indonesia joined “One slightly damaged schools (can easily be Million Safe Schools and Hospitals repaired). Campaign” and launched the national campaign on safe schools and hospitals. 5. 2011 – BNPB developed disaster risk During this event, the Vice Minister map, supported by World Bank based for Education and Culture pledged to on Ministry of Education and Culture ensure that thousands of schools would request, to identify schools that were comply with school safety standards, located in disaster prone areas and and that the Education Office at these schools would be prioritized to provincial and district/ municipality be rehabilitated and/ or reconstructed. level were urged to participate in The assessment indicated that 75 the campaign and its school safety percent of school buildings in Indonesia standards implementation. are located in disaster prone areas. 2. July 2010 – Indonesia joined “One 6. 18 February 2011 – BNPB supported Million Safe Schools and Hospitals by Ministry of Education and Culture, Campaign” and launched the national Ministry of Public Works (Cipta Karya), campaign on safe schools and hospitals. BPPT – State Ministry of Research During this event, the Vice Minister and Technology, BAPPENAS, Planas for Education and Culture pledged to (National Platform), Kerlip, Plan ensure that thousands of schools would Indonesia, UNESCO Jakarta Office, and comply with school safety standards, PPMB ITB issued “Guidelines for Safe and that the Education Office at School Rehabilitation using Education provincial and district/ municipality Special Allocation Fund (DAK) 2011”. level were urged to participate in 7. 25 August 2011 – Establishment of the campaign and its school safety National Secretariat for Safe School. standards implementation. This National Secretariat reported 3. December 2010 – National Conference directly to the Vice Minister for on Safe Schools, organized by Plan Education and Culture and was Indonesia in close collaboration with managed by Kerlip (local NGO), funded the Ministry of Education and Culture, by World Bank. BNPB, Plan International. However, on 2013, the National 4. 2010-2011 – Ministry of Education and Secretariat for Safe School was handed Culture conducted GIS based school over to BNPB and between 2013-2014 mapping and monitoring through BNPB tried to develop Blue Print for integration of safe school data with National Secretariat for Safe School. the Education Management and 8. September 2011 – Based on the Information System (EMIS) to collect mapping result, Ministry of Education data on schools which were categorized and Culture launched National into heavily damaged/ totally destroyed Program on School Rehabilitation (for schools, medium damaged schools elementary/ SD and junior high school/ (damaged, but can be repaired), and SMP) and this activity was targeted to 45 SAFE SCHOOL be completed by 2012. For this activity, 2012. In addition, Ministry of Religious MoEC allocated IDR 17.4 billion using Affairs also implemented Safe Schools/ Specific Allocation Fund (DAK) and State Madrasah in 17 provinces . Budget (APBN) managed by MoEC. The Ministry of Religious Affairs (MoRA) 11. October 2012 – Three events on Safe also implemented the same activity Schools at the 5th Asian Ministerial for madrasah, and MoRA allocated IDR Conference for Disaster Risk Reduction 3 billion for this purpose. This School (AMCDRR) in Yogyakarta were Rehabilitation activity was a mandate conducted 3 sessions related to Safe stated at President Instruction No. 1/ Schools, two among of those hosted by 2010 on accelerated development the Ministry of Education and Culture to improve the quality of service and supported by GFDRR-World Bank and education management which was one hosted by Plan International as coordinated by the Vice President explained above. through President's Delivery Unit for 12. 2012-2013 – Australia Education Development Monitoring and Oversight Partnership with Indonesia (AEPI) (UKP4). assisted Ministry of Education and Since this School Rehabilitation Culture on the development of Program launching, the Government community based construction model of Indonesia has provided Specific and built 764 new safe schools in 28 Allocation Fund for more than IDR provinces. 7.6 billion annually , specifically 13. 2013 – BNPB issued Safe School allocated for safe school rehabilitation Directories until 2013 in relation with and construction on top of national the issuance of Guideline for Safe government budget. The Specific Schools and Madrasah. Allocation Fund was transferred directly to the local government. 14. October 2013 – two events related to Safe Schools were conducted during 9. 2 May 2012 – A Guideline for Safe DRR month commemoration at NTB Schools and Madrasah was issued by province: 1) Showcase of Safe School BNPB (Perka 4/2012) and launched Implementation at SDN 1 Telagawaru, together with Ministry of Education and Lombok District which was funded by Culture during National Education Day GFDRR/ World Bank; 2) Safe School commemoration on 2 May 2012. Seminar, organized by Save the 10. May 2012 – Piloting of more than 200 Children. Safe Schools led by MoEC and BNPB 15. 2013-2014 – BNPB organized several (2012-2013), supported by World Bank workshops to develop and later to (GFDRR and BEC-TF), Plan Indonesia finalize the National Secretariat for and others in 6 provinces: West Safe School Blue Print. However, until Sumatera province, East Kalimantan October 2014 the Blue Print was never province, DKI province, West Java finalized. province, Central Java province, NTB province, and NTT province. Pilot 16. June 2014 – Ministry of Education and project were conducted to schools Culture formed MoEC’s Secretariat for which previously received Specific Disaster Management (MoEC’s DM Allocation Budget for Education in Secretariat) – under the Bureau of Planning and International Cooperation, 46 SAFE SCHOOL Secretariat General’s responsibility – in climate change. order 1) to improve education sector’s disaster management programs 21. January – June 2015 – Developing (preparedness, response and recovery) standard modules for Comprehensive for 2014-2015; 2) to develop policies, Safe Schools (CSS) which reflecting strategies, and 2015-2019 action plans the 3 pillars of CSS: 1) Safe Learning related to education sector’s disaster Facilities, 2) School Disaster management program; and 3) to Management, and 3) Risk Reduction improve coordination on education and Resilience Education. There were sector’s disaster management programs several stages taken on developing both with the MoEC’s main units and these CSS standard modules: with external parties ((other Ministries/ • Desk study review on available Agencies, NGOs, UN Agencies). policies and other tools related to Through this MoEC’s DM Secretariat, Safe School. This desk study was Safe School implementations have been planned by the MoEC to review strengthening. policies and other tools available 17. 22-26 June 2014 – Ministry of related to Safe School/ Madrasah, Education and Culture joined the whether they were issued by 6th Asian Ministerial Conference on MoEC, MoRA, BNPB, NGOs or Disaster Risk Reduction (AMCDRR) UN Agencies. Expected outcome in Bangkok. During this event, MoEC from this desk study review was presented Lesson Learned on Indonesia to have a catalogue on policies Safe School implementation on Pillar 1 - and tools for the three pillars of Safe School Facility. Comprehensive School Safety (CSS). 18. October 2014 – During the DRR month commemoration at Bengkulu province, • Development of CSS standard BNPB handed over the National modules, which was based on the Secretariat for Safe School back to the desk study review result. Existing Ministry of Education and Culture. policies and tools were compiled according to the three pillars of 19. 30-31 October 2014 – Ministry of CSS, which will benefit MoEC’s Education and Culture joined First plan to equip CSS facilitators for Meeting of Safe School Country Leaders teachers training with knowledge (Istanbul, Turkey), in which MoEC of available resources. MoEC plans presented the achievement of safe to print the standard modules school implementation in Indonesia. and distribute them to the CSS facilitators. 20. 4-7 November 2014 – Ministry of Education and Culture joined Regional • Exposures of CSS standard Consultation Meeting on Education and modules to MoEC’s main units Resilience in East Asia and the Pacific: and also to education sector Programmes and Policies that Promote stakeholders. Social Cohesion and Comprehensive School Safety in Quezon City, 22. 23-24 February 2015 – Ministry of Philippines, in which MoEC presented Education and Culture joined technical the Indonesia good practice policies meeting on the Istanbul Roadmap for resilience to natural disasters and for the Worldwide Initiative for Safe 47 SAFE SCHOOL Schools (WISS) in Geneva, in which from the Bureau of Planning and MoEC presented the Comprehensive International Cooperation, Secretariat Safe School implementation in General to the Directorate of Special Indonesia. Education and Special Services, Directorate General for Basic and 23. 14-18 March 2015 – Ministry of Secondary Education. However until Education and Culture joined the 3rd now discussion on National Secretariat UN World Conference on Disaster for Safe School structure including its Risk Reduction (WCDRR) in Sendai, coordination mechanism is still going Japan. During this conference, the on. Government of Indonesia gave their commitments 1) to the implementation 27. 29-30 September 2015: 2015 National of the Worldwide Initiative on Safe Conference on Safe School in Jakarta on Schools, particularly through the “Obtaining Commitment on Safe School development of national plans for safe in Relation with Sendai Framework schools; and 2) to pursue allocation of for Disaster Risk Reduction” which 20% of its annual development budget resulted a declaration. Participants to education (and school safety). coming from MoEC, BNPB, Ministry of Religious Affairs (MoRA), Ministry 24. 19-20 March 2015 – Ministry of of Women’s Empowerment and Education and Culture attended the Child Protection (MWECP), Ministry Technical Workshop on Safer School of Home Affairs (MoFA), Ministry Facilities in Tokyo, Japan. This event of Public Works and Public Housing was organized by GFDRR – World Bank (MPWPPH), Regional Parliament and this was part of Global Program (DPRD), Provincial government, District/ for Safe School (GPSS) of GFDRR. This Municipality government, religious activity was attended by countries, society organization, Consortium which would be part of GPSS, including for Disaster Education (CDE or KPB), Indonesia who was represented by learners, teachers and other education MoEC. personnel, private sectors, mass media, 25. 19-22 May 2015: Ministry of Education universities, and National Headquarter and Culture attended World Education of Scout Movement. Forum 2015 in Incheon, South Korea, in 28. 16-18 October 2015: National which MoEC presented the progress of Commemoration for DRR Month in Solo Safe School in Indonesia program. – there were three working session 26. May - September 2015: Development during this commemoration event, of Safe School Roadmap. On May 2015 and there was one working session MoEC decided to develop Indonesia (Working Session #2) on Safe School/ Safe School Roadmap, instead of Madrasah. During this session, it was finalizing the National Secretariat for mentioned that identified challenges Safe School Blueprint (the initial draft on implementing Safe School program was developed by BNPB). The Roadmap are: 1) Geographical conditions (of document also addresses Safe School Indonesia) have caused many disasters; institutionalization (National Secretary 2) On realization of the Government for Safe School). The document was of Indonesia’s commitment as Safe finalized on December 2015, and the School Leader that has been conveyed plan was to have a formal handover at 2015 UNWCDRR; 3) On maximizing 48 SAFE SCHOOL the absorption of the allocated national Safe School Roadmap 2015- education budget (20% of the total 2019; annual national development budget) 5. Develop Indonesian National to improve school facilities and Standard on Safe School with its clear infrastructure damaged, while safe and applicable indicators, including school standards are not yet available, disaster symbols; therefore there is a need to develop 6. Improve data center and develop the Indonesian National Standard on information system by integrating safe Safe School in order to be used by all school data; actors as a reference. 7. Integrate disaster risk education in On the other hand, there are still some education which met the Indonesian challenges on integrating disaster National Standards indicators, and Safe risk reduction into education system, School certification and accreditation; such as: 1) Curriculum burden for 8. On involving scouts as disaster the students; 2) Lack of teachers’ risk reduction education agents understanding on disaster issues; who actively conduct independent 3) Lack of teacher’s capacity and assessment on schools located at capabilities on integrating DRR into disaster prone areas. curriculum; 4) Lack of distributed 29. October - December 2015: BNPB reference, syllabus and teaching facilitated the adoption of Safe School/ material which can be accessed by the Madrasah from disasters in 10 schools teachers; 5) Lack of resources (human in 10 districts/ municipalities at North resources, budget and facilities); 6) Aceh district, West Pasaman district, Physical condition of school buildings, Bengkulu, Bandung district, Badung facilities and infrastructure needs district, South Minahasa district, Bima, improvement, as they were built Ternate, Ambon, Gorontalo. Goals of without considering the environmental this activity are: impact analysis and safe construction; and also 7) Institutions and local 1. Build a culture of preparedness, regulation on disaster management a culture of safety, and a culture of at district/ municipality level are not disaster risk reduction in schools, along available. Follow up recommendations with building a planned, integrated, are: and coordinated school community resilience on disaster by utilizing 1. Dissemination of a new paradigm the available resources in order to on disaster management in general and protect students, teachers and school specifically on the concept and practice community from disaster risks and its of safe school / madrasah; impact 2. Commitment in programming, budgeting, implementation, and a 2. Disseminate and develop disaster structured, scalable and efficient knowledge to the wider community monitoring and evaluation system; through the education system 3. Develop strategies on resource 3. Develop Safe School/ Madrasah optimizing in order to integrate disaster from Disasters program risk reduction into education system; 30. October - November 2015: BNPB 4. Finalize the development of facilitated Sister School program 49 SAFE SCHOOL in disaster-prone areas in Sleman environment for students whose district. Sister School (program) is a schools have been affected by commitment between two schools in disaster, so that the teaching and disaster risk reduction, preparedness learning process can continue to run and emergency response at school, as effectively at support schools that are well as a development/ modification of not affected by a disaster. Ten pairs of school disaster preparedness activities school at Sleman district, consisted of and Safe School/ Madrasah from ten disaster-affected schools and ten Disasters. support schools signed MoUs for this purpose. Activities part of Sister School program are: 1) Forming Disaster Preparedness 31. November 2015: Adaptation on the Team; 2) Conduct assessment on VISUS (Visual Inventory for Surveying hazards, vulnerability, capacity and and Upgrading Safety) methodology, risks; 3) Develop contingency plan; 4) which was piloted at 60 schools in Socialization and training; 5) Develop Indonesia, was a cooperation between evacuation route map and evacuation MoEC, UNESCO and ITB, is to be used signs; 6) Develop DRR EIC (education, as Pillar 1 instrument for conducting information and communication) assessment on school’s structures media; 7) Conduct emergency drill/ and safe school’s facilities and simulation; 8) Integrate DRR issues infrastructures. into extra-curricular activities; and 9) Develop MoU between impacted school and support school. Implementation of Sister School program aims to provide a convenient and feasible teaching and learning 50 ii Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices © 2016 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank 1818 H Street NW Internet: www.worldbank.org This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Rights and Permissions The material in this work is subject to copyright. Because The World Bank encourages dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for noncommercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given. Authors: Iwan Gunawan, Jan Sopaheluwakan, Saut Sagala, Hoferdy Zawani, Suryani Amin, Ruby Mangunsong Photo Credit : Dissy Ekapramudita, Rizky Budiarto, Kristadi Setiawan, Suryani Amin Copyright World Bank Design & Layout : Mapple First Edition, June 2016 i Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices ii Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices CONTENT Urb an Re silie n ce in Indonesia: Concept & P rac tices i Contents iii Foreword iv Acknowledgement 1.1 Rapid Urbanization 1.2 Cities, Disaster and Climate Change FOCUS ON CITIES 1.3 State of Indonesia Cities 1.4 Risk Features of Indonesia Cities 2.1 Key Issues in Urban Resilience 2.2 Basic Concepts of Urban Resilience URBAN RESILIENCE 2.3 Rapid risk diagnostic tool CONCEPTS 3.1 Towards Resilient City Policy 3.2 Building resilience in coastal areas NATIONAL POLICY FOR BUILDING RESILIENT CITIES i Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices 4.1 Phase 1 – Risk Assessment 4.2 Phase 2 – Development of Critical Enabling Capacity KEY PHASES TO MAKE 4.3 Phase 3 – Implementing CITIES RESILIENT Resilience Measures 4.4 Phase 4 – Sustaining Resilience Infusion 5.1 Urban Risk Assessment Practices: Tallo River Normalization 5.2 Enabling Capacity: Collaborative URBAN RESILIENCE Mapping in Balikpapan & Yogyakarta PRACTICES 5.3 Urban Resilience Measures: Urban Upgrading in Karang Waru & JUMFP 5.4 Risk Infusion Practices v Bibliography ii Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices FOREWORD Indonesia is a disaster-prone country, especially to disasters linked to climate change. Cities in Indonesia are particularly vulnerable due to the complexity of the system, population density, utilities and infrastructure system. Consequently, there has been an attempt by the Government of Indonesia (GoI) to reduce disaster risk and to mainstream it into the national development planning. This publication is developed for urban spatial planners, policy makers and practitioners of urban disaster management in order to provide a basic understanding of the concepts and systematic steps that should be done to build a resilient city. Examples of relevant practices are provided on how the implementation of resilient cities takes place in Indonesia. The proposed concepts and actions are summarized from various sources of literature and experiences in Indonesia. This publication is not meant as a standard or a guideline for urban resilience planning, but it will give initial understanding to combine the concept of urban resilience into urban planning. On the other hand, the technical procedure of the implementation will require further exploration. In the first part, this work will discuss about the urbanization trend and its impact to urban vulnerability. It is followed with basic concept of urban resilience, the policy framework of urban resilience in Indonesia and indicative measures needed to strengthen the resilience of the city. It follows up with key phases to making cities resilient. The final section provides examples of related urban resilient practices. i Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ii Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices FOCUS ON CITIES 1.1 Rapid Urbanization U rbanization gains its momentum as early as the industrial revolution by the end of the eighteenth century, where real “urbanized societies” were developed. With technological invention that replaced hand tools with power-driven machines, agricultural societies gradually evolved into industrial societies, and a high proportion of the population began to inhabit the cities. The concentration of industry in large led to socio-economic transformation, where societies started to develop and segregated with specializations and skills. Along with this, institution of governments was formed to manage people and societies. This period was also defined by mass production, the rise of nation state, and modern medicine that increased dramatically the quality of human life. Ever since the industrial revolution, several categories of cities, such as small cities and medium sized cities have emerged. Now, the categories expand from small, medium, big, metropolitan and megacities. As cities grow, they offered more and bigger services, infrastructures, and opportunities for their inhabitants. However, along with the population increase, the population density also increases which often accompanied by a variety of risks such as fires, diseases, crimes, social conflicts and declining environment. Rapid urban development in hazard-prone areas also contributed to the creation of risks. This occurred due to partial development that is characterized by unequal access to infrastructures or public services and unavailability of urban space for the poor. Consequently, due to lack of option, poor households inhabit flood-prone river banks, steep slopes or areas with a high level of environmental degradation. In addition to the risk faced, these areas have little access to public infrastructure. Moreover, the vulnerability of poor households could be intensified by lack of access to social 10 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices FOCUS ON CITIES Introduction protection. This phenomenon is recognized in Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction 2015 which stated that “in many low and middle-income countries, urban development is characterized by highly unequal access to urban space, infrastructure, services and security” (UNISDR 2015). Economic growth, rapid technological advancement, the promise of prosperity and the current drive of globalization have further fostered the process of urbanization. In some countries, this process has given rise to megacities. Megacities have their own advantages and challenges. Mega-urban life offers various advantages such as improved economic opportunities, better quality of life, easier access to basic services, and a rich cultural life. However, with increasing social polarization induced by globalization, the proportion of marginalized population that is excluded from these benefits is growing within megacities. These poor people are particularly vulnerable to the negative effects of economic, social and political insecurity, exploitation, environmental pollution, natural hazards, health crises, and food insecurity. 11 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices FOCUS ON CITIES Cities, Disaster And Climate Ch ange hand, a well-planned and properly constructed 1.2 Cities, Disaster and reclamation projects may provide additional land Climate Ch ange areas and added protection for cities as they may serve as sea barriers to mitigate the effects of rising sea levels. D ue to limited of space, the city development has put its citizen, infrastructure and assets exposed to disaster prone Climate change pose another potential and significant threats to city resilience, such as areas. This is theoretically illustrated through the through sea level rise, water scarcity, coastal interaction between natural hazards, exposure and flooding, extreme weathers. Coastal cities in South vulnerability that creates disaster risks in the city East Asia, such as Jakarta, Bangkok and Manila (Figure 1.1a). This condition can be exacerbated by have been frequently hit by disasters that cost poverty and environmental degradation, poor plan fatalities and economic losses. A report by EEPSEA development plan and external factors, such as (2009) stated that five out of six municipalities in climate change (Figure 1.1b). Jakarta were very vulnerable to climate change impacts. Without a careful mitigation and disaster risk reduction plan, the losses can be enormous in the future. Natural Hazard Exposure Vulnerability Climate Change Poverty and Poorly planned development A study by the World Bank (Dickson et al. 2012) environmental concludes that compared to rural areas,urban degradation areas suffer greater fatalities and economic DISASTER RISK losses due to disasters. With more than half of the world’s population currentlyliving in cities and an Fig. 1 The interplay of natural hazards, exposure and vulnerability in creating disaster risks additional two billion people will live in cities in the next twenty years, city residents will face increased Poverty and environmental degradation is a complex risks in the future. Also, with the growing number of problem that is closely linked with social structure urban residents living in slums and the worsening and economic activities of the cities. Growing urban impacts of climate change, without significant population and increasing density will put pressure changes in the management of disaster risks and on the environment, and hence increasing poverty urbanization, many cities will continue to sustain and vulnerability. Increased settlements in hazard- heavy losses due to disaster. prone areas and poorly planned development will increase exposure to risks, while through changing Data from the World Bank (2015) show that urban temperatures, precipitation and sea levels, climate areas are adding at 1.4 million people per week and change has intensified hazard levels. The interplay it is projected that 90% of urban growth through ofall these drivers may increase the scale of 2050 will occur in Africa and Asia (see figure 2). disaster risks. The data also demonstrate that weather-related losses have increased significantly in 1980-2013, Poorly planned development may expose the city suggesting that climate change is increasing to greater risks. For instance, without careful the frequency and intensity of weather-related planning, reclamation in coastal areas can cause disasters. flooding, as it destroys wetlands that form a natural intensity of weather-related disasters. buffer between the ocean and the land. On the other 12 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices FOCUS ON CITIES “Without risk sensitive development, population growth and rapid urbanization will lead to increased exposure and risk” Figure ‎1.2Population growth, rapid urbanization and climate change risks Source: Investing in Resilience: Sendai 2015, World Bank. Figure‎1.3 Jakarta Flood 2013 13 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices FOCUS ON CITIES Table 1-1. Urban Climate-related hazards Source: Adapted from World Bank (2009b) in Dickson et al (2012) 14 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices FOCUS ON CITIES Cities, Disaster And Climate Ch ange C ities 1.3 State of Indonesian Indonesian cities are thriving rapidly during the past 15 years, with the development of 34 new cities as a result of district or town expansion, which in parthas been driven by the decentralization andregional autonomy policy. Data from the Ministry of Home Affairs suggest that in 1999-2015, 529 new regions have been established, including 34 provinces, 402 districts and 93 cities . Concentration of urban population in Indonesia are mostly found in Java and Sumatra (Figure 1.4). Figure.‎1.4 Indonesian Metropolitan Cities Figure ‎1.5Rapid urbanization and projection in Indonesia Source: National Development Planning Board, 2014 The trend shows that Indonesian citizens will concentrate more in metropolitan areas and megacities. BPS (2015) estimated that by 2035 the In the period of 1980-2010 the urban population of percentage of urban population will reach around Indonesia had increased six fold from 20.5 million 66.6% of the total population, or approximately (1980) to 118.7 million (2010). It is projected that the 305 million people, an increase from 49.8% in country’s urban population will reach 203.5 million 2010 . In 2015, the total population of Indonesia by 2035. Urban population will increase by 3.4 reached 255.5 million people, making it the fourth million people per year or approximately 800,000 most populous nation in the world, with 57% of the new households in the period of 2010-2035. This population live in Java Island. The country has an will have huge implications on the demand for annual population growth rate of 1.38 percent(BPS urban housing and settlements, basic services, 2015). Figure 1.5 below describes the proportion, transportation and urban utilities. trend and projection of urban-rural population. 15 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices FOCUS ON CITIES Cities, Disaster And Climate Ch ange Figure ‎1.5Rapid urbanization and projection in Indonesia the national capital, Jakarta and nearby urban Source: National Development Planning Board, 2014 areas of Bogor, Depok, Tangerang & Bekasi (Jabodetabek). Currently in 2014, 9,3% of urban The percentage of people living in urban areas has populationin Indonesia lives in Jabodetabek area, increased fourfold since 1961, from 14.9 percent which also constitutes 16,8% of the total population to 49.8 percent in 2010. The year 2011 marks a of Java. The growth of population in Jabodetabek turning point for the country as by that time the area is 3.6% per year, making it the most percentage of Indonesian population living in urban competitive and densely populated megacity with a areas passed those living in rural areas. In 2015 it GDP share of more than 25% during late 1990s and is estimated that the percentage of people living in mid-2000s. The number of people live in cities of in cities will increase to 53.3 percent. Java Island has overpassedthe national total urban population which is 49.7%. In 2010, there were 12 The Government through the Ministry of Public cities with a population of more than 1 million, 9 Works (2009recognizes four types of cities in of which were in Java. Six of those 9 cities were in Indonesia, i.e. metropolitan city, big city, medium Jabodetabek region, except for Surabaya, Bandung city and small city. Metropolitan city is a city with and Semarang (Firman 2015). a population of more than 1 million people. There are 10 metropolitan cities in Indonesia, 7 of which Besides Jabodetabek, there are other large urban are located in Java (Jakarta, Surabaya, Bandung, agglomerations such as Bandung Metropolitan Bekasi, Tangerang, Semarang, and Depok), 2 Area (Bandung Raya), Surabaya Metropolitan in Sumatra (Medan and Palembang), and 1 in Area (Gerbangkertosusilo), Medan Metropolitan Sulawesi (Makassar). Big city is categorized as Area (Mebidangro), Makassar Metropolitan Area a city that has population of 500,000 - 1 million (Maminasata). These urban agglomerations have inhabitants. Medium City is a city that has a similar characteristics to megacities. Other than population of 100,000 – 500,000 inhabitants. Small urban agglomerations, there is also rural areas city is categorized as a city that has a population of that urbanized into cities (Firman 2015). This rural 50,000 – 100,000 inhabitants or < 50,000 inhabitants urbanization or known as in-situ urbanization took but having an autonomous status. place since 2000 in Java islands. Thus urbanization has not always included migration or movement of In Indonesia, the distribution of population is not people from rural to urban areas. uniform. The population density centered around 16 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices FOCUS ON CITIES The annual urban population growth rate is 2.75%, exceeding the average national growth rate which is 1.17%. In 2025 it estimated that 68% of the Indonesian population will live in the cities. And in 2045 this percentage will reach 82%. Figure ‎1.6 Densely Populated Urban Areas Source: World Bank Study Team 17 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices FOCUS ON CITIES State od Indonesia Cities 1 . 4 R i s k F e a t u re s of I nd o n e s i a n C i t i e s A ccording to DIBI data (BNPB, 2016), over the last two hundred years (1815 – 2015) disaster events mostly occurred in Java The National Planning Board identifies a number of vulnerabilities faced by cities in Indonesia, that relate to the rapid growth of cities, increased and Sumatra, and to lesser extent in Kalimantan, disaster occurrences and climate-related hazards. Sulawesi, and Nusa Tenggara Islands (BNPB, 2016). These vulnerabilities are contained in the elements This pattern is quite similar to the distribution of of the city, such as services and infrastructures, the population in the country. Correspondingly, economy, social-cultural sphere, environment, disaster risk will likely be concentrated in Java governance and rural-urban linkage as elaborated islands, where mega-urbanization takes place. in the box below (Bappenas 2014). Hence, it is important to start investing to increase city’s resiliency in this region. Table ‎1.1 Type of vulnerabilities the city and their underlying causes 18 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices FOCUS ON CITIES State Of Indonesia City National Disaster Management Agency (BNPB) (2013) issued the Indonesian Disaster Risk Index (Indeks Risiko Bencana Indonesia) that categorizes districts and cities to three level of risks, i.e. high, medium and low. Based on a calculation of the total score of the historical multi hazard data and the total population exposed, 136 districts and cities have been categorized as high risk. Figure 1.7 below represents the spatial distribution of the high, medium and low risk areas of cities, overlaid with the city size. It shows in general that many cities are categorized either medium or high risks. Many cities in Java Island are in high risk category. Cities in Sumatra Island show a variety between medium to high risks. Nonetheless, most cities in Sulawesi Island and Kalimantan Island also fall into high risk category. 19 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices FOCUS ON CITIES Risk Feature of Indonesian City Figure ‎1.7 Risk Index of Indonesian CitiesSource: World Bank Study Team, based on data from Central Bureau of Statistics (BPS) and National Disaster Management Agency (BNPB) 20 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices URBAN RESILIENCE CONCEPTS 21 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices URBAN RESILIENCE CONCEPTS 2.1 Ke y Issues in Urban Resilience T O BE CHANGED WITH MORE ROBUST IDEAS FROM VARIOUS SOURCES. According to UNISDR (2012), there are several significant drivers of urban resilience: Growing urban populations and increased density, which put pressure on land and services, increasing settlements in coastal lowlands, along unstable slopes and in hazard-prone areas. Concentration of resources and capacities at national level, with a lack of fiscal and human resources and capacities in local government, including unclear mandates for disaster risk reduction and response. Weak local governance and insufficient participation by local stakeholders in planning and urban management. Inadequate water resource management, drainage systems and solid waste management, causing health emergencies, floods and landslides. The decline of ecosystems, due to human activities such as road construction, pollution, wetland reclamation and unsustainable resource extraction, that threatens the ability to provide essential services such as flood regulation and protection. Decaying infrastructure and unsafe building stocks, this may lead to collapsed structures. Uncoordinated emergency services, which decreases the capacity for swift response and preparedness. 22 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices URBAN RESILIENCE CONCEPTS Ch aracteristics of a Disaster and Climate Resilient City Adverse effects of climate change that will likely increase or decrease extreme temperatures and precipitation, depending on localized conditions, with an impact on the frequency, intensity and location of floods and other climate-related disasters. Therefore, development should also be based on plans that meet the specific socioeconomic and geographic conditions of a place. The low income community in urban and rural area has different scales and types of vulnerability as well as poverty characteristic.The most significant challenges faced by the poor in urban areas relate to employment, housing and social welfare (Wisnetr et al 2004). In principle, local governments are responsible for providing basic services (i.e public housing, education, healthcare and social insurance) to reduce the vulnerabilities of low- income people. The quality of these services correlates closely with the level of vulnerability of the beneficiaries. The better the quality of public service, the beneficiaries become less vulnerable and will have higher probability to get out of the poverty. One of the underlying causes of urbanization is the motivation to seek a better livelihood and economic benefits in cities. In order to achieve this, people from rural areas migrate to the cities where economic opportunity is deemed to be better. In most cases, these job seekers migrate with limited financial ability and thus the migrants account for a large share of the urban poor in many cities. Due to their many limitations, their status can be translated as high vulnerability. Nonetheless, as migrants contribute significantly to the economic development of recipient cities, they are entitled to earn social protection from the government.In order to manage the negative impacts of urbanization, city governments have to work collaboratively with civil society and private sectors. Effective cooperation needs to be built with all stakeholders to make the city more resilient and robust in every aspect. 23 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices URBAN RESILIENCE CONCEPTS Ch aracteristics of a Disaster and Climate Resilient City 2.2 Basic Concepts of Urban Resilience R esilience is rooted in many disciplines, such as psychology, ecology and engineering. It is used in many policy studies related could be further augmented by the unpredictable impacts of climate change. Consequently, a city needs a resilience concept that goes beyond to climate change, risk management, adaptation “bouncing back” to a bigger concept of “building measures (Kelman et al 2015) and in development back better” or “bouncing forward” (Kennedy et al studies and urban and regional planning. Resilience 2008). describes the ability of a system to withstand or accommodate stresses and shocks such as climate Dickson et al. (2012) mention that there are at least impacts, while still maintaining its function. At an six characteristics that are present in resilient cities. urban scale, resilience will depend on the ability First of all, a resilient city has the capacity to face to maintain essential assets, as well as to ensure a contingency along with its unexpected demands. access to services and functions that support the They have a spare capacity, which ensures that wellbeing of citizens (Dickson et al, 2012; Joerin there is a back-up or alternative available when a and Shaw, 2011). vital component of a system fails, to ensure service delivery. Resilient cities are also flexible or able to Resilient cities can only be accomplished through change, evolve, and adapt to alternative strategies a concerted effort in implementing disaster in the face of disaster. They have the ability to risk management, climate change adaptation absorb shocks and prevent failures from rippling and sustainable urban management through across systems (safe failure). Resilient cities have a systematic action in understanding risks, the capacity for rapid rebound, which is the capacity identifying the capacity of the city, harnessing to re-establish function, re-organize, and avoid opportunities to prevent adverse impacts and long-term disruptions. Therefore, achieving urban optimizing positive benefits. This may suggest that resilience requires engaging the capacities of resilience is comprised of characteristics that may social agents to understand and act upon the urban be developed by the city elements, including the systems through iterative cycles of understanding natural environment, the built environment and the vulnerability and building resilience. Furthermore, citizen. The bigger the challenge faced by a city, the Jha et al. (2012) categorized urban resilience into more the city is in need of a highly robust resilience four components, infrastructural, institutional, concept. Moreover, the challenge faced by the city economic, and social resilience (Table 2.1). 24 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices URBAN RESILIENCE CONCEPTS Ch aracteristics of a Disaster and Climate Resilient City As mentioned earlier, concentration of people, 3 (3) Identify, understand and use current and assets, and economic activities in cities has future risk scenarios, increased exposure to the impacts of natural hazards and climate change. City residents are 4 (4) Pursue resilient urban development and particularly vulnerable to earthquakes, landslides, design, floods, rising sea levels, and storm surges. In addition to making hazard events more frequent 5 (5) Safeguard natural buffers to enhance the and more intense, climate change has also posed protective functions offered by natural the risks of prolonged drought and extreme heat. ecosystems, Figure xx below shows the changing pattern of natural disaster by comparing data from 1903- (6) 6 Strengthen institutional capacity for 1962 and 1963-2012. Compared to the set of data resilience, from the first period, the second period shows that weather-related events other than storm have 7 (7) Understand and strengthen societal increased significantly from 24.9% to 48.2%. To capacity for resilience, build resilient cities amidst this changing pattern of natural disasters, city governments will need to 8 (8) Increase infrastructure resilience, engage in disaster risk management that is more accommodative to emerging risks. 9 (9) Ensure effective disaster response, and Baker (2012) maintains that disaster risk reduction 10 Expedite recovery and build back better. and climate change adaptation have many In more operational meaning, the Government of Indonesia through BNPB adopted “ten essentials for making cities resilient” approach that was developed by UNISDR (2012). These ten essentials are as follows: (1) Organize for disaster resilience, (2) Strengthen financial capacity for resilience, 25 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices URBAN RESILIENCE CONCEPTS Ch aracteristics of a Disaster and Climate Resilient City 2.3 Rapid risk dia gnostic tool T o understand the possible disaster risk and climate change impact, a rapid diagnostic tool can be used to obtain a quick 4 (4) identifying major urban investments, types of investments and their locations and impacts to vulnerability reduction; overview of risks (Gunawan et al 2015). A rapid diagnostic tool has been tested and developed by 5 (5) formulating city risk profile, the World Bank (2015) in several Indonesian Cities. which presents the locations of risks, Rapid risk diagnostics can be used to initiate a investments and the option of resilient conversation among city officials and stakeholders measures to be taken. on disaster and climate risks (e.g. their general spatial distribution, and their potential relations to the city’s growth pattern and trends). The rapid risk diagnostics can utilize available tools to be pin pointed such as: low resolution data or atlas, records of event occurrences as remembered by the residents or captured in the news, and information on the city’s on-going and planned development investment, specific geographic areas around natural hazards and investment locations. It should be follow by a more detailed and thorough risk assessment in much smaller geographic areas. Only at this stage, generating new and higher resolution data will be more manageable and less costly. Rapid risk diagnostic tool has 5 key steps: (1) reviewing the overall spatial structure of the city, which includes the core of the city, economic base and spatial Figure 2.1 elaborates concept of rapid risk agglomeration; diagnostics, which emphasizes the interrelationship between development, vulnerability and resilience (2) reviewing the growth pattern and growth options. This approach takes into account the direction of the city, which presents the disaster patterns that may shape the overall growth trends, spatial distribution and spatial structure. On the other hand, the city has direction; vulnerable areas or elements that were formed by urban development practices and societal activities 3 (3) reviewing the pattern of disaster over a long period of time. The interplay between occurrences (i.e. types and frequency of disaster patterns and vulnerability areas creates hazards, and pattern of disasters), urban risks, which may be reduced by lessening vulnerability and reengineering the spatial 26 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices URBAN RESILIENCE CONCEPTS Ch aracteristics of a Disaster and Climate Resilient City structure of the city. For that purpose, city needs to incorporate resilience principles into major urban development and investments particularly in high risk areas or elements.Rapid risk diagnostics have been piloted by World Bank and Bappenas in six cities in Indonesia, i.e. Balikpapan, Denpasar, Figure ‎2.2Rapid Risk Diagnostic Pilot Cities in Indonesia Makassar, Palembang, Semarang, and Yogyakarta. Source: Gunawan et al 2015 27 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices URBAN RESILIENCE CONCEPTS Ch aracteristics of a Disaster and Climate Resilient City 28 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices Tools and Options For Building Resilience NATIONAL POLICY FRAMEWORK FOR BUILDING RESILIENT CITIES Tools and Options For Building Resilience 3.1 Towards Resilient City Policy Figure ‎3.1Timeline of Policies Related to Urban Resilience Source: World Bank Study Team T he development of national urban policy in Indonesia may be seen as milestones towards resilient city. The initial attention was on environmental related issues (sanitation and cleanliness), followed by health issues. Later, the approach becomes more comprehensive from livable city, green and sustainable city, resilient city and smart city (Figure 3.1). Since the 1980s Indonesia has implemented programs that address various aspects of city problems and challenges. In 1986 the Ministry of Environment launched the Adipura Program, which provides awards to cities and districts that have been successful in maintaining cleanliness and good environmental management. Aspects that are assessed through this program include waste management, tree cover, green open space, and water and air pollution control. The program evaluates both the physical and institutional- management aspects of cities and districts. Since 2015 Adipura Program has also been geared towards achieving sustainable city goals (Permen LH 6/2014). 30 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices NATIONAL POLICY FRAMEWORK FOR BUILDING RESILIENT CITIES Indicators For Disaster and Climate Resilience The Ministry of Health initiated the Healthy District/ in implementing disaster risk reduction (Perka City Program (Program Kabupaten/Kota Sehat) in BNPB 1/2012). The results of this exercise are 2005 through a joint Ministry of Home Affairs and meant to inform the local development planning Ministry of Health Decree Number 34/2005. This process, as a way of mainstreaming DRR into local program, which adopts a WHO-led program that has development plans. On November 28th 2015, BNPB been implemented in developing countries since stated their commitment towards realizing Central the 1980s, is meant to operationalize sustainable Java Disaster Resilience Province . In addition to development through the development of cities that, some other cities’ have already taken steps for and districts that are healthy and environmental achieving disaster resilient cities, such as Bima , friendly. Some aspects and indicators of the Bogor , Makassar , Klaten and Denpasar . program are similar to those used in the Adipura Program (Ministry of Home Affairs and Ministry of A similar approach has been taken by the Health, 2005). Association of Indonesian Planning Experts that adopts the Most Livable City Index (MLCI) to Since 2011, the Ministry of Public Works has encourage cities to engage in sustainable urban implemented Green and Sustainable City development in the end of 2009. The index shows Program. The program aims at promoting city and level of how comfortable city inhabitants about regional development that will not undermine the living in their city. The index is acquired through environmental assets of the regions. The Green survey towards 1200 citizens of 12 Large Cities in and Sustainable City Program tries to support the Indonesia. Criteria used in this survey are based enforcement of Spatial Planning Law in terms on National Symposium: Future of Indonesian of allocation of 30% of city and district areas as Metropolitan Cities in Medan, 4th December 2008; green open spaces. Through the program cities with seven main variables: physical, environment and districts are expected to prepare a green quality, transportation—accessibility, Facilities, map and a master plan for green open space, and Utilities, Economic and Social. This index serves as organize public campaign and education as well as evaluation for local government and its citizens to capacity building efforts for environmental friendly increase their cities’ livability (Muttaqin, 2010). urban development. The program also promotes the advancement of 10 Initiatives from Bali Forum In 2014, the National Development Planning Agency for Sustainable Urban Development that include (Bappenas) collaborated with the World Bank to city management, institutional capacity, control develop a disaster and climate change resilience of urban population growth, disaster and climate framework for urban development. The World change mitigation, urban economy, heritage, Bank assisted Bappenas in conducting technical housing and settlements, green cities, revitalization discussion among the local municipalities through of waterfront areas and urban transportation(PU, floor group discussions (FGD) and consultation 2011). activities throughout 2014. The consensus is then incorporated and reflected in the National Medium The National Agency for Disaster Management Term of Development Planning (RPJMN) of 2015- (BNPB) launched the Resilient City Program in 2019 in the urban development sector. 2012. Employing the UNISDR Local Government Self-Assessment Tools (LG-SAT) for City Smart City Program constitutes the latest city- Resilience, the agency tries to engage city and related program launched in the country. Declared district governments to assess their progress by city mayors from the Asian and African 31 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices NATIONAL POLICY FRAMEWORK FOR BUILDING RESILIENT CITIES Indicators For Disaster and Climate Resilience countries at the commemoration of the Asia- rural-urban economic development. Africa Conference in Bandung in 2015, the program aims at developing a sustainable and smart city by The National Medium-term Development Plan establishing knowledge networks and sharing of 2015-2019 outlines three major categories of cities, technology among local governments, academia, i.e. livable cities, green and resilient cities, and business, industry and communities. A smart city competitive and smart cities. Indonesian policy implements smart governance, smart economy, for urban development in the next five years will smart mobility, smart living and smart environment. be focused on improving people’s productivity, Many cities have been involved in this initiative, but leveraging global competitiveness, and developing it seems that most of these cities have only focused the country from the fringe by strengthening their efforts in using information technology to and improving competitiveness of the regions facilitate their service delivery (Giffinger et al, 2007). and villages. Figure 3.2 below depicts urban In August 2015, Institut Teknologi Bandung (ITB) development priority in Indonesia 2015-2019. collaborated with Kompas newspaper with support from PT Perusahaan Gas Negara (PGN) awarded Smart City (Kota Cerdas) 2015 in Indonesia. The award was given based on Indonesia Smart City Index (IKCI), comprising of several aspects, such as economy, social, environment. This activity is also supportedby Ministry of Public Works and Housing by Green City Program (PU, 2015).The smart city concept is supported in conjunction with the idea to increasing city government ability in facing ASEAN Economic Community challenge. National Mid Term Development Plan on Urban Development The National Medium-term Development Plan 2015-2019 maintains that the national policies for urban development will be geared towards Figure ‎3.2Urban Development Priority in Indonesia sustainable cities that have the necessary physical 2015-2019 characteristics, economic potential and vibrant local culture (RPJMN 2015-2019). Based on experiences from the above city level initiatives, national government endeavors to formulate an integrated long-term policy for urban development. This mid-term plan is based on a concept developed by Bappenas (2014) on establishing a dynamic balance of growth among metropolitan cities, and big, medium, and small cities. With this policy, the growth of big and metropolitan cities will be controlled and directed towards the acceleration of 32 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices NATIONAL POLICY FRAMEWORK FOR BUILDING RESILIENT CITIES Indicators For Disaster and Climate Resilience Source: Bappenas, 2014 Although Indonesia has not set a resilient city roadmap or pathway, sectors related to resilient The National Planning Board has also set-up urban city are recognized in the national mid term development targets that have to be reached by development plan 2015-2019 (Table 3.1). 2019 as followings: Table 3.1 Sectors related to Resilient City Issues in National Mid-Term Development Plan 1) Urban systems for discrepancy reduction realization; 2) Urban service standard fulfillment; Building secure, comfortable and livable 3) 3 cities; 4 4) Develop climate change and disaster resilient green cities; 5) 5 Develop competitive and ICT-based smart city; 6 6) Build a transparent, accountable, participative and professional urban management capacity. 33 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices NATIONAL POLICY FRAMEWORK FOR BUILDING RESILIENT CITIES Governance and Community Enga gement 34 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices NATIONAL POLICY FRAMEWORK FOR BUILDING RESILIENT CITIES 3.2 Building resilience in coastal areas As an archipelagic country with more than 17,000 islands and a coastline of more than 95,000 km, coastal cities in Indonesia faces the growing risks of sea level rise, salt-water intrusion of aquifers through storm surge and high land subsidence. The sea-level rise was projected to increase 35-40 cm of sea surface relative to year 2000 (ACCRN, 2016). Coastal inundation due to sea level rise has caused significant problems along coastal zones where about 50-60% of total population resides, which may cause displacement and internal migration. The inundation could impact some cities have even been submerged completely. the industry, agriculture and fisheries productivity and thereby affecting household employment Recognizing the important role of coastal cities in (ACCRN, 2016).Large numbers of major cities in the country’s economy, the national government Indonesia are coastal cities that are located in Low has formulated some strategies to develop Elevation Coastal Zone/LECZ (zone with altitudes resilient coastal cities, among other through the of less than 10 meters above sea level), such as integration of climate change adaptation into coastal cities in Java, such as Jakarta, Cirebon, coastal planning in cities and districts that are Semarang, Surabaya and Medan. In short, strategic located in coastal areas. Integrated management infrastructure for national welfare are located in of coastal zones, small islands and marine these areas. ecosystems will be implemented, including through physical adaptation in coastal zones and small Currently, there is about 61 coastal cities in islands (Bappenas, 2010). The Mid-term National Indonesia (KPPOD, 2013). In these coastal cities, Development Plan 2015-2019 outlines a number of climate change could impact the key sectors national development programs in Marine Sector to including marine fisheries, water access, health, enhance the prosperity of people living in coastal agriculture and forestry (Bappenas, 2010). In the areas. To reduce the people’s vulnerability and water sector, climate change could cause water increase the social economic condition of people resource scarcity, flood, landslide, and drought. living in coastal areas, the government will build It was reported that from 2000-2010, these eco-fishing ports and national fishing ports, as hydrological disasters caused 4,936 casualties and well as strengthen sea transport connectivity and impacted 17.7 million people, which accounted to develop marine-based energy. 80% of all disaster experienced by Indonesia. These disasters could increase the vulnerability of the people, especially those live in coastal cities. A lot of coastal cities Indonesia have also experienced land subsidence due to over exploitation of ground water. Therefore, some very low-lying areas in Ministry of Environment, Indonesia Second National Communication Under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), 2010 35 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices NATIONAL POLICY FRAMEWORK FOR BUILDING RESILIENT CITIES 36 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices KEY PHASES TO MAKE CITIES RESILIENT Tools and Options For Building Resilience 37 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices KEY PHASES TO MAKE CITIES RESILIENT 3.1 Roadmap for Resilient Cities 2015-2025 U rban resilience helix (URH) is a concept for achieving urban resilience (Figure 4.1). It consists of four phases of Urban Resilience Approachthat offers key elements and steps that may be needed to build resilience.Such a helix illustrates the sequential phases to be followed up systematically and practiced to obtain the sustainable city resilience through It provides options for urban planners and city managers from hard (and “shallow”) resilience intervention to soft (and “deep”) intervention to build resilience. URH starts with risk assessment (Phase 1),Critical enabling capacity (Phase 2) , developingresilience measures (Phase 3) and sustaining resilience infusion (Phase 4). Each of these phases is ellaborated into several steps as shown in Figure 4.1. An alternative of the comprehensive phases suggested above, a short cut (black arrow) from phase 1 to phase 3 is possible considering the urgent needs of the community and areas to counteract imminent risks. This short cut can be done through rapid risk diagnostic tools 38 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices KEY PHASES TO MAKE CITIES RESILIENT 4.1 Ph ase 1 - Risk Assessment T he goal of risk assessment is producing clear spatial mapping of the possible impacts of disaster and climate change. The and hazard mapping. Hazard mapping is the most common form of hazard identification, which is recommended for urban investment projects. Hazard mapping spatial mapping consist information about the enable the identification of areas at risk, distribution of in the form of spatial distribution hazard frequency, duration, extent, and of the probability or likelihood of disaster events speed of onset, spatial dispersion, temporal occurring, as well as the damage and loss that will spacing, and the possibility of secondary hazards (Jha et al 2012). be incurred from the respective events. In order to do risk assessment, Jha et al (2012) summarizes Hazard trends need to be identified so fourcore elements which are hazard identification, that changes in the patterns of frequency, exposure analysis, vulnerability analysis,and risk seasonality, location and intensity can analysis. In URH, these four elements of risk be identified, thus allowing prediction based on programming to be made. Many assessment is seen as steps in carrying out risk hazards are not completely random events assessment. but are the consequence of other forces, such as climate change (Concern, 2005). In Indonesia, National Agency for Disaster Thus a thorough recording of all factors Management issued a general guideline on risk that could contribute to hazards should be made, such as the nature, locale, intensity assessment through the Head of BNPB Decree and probability of at least three types of 2/2012. The decree specifies the government hazards (i.e natural, technological and other approach in risk assessment, which is based on man-made hazards) (UNISDR, 2012). The three variables: level of hazards, level of vulnera- following figure shows example of hazard bility and community’s capacity. Risk assessment, analysis of flood and extreme weather in Indonesia (Figure 4.2). according to the decree, provides a basis for the implementation of disaster risk management Step 2 - Exposure Analysis measures in a given area. In this stage the identified hazards will be overlayed with the elements at risk, which Step 1- Hazard Identification are population and economic assets and economic development projection. The Hazard identification refers to the assets exposed may include buildings, quantification of hazard parameters such as infrastructure, crops, and people. These probability of occurrence, intensity, speedof variables are measured to how likely they onset and areas potentially impacted. sustain loss or damage in the event of a Hazard events may come from nature as disaster, as well as how severe the damage well asfrom human-related acts. Activities will be. The projection of damage assessment in hazard identification include construction is measured by collecting information of probabilistic hazard models, which regarding the physical characteristics (e.g. is especially necessary to characterize two-story masonry house), monetary value hazard that extends beyond the limited (replacement cost or actual market value), historical record of observed events. It and location (street address, latitude and can also be used to model how climate longitude coordinates) (Jha et al 2012). change may affect disaster occurrence. The other activities may include formulation Step 3 - Vulnerability Analysis of catalogues of historical disaster events 39 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices KEY PHASES TO MAKE CITIES RESILIENT Exposed elements such as people and Step 4 - Risk Analysis households, physical and economic assets, environmental services and Risk analysis provides a spatial assessment critical infrastructures may inherently of risk based on hazards, vulnerable pop- have vulnerability to disaster. Vulnerability ulation, and the ability of the community to analysis tries to quantify how susceptible cope with disasters. Risk analysis must es- exposed populations and their assets timate losses of human life as well as direct are to different hazard intensities. This and indirect economic losses. The direct analysis may include estimation of the likely losses are more straightforward to evaluate human casualties that may be incurred by using standard relationship between the disaster, and the potential damage and loss severity of the hazard event, location of the of assets that may be caused by disaster. damaged assets, and occurrence of dam- Historical data on disaster loss are vital age of certain severity, but other disaster for understanding how specific disasters consequences that are harder to quantify impact populations and infrastructure. If can contribute significantly to the risk an the necessary data do not exist, however, urban infrastructure investment seeks to engineering-based analytical models mitigate (Jha, 2013). can be used to estimate disaster impacts (SOURCE). 40 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices KEY PHASES TO MAKE CITIES RESILIENT 4.2 Ph ase 2 - Development of Critical Enabling P hase 2 addresses the critical enabling factors that need to be developed by city governments, including geospatial information, as to enable all stakeholders to actively participate in reducing and preventing disaster risks (Jha, 2013). disaster risk management framework, and Step 6 - Establishing Disaster Risk community participation and collaborators. Management Framework Step 5 – Strengthening Geospatial Disaster risk management framework Information includes the management of long-term exposure and damage reduction, short Geospatial data provide valuable information term damage prevention through early that can be used to understand risk better. warning system, damage mitigation The geospatial data acquired from remote through contingency capacities, and the sensing provide a perspective of the built establishment of sustainable recovery environment and its exposure to hazards. structures as depicted in Figure 4.5 below. However, despite the presence of high- spatialresolution of satellite sensors, remote In identifying risk, there are two steps sensing is still underutilized, especially in involved, risk assessments and risk developing nations. Limited understanding communication. Risk identification of the benefits and a lack of technical becomes a foundation and is necessary training have made it an often-overlooked or in order to proceed with the following latent resource (Understanding Risk, 2014). steps. Reducing risk involves avoiding any There is a need for multi-level geospatial creation of new risks and reducing present information to support improved decision- risks. Risk reduction can be done using making. In addition multi-level modeling structural and non-structural measures, will enable development of crisis scenarios for example: improving infrastructures, and impacts on social systems, according land use planning, policies and regulation. to chosen prevention and response actions Preparedness is needed to improve the (Aubrecht et al, 2012). urban capacity in managing and undergoing crises. Increasing preparedness can be done Therefore, developing the capacity for using with development of early warning systems, geospatial data and information is a one of support of emergency measures and the key prerequisites in decision making contingency planning. Financial protection for developing resilient cities. Decisions can be done by assessing and reducing to prioritize resilience efforts may be contingent liabilities, budget appropriation greatly helped by spatial and temporal and execution, ex-ante and ex-post financing understanding of risk, which may be instruments. The last pillar is resilient facilitated by GIS tools, which enable the recovery and reconstruction policies; whose decision makers to quantify the impacts of goal should be set on building back better planned or proposed investments in reducing (World Bank, 2012). risk. Thus GIS tools provide sustainable risk information systems and analytical tools To conclude, activities to implement to allow systematic and evidence-based disaster risk management framework understanding and communication of risk. should include awareness building for the Geospatial risk information needs to be public, formulation of City Resilience Action made available in a user-friendly format, to Planws, set-up of Early Warning System, inform long-term decision making as well formulation of Emergency Response Plan, 41 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices KEY PHASES TO MAKE CITIES RESILIENT establishment of Emergency Operations (Deliberative Democracy Consortium, 2004) Center, disaster preparedness training exercises, interoperable communication The Government has showcased community systems and risk communication. participation in several post-disaster projects in Indonesia. In collaboration Step 7 – Encouraging Community with local disaster management agency, Participation and Collaboration the Ministry of Public Works led the rehabilitation and reconstruction of housing Participation of communities and other and settlements of over 100 villages city stakeholders is critical in building impacted by the Merapi eruption in 2010. The resilient cities. Experiences have shown government outlines policy of community- that community-driven programming is based development plan that enables essential in the success of urban planning village members organizing themselves in and infrastructure development. It is also respons to disaster impacts by establishing vital to ensure that the most vulnerable and the Community Settlement Plan to improve marginalized populations will have access village’s social and environmental condition to full and meaningful participants in all and strengthening disaster prearedness. processes related to urban development. With the limited capacity of local The community settlement plan preceeded governments in addressing disaster risk by preparation of Basic Map. It was a formal reduction and climate change adaptation, map scale of 1:2000 collected from local all level of urban society should support agencies that contains geographical features direct resilience-related actions. of the affected villages. The commmunity held a Self Survey that capture information Deliberation is a form of community on damage and loss to make profile of participation in planning process, where a affected areas into thematic maps. The discursive approach in used in decision- thematic maps offer critical information for making. In deliberation, citizens would gather analysis which threreafter discussed among in a non-coercive environment to identify village stakeholder to bring about Program and discuss public problems and possible Indicators into design of Community solutions. It offers a different structure, Settlement Plan. (The Standard Operating resulting substance, and civic benefits. Procedure of Community-based Settlement Through deliberation, the public could have Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Project, a better and common understanding of Ministry of Public Works 2011) underlying issues, make substantively better policy recommendations, reduce friction, and at the same time empowering citizens. 42 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices KEY PHASES TO MAKE CITIES RESILIENT 43 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices KEY PHASES TO MAKE CITIES RESILIENT 4.3 Ph ase 3 – Impl ementing Resilience Measures R better land use planning and zoning. Spatial plan- esilience measures consist of Risk- ning should be coupled with enforcement of build- sensitive Land Use Planning and ing codes, to ensure that there is adequate supply Ecosystem Restoration. Examples of implementing of “safe” land available for commercial, industri- resilience measures are as follow: revising land al, and residential subdivision development. This use plans to take into account the results of risk is also includes zoning for conservation purposes (ADB, 2013). Cities will also need to promote resil- assessment, detailed land use zoning in targeted ient design, safer construction and strengthening development areas based on hazard micro zonation of non-engineered buildings, and build the techni- or other instruments governing site allocation and cal capacity and competence of local enforcement control. It represents actual soft and short and officials, builders, tradesmen and practicing pro- medium-term interventions to obtain resilience. fessionals to promote compliance with regulations, plans and building codes. Resilience measures are physical and non physical actions that are important to anticipate potential An example of a risk-sensitive spatial planning is hazards that may be caused bythe dynamic Bendali projects in Balikpapan. Bendali is an ab- development of an urban area (Gunawan et al, breviation of Bendungan Pengendali Banjir or 2015). Flood Controlling Dam. As stated in the master plan of Balikpapan City, there should be 55 units of Bendali developed, although until now six units of Step 8 – Risk-sensitive spatial Bendali have been developed, which overall aim to planning reduce the frequent flash flood and landslide in the city due to its hilly topography. The developed dams Risk-sensitive spatial planning is a nonstructural are located in the water catchment area to increase the water recharge into the groundwater aquifer. approach that identifies the safest locations for ur- To reduce the possibility of transferring household ban development and creates regulations for guid- and solid waste into Bendali, a couple of reservoirs ing it. It is carried out by identifying exposed and were located preceding the dams in order to reduce vulnerable areas and quantifying the possible im- the risk of sedimentation. pacts of disaster and weather events. The possible impacts are further detailed in spatial distribution of damage and loss and the probability or likelihood Step 9 - Ecosystem Restoration of adverse events occurring. Activities in this step include local risk assessment that collects infor- Ecological restoration focuses on mation about which parts of the city that might be establishing the composition, structure, affected by a certain hazard (e.g. a coastal area with pattern, and ecological processes tourist facilities that might be affected by sea-lev- necessary to facilitate terrestrial and el rise). Another activity is a proper development aquatic ecosystem sustainability, of spatial plan. A spatial plan may take the form of resilience, and health under current and land classification, future land use, a statement of future conditions (US National Forest policy, or a land use management plan, or a mix of Service, 2014). Natural ecosystems all these. such as mangrove forests, watershed areas, urban forests, tree stands, and In conducting risk-sensitive spatial planning, new parks may provide protection against developments and critical infrastructure needs to be steered away from hazard-prone areas through tsunamis, landslides, erosion, floods 44 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices KEY PHASES TO MAKE CITIES RESILIENT risk reduction norms. and hence can decrease the risk of Step 10 - Urban Upgrading & urban infrastructure projects. Likewise, Structural Mitigation ecosystem management strategies such as watershed management, green and Urban upgrading refers to the blue infrastructures and environmental efforts to improve the condition of buffers, can reduce the vulnerability of the urban most vulnerable group. It a city to disasters and enhance urban prioritizes investments in infrastructure, resilience (Jha et al. 2013). It is therefore housing, livelihoods, and social important to make use of natural networks for the urban poor (Jha et al. infrastructure and restore the natural 2013). Comprehensive urban upgrading urban ecosystems to decrease the costs reduces risks through slum upgrading of building resilient cities. and prevents new slum formation by using incentives for private sector and Ecosystem restoration cannot community engagement to increase the be achieved without the participation of supply of low-income housing; it also all city stakeholders. City governments provide opportunities and empowers the need to raise people’s awareness slum dwellers. Slum areas are vulnerable of the impact of environmental and to external hazards and at the same time ecosystem degradation to disaster risks, also face internal slow-onset hazards as well as educates the public about caused by unhealthy environment, sub- the negative consequences of global standard infrastructure and utilities and warming and climate change. They will over-crowded spatial arrangements. also need to review the environmental consequences of existing plans, policies As part of urban upgrading, cities and programmes, mainstreaming need to protect critical infrastructure ecosystem considerations into the future and develop new resilient infrastructure. planning processes, and tackling drivers They also need to plan for business of environmental degradation. They may continuity to ensure that lifelines and also incorporate ecosystem-based flood services can be quickly restored or still reduction measures into engineered functional during disaster emergency infrastructure to support coastal (i.e hospital). This could be achieved by protection, upstream reforestation, applying minimum criteria and standards wetland and river bank restoration, of resilience into urban design. and floodplain regulation to achieve resilient urban development goals. All On the other hand, structural these initiatives may be done through mitigation can play key role in reducing collaboration with the non-government disaster risk by providing physical and the private sectors, including intervention in the hazard system. building partnerships with the private Nonetheless, exclusive reliance on sector to leverage technical and financial structural measures will ultimately resources and ensure that private prove ineffective and must be done along investments follow environmental and 45 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices KEY PHASES TO MAKE CITIES RESILIENT with nonstructural measures, such as Figure 4.8 Making Gabions and River Embankment law and regulations (Ghesquiere et al, as part of Structural Mitigation along Winongo 2012). Consequently, authorities should River build their capacity to understand risk and incorporate their understanding into building codes, land use regulations and spatial planning (Jha, 2012). In this way, the resilience of urban development can be achieved by maintreaming structural mitigation into planned or on-going urban upgrading programs. 46 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices URBAN RESILIENCE PRACTICES 4.4 Ph ase 4 – Sustaining Resilience Infusion A fter going through three previous phases, city governments need to come to an agreed scheme the and cities, such as sovereign disaster risk financing, risk retention, catastrophe risk insurance, catastrophe risk , market of interventions which will finally be visible and development, alternative risk transfer beneficial for the society. All the results from the and disaster micro-insurance (AMCDRR, three phases need to be permeated into their supra 2012). and infrastructural systems through regulations, best practices and continuous learning for The example of resilience continuous improvement. Resilience infusion needs investment can be found in the Kupang to be conducted at least through urban upgrading, City DRR and CCA action plans (UNDP, notably in slum areas and retrofitting of the city by 2015). In this document, the each incorporating healthy and prudent risk financing strategy for DRR or CCA is designated and risk transfer system. to the related institution along with the budget allocation from the Regional Step 11 - Financing Risk and Government Budget (APBD). For Resilience Investment instance, the building of flood defenses is designated under the Department of Comprehensive disaster risk Public Policy, whereas the management management cannot be achieved of the city’s green space is under the without a good financial strategy. Department of Sanitation. Likewise, Although they do not reduce the amount the Department of Housing and of damage and loss, disaster risk Regional Infrastructure of Yogyakarta financing and insurance instruments municipalities undertake the slum can protect against the financial impacts upgrading program of 7 sub-districts of disasters. In order to deal with in 2016. Thus, the urban resilience climate and development uncertainties, program does not have to be specified national stakeholders need sustained under DRR or CCA program but can be and flexible programs, which require incorporated or added into routine or clear institutional frameworks and on-going development program. predictable, long-term financing (e.g over at least a decade). The fact that Step 12. Governance, regulation climate affects many sectors introduce and institution added complexities in many countries where governance systems are Resilience can be achieved structured along sectoral lines (World through governance, regulation and Bank, 2013). The economic and financial institution. Governance is about how impact of disasters can be assessed the governments and other social with financial risk assessment and organizations interact, how they relate catastrophe risk modeling tools. There to citizens, and how decisions are taken is a series of financing instruments and in a complex world (Graham et al, 2003). services available to local governments 47 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices KEY PHASES TO MAKE CITIES RESILIENT Through governance, regulation and institutions, any efforts on reducing risk and such can actually have legal power and authority. Under this condition, disaster risk reduction can be mainstreamed into planning procedures for infrastructures projects as discussed in Step 10 above. In addition, urban planning can act as a tool for risk reduction given that the basic philosophy is geared into DRR by incorporating several measures as follows: environmental planning, defensible city, responsible architecture and urban disaster governance (Wamsler, 2006). Urban environmental planning in this case means to inter-connect urban planning and broader environmental aspects. Defensible city means integrating the concept of community protection against natural disasters as a key aspect of urban planning. Responsible architecture aims to target informal settlements and to combine large- scale structural improvements with participatory small-scale measures. Urban disaster governance means combining knowledge and management of disasters and urban planning to create joint governance practices. In general, the GoI have designed the action plans for the National DRR and CCA (known as RAN-API-PRB), which acts as the guidelines for the local governments to developed the local DRR and CCA action plans (known as RAD- API-PRB). For instance, the Kupang municipality managed to develop the RAD-API-PRB in 2015. 48 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices URBAN RESILIENCE PRACTICES 49 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices URBAN RESILIENCE PRACTICES The following chapter elaborates some urban resilience practices that have taken place in Indonesia. Some of these case studies are initiated by previous World Bank projects. The case studies are examples of how urban resilience have occurred in Indonesia. 5.1 Urban Risk Assessment Practices: Strengthening J akarta Risk Information to Flood A s the capital of one of the world’s fastest growing economy, Jakarta holds a strategic role in Indonesia urban system. However, the city has been constantly dealing with flood since the colonial era. The underlying factors of Jakarta’s vulnerability to flood can be attributed to geographical conditions, infrastructure quality, environmental damage and partly to lack of people awareness to disaster. Around 40% or 24,000 ha of Jakarta area were located under the sea surface and they have been constantly pressured by the uncontrolled urban growth and lack of enforcement of groundwater extraction. In February 2007, floods accounted for over than IDR 5.16 Trillion of lost and damage and projected to increase to IDR 6.3 Trillion in 2013 (BPBD Provinsi DKI Jakarta, 2012). The World Bank/GFDRR with AIFDR, HOT and BNPB worked to support BPBD Jakarta in strengthening risk information urban flood management. The initiative was triggered by the launch of InaSAFE - 50 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices URBAN RESILIENCE PRACTICES application to produce contingency plans of various In 2012, the World Bank supported BPBD DKI hazard impact scenarios. The only challenge was Jakarta to piooneer mapping 2,688 sub-villages Jakarta had only administrative boundary up to (RW), 6,000 of buildings/assets in 267 villages in kelurahan (village) levels which had lead InaSAFE Jakarta. Thereafter the city received support of generates an overestimated flood impacts. Greater mapping sub-sub district for area indicated as highly detailed information on boundaries and assets was risk to frequent flood, enabling the city estimated crucial for risk assessment. It was then responded impact in more localized way and promised better by encouraging public participation through preparedness to flood. OpenStreetMap-a free mapping crowd source platform. 51 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices URBAN RESILIENCE PRACTICES Figure 5.2. Inundated area in one sub-village in Jakarta as generated from field reports The data of detailed boundaries and assets exposure allows Jakarta to model damage and loss calculation instantly following a flood event. The Bank supported the development of Jakarta DALA System Calculator named by JakSAFE. By overlaying hazard with exposed assets as reported from the field the system able to estimate financial damage and losses due to flood in no time. In the late 2015, the JakSAFE becomes part of Jakarta Smart City system. 52 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices URBAN RESILIENCE PRACTICES 5.2 Enabling Capacity: Integrated water resource mana gement planning in Balikpapan H igh-scale mapping of disaster prone area is one of the options can be done in building capacity. Traditional data and into the map resulting in disaster thematic information. The data enables detailed disaster risk spatial plans which focuses on disaster mitigation information management, where data are and settlement planning. managed sectorally, is not effective since it creates a geospatial information gap in decision-making, The data and information provided from City Risk implementation and monitoring. By doing a high- Diagnostics and Collaborative Mapping enables scale mapping, this problem hopefully can be the city performs urban spatial planning that taken solved by accumulating spatial data of disaster into account to risk of river flood and sea level rise. vulnerabilities. It allows for implementation of integrated water resource management concept that emphasizing The example of a high-scale mapping development for each region. For instance, the implementation can be found in Yogyakarta and upstream would be focused on water conservation Balikpapan. Both Yogyakarta and Balikpapan are to restore and increase catchment. The midstream categorized as big cities; both local governments was planned to provide more space for settlements chose river are as mapping location, which are and increase its quality by improving drainage Winongo River in Yogyakarta and Ampal River system and normalize riverway, this include in Balikpapan. Both locations are prone to flood resetllement plan for slums by the river. The risk and landslide. Both have a relatively similar downstream area was to adopt reclamation that percentage of poor people, which is 4%, and the adhere green construction principles as suggested location is the based of World Bank study about city in the City Risk Diagnostics. profiles (Gunawan et al, 2015). In Balikpapan, Bappeda acted as the main coordinator, supported by Balikpapan University, who acted as technical consultation and some local public figures. Community participation emphasizes on borders validation and acquirement of disaster history data; both data are synchronized 53 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices URBAN RESILIENCE PRACTICES Figure 5.3 an artwork pictures the downstream In short, there at least three stages of building built environment of Balikpapan urban resilience were covered, which are building Source: Gunawan et al 2015 capacity in providing accurate information, resolving uncertainty and enhancing disaster risk understand. In this urban helix phase, it is included in the second step of risk assessment follow- up which was recommended as priority in urban development corridor. The next step is to formulate structural and non-structural measures needed in urban development planning to mitigate risk. Overall, the collaborative risk assessment should be considered as disaster mitigation strategy, which should be internalized into decision-making system on city level to achieve sustainable development goals. 54 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices URBAN RESILIENCE PRACTICES 5.2. Mi 5.3 Urban Resilience Measures: Urban Upgrading in Karang Waru & JUMFP tigasi Struktural Penanganan Banjir Collaborative approach for urban upgrading di meter away from the river side. Karangwaru Sub-district and Bener Sub-district, ND supports the financing for one segment of Yogyakarta Special Area (DIY) the river, while the input of planning resulted from people is included in the mid-term city I n Yogyakarta, Karangwaru neighborhood is vulnerable to flood and landslide along Kali Buntung River. The neighborhood was development planning (RPJMD) in 2013. The detailed engineering design is made by an architect team from local university (UGM). polluting the river by discharging solid waste and human waste into the river. Due to its condition, the neighborhood was targeted as one of urban development priority program in 2009. The program was known as Neighborhood Development (ND) program and aimed to alleviate poverty under the PNPM program for Human Settlement which led by Ministry of Public Work Directorate. The specific challenge of the program was to minimize the possible social conflict that might have arisen from rearranging of settlement in the riverside. The slum rearrangement aimed to reduce flood risk, which was achieved through river revitalization, waterfront neighborhood, infrastructure enhancement (wall river strengthening), forestation, fencing and river walk built at both river sides. Figure 5.4 Environmental Issues Mapping in The program is done in several stages. At the first Bener Neighborhood, Yogyakarta stages, to ensure the people’s participation in the spatial rearrangement planning, the people were shown some of the designs. As soon as some of the settlers were willing to release their land, the rearrangement started by moving their houses 1.5 55 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices URBAN RESILIENCE PRACTICES In 2013, to overcome the problem volunteers provided a technical assistance for upgrading the neighborhood, which known as the Riverfront Redevelopment Design Plan. The program aimed at integrating economy-based environmental program with the development of riverbank areas that promote the public welfare and social equity, while significantly reducing disaster and climate risks. The first stage of the program was facilitating the communities to identify the potential local resources and make the economic-environmental- based riverbank development plan in the study areas. Primary and secondary data were collected from a variety of relevant sources. The next stage was facilitating coordination among various stakeholders such as governments, universities, and private sector in the study areas in to be involved in the development plan process. The coordination of development plan resulted in recommendations such as: (1) to utilize existing well as water source, (2) training and shaping of waste management groups, and (3) building a temporary dumpster. From the local community perspective, several inputs were added, which were renovation of uninhabitable houses, making of water hydrant and fire extinguishers, and fixing Figure 5.5 Thematic map illustrating segment of Bener Neighborhood in 1:2000 of scale 56 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices URBAN RESILIENCE PRACTICES broken water embankment. Business development plan was developed by community participation approach to make a Kampung Wisata (Tourism Village) for outbound activities in water-based ecosystem and traditional Javanese children games. The initiative then followed up with hazard microzoning and pre- feasibility study (Fig. 5.4). The hazard microzoning included three key features of the areas, namely (i) geographical, socio-economical and structural profiles of the area such as land use parcels and static (ie. settlements, commerce, public utilities, open space, etc); (ii) key assets and basic infrastructures, and (iii) natural features (i.e. river, swamp, bushes, etc). This process was done to find local solutions to reduce disaster and climate risk. One output of the hazard microzoning was identifying structures that located within hazard zones, and also available land parcels for in situ location. The hazard microzoning and the pre-feasibility study identified several structural measures and environment revitalization that will help increase the sub-district resiliency. This multi-discipline analysis, involving a diverse group of experts from economists, environmentalist, hydrologists, and community development specialists, legal advocated as well as community representatives. With the help experts and planners, the community and the government can manifest their vision of the river walk development. Structural Mitigation Flood Management in Jakarta under Jakarta Urgent Flood Mitigation Figure 5.6 JUFMP Working Scope Project (JUFMP) Forty percent (40%) of Jakarta is lowland areas year gap gets narrower from 2007 to 2013. In and has average altitude below the sea surface. 2013 the flood causes 6.36 trillion IDR loss (BPBD In addition to the high rainfall, Jakarta is also a DKI Jakarta), from public facilities damage, downstream of fourteen rivers, making the city transportation disruption, energy and the stopping highly vulnerable to flood. In addition, many of of activities in business and office centers. One Jakarta’s drainage are clogged; the high level of the efforts by Jakarta Government in reducing of deforestation also contributed to the flood flood risk is to add more capacity in water reservoir vulnerability. also adding and maintaining waterworks facilities Jakarta has a history of 5-year-flood, but the such as lake, reservoir, and river normalization 57 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices URBAN RESILIENCE PRACTICES and dredging. Jakarta Urgent Flood Mitgation retention basins which have been identified as Project (JUFMP) is an example of large scale priority sections of the Jakarta flood management structural mitigation. It aims at contributing to the system in need of urgent rehabilitation and improvement of the operation and maintenance of improvement in flow capacities. The dredge priority sections of Jakarta’s flood management material is transported and disposed into proper system. There are two components to the project. disposal sites. The second component is technical The first component is dredging and rehabilitation assistance for project management, social of selected key floodways, canals and retention safeguards, and capacity building. This project is basins. This component supports the dredging and implemented by Public Works Ministry and Jakarta rehabilitation of 11 floodways / canals and four Local Government from May 2012 - March 2017. 58 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices URBAN RESILIENCE PRACTICES 5.4 Risk Infusion Practices T he government of Indonesia has been working on improving the quality of national development by creating a guideline of high resolution of GIS map of the respective slum areas. It is expected that through this program the municipalities are able to develop the necessary DRR policy that put emphasis particularly for urban measures of urban upgrading program that is areas. In a study of Indonesian Disaster Risk Index based on the principles of DRR in slum areas. (IRBI) in 2013, the National Disaster Management Agency (BNPB) identified and mapped all the cities From the above examples, it is obvious that and districts with high disaster risk. The results of collaboration among institutions, that translated the mapping formalized into the National Medium into implementation across sectoral, is a key factor in achieving the GoI’s target to reduce disaster risk Term of Development Planning (RPJMN) 2015- index, which eventually help to create resilient 2019 which was then translated into subsequent cities in Indonesia. policies and action strategy of BNPB. The GoI targets to reduce the disaster risk index by 30% in 136 cities and districts identified as having priority or high risk by 2019. This effort requires BNPB to collaborate closely with related institutions in charge. For example, the program Safe School that required facilitation of of the World Bank and active collaboration between BNPB and the Ministry of Education and Culture. One of the outputs of this collaboration is a guideline for structural reinforcement of school buildings in landslide prone areas, which has been implemented in several elementary schools in West Java. Another program is the National Slum Upgrading Program which was done under collaboration between BNPB and the Ministry of Public Works and Housing which targets to organize the slum areas in 20 cities in Indonesia. The program was designed to improve the city resilience through reducing the vulnerability of the poor people. Until this paper is written, the World Bank is assisting the municipalities to redesign the slum area with DRR based approach by providing a 59 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices URBAN RESILIENCE PRACTICES 5.4 Risk Infusion Practices F follows: inally the some of the highlights from key lessons to urban resilience are as Mainstreaming resilience concept into urban development should be first done towards the policies and regulation that would govern the subsequent steps, be it action plan, financial budgeting, spatial planning or implementation programs. Once resilience principles have been embedded into the law and regulations, resilience principles can be enforced or at least encouraged in the urban development programs. To increase resilience, urban development should aim its priority towards the most vulnerable group that could be easily found in slum area. For example is the slum upgrading program in Yogyakarta, which aimed to construct embankments along the river in Karang Waru that is mainly inhabited by poor people. Through this program, the local community had healthier living environment and was protected from flood risk. Coastal cities should put extra effort in increasing the urban resilience, particularly due to their vulnerability towards sea level rise, in addition to other disasters such as flood and tsunami. Community participation is crucial is assuring not only the success of any program but also the sustainability of the program; in addition, community participation put the involved stakeholders in the same perspective and increase the community capacity and preparedness (e.g Kampung Siaga Bencana program) Integrating risk financing in order to achieve more robust DRR and CCA program and efficient budgeting; this could be done by coordinating program across institutional agencies in the government or even involving the potential private sectors. 60 Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices Bibliography ACCCRN.(2010). City Resilience Strategy: Semarang’s adaptation plan in re- sponding to climate change. Institute for Social and Environmental Transition, 90 pp. ACCCRN. (2010). Vulnerability assessment and adaptation to climate change of Bandar Lampung (in Indonesian). Institute for Social and Environmental Transi- tion, 165 pp. ACCCRN (2016) Asian Cities Climate Change Resilience Network (ACCCRN) Pro- gram, accessed from http://acccrn.net/country/indonesia, on April 30, 2016 AMCDRR (2012) A Background Study for 5th Asian Ministrial Conference on Di- saster Risk Reduction (AMCDRR), Yogyakarta. Arup, RPA, and Siemens, 2013, Toolkit for Resilient Cities, California Academy of Sciences. Asian Development Bank. (2013). Moving from Risk to Resilience: Sustainable Urban Development in Pacific. Manila: Asian development bank Aubrecht, C., Freire, S., Loibl, W., Steinnocher, K., & Ungar, J. (2012). The contri- bution of multi-level geospatial information to assessing urban social vulnera- bility to earthquakes. In Proceedings of the 9th CUEE and 4th ACEE Joint Con- ference. Tokyo, Japan. Baker, Judy L. ( 2012). Climate Change, Disaster Risk, and the Urban Poor : Cit- ies Building Resilience for a Changing World. Urban Development. Washington, DC: World Bank. Bevington, J. & Nicole, K. (2014). Game Time: Monitoring Changing Riskscapes with GEM and SENSUM Tools. In Understanding Risk. Washington DC: The World Bank. BPBD DKI Jakarta. (2013). Penilaian Kerusakan dan Kerugian, serta Kebutuhan Pemulihan Pasca Banjir di Jakarta Pada Januari 2013. Jakarta, DKI Jakarta, Indonesia. i Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices i Urban Resilience in Indonesia: Concept & Practices Technical Note 6 Lessons from the Efforts to Develop Disaster Risk Financing and Insurance Framework in Indonesia Content 1. Economic Impact of Disasters in Indonesia 1 2. Challenges in Financing Post Disasters 4 3. Indonesia’s Disaster Risk Financing and Insurance Framework 6 4. Implementation Status of DRFI Framework in Indonesia 7 5. Viable Policy Options 9 6. Key Lessons 10 1 1. Economic Impact of Disasters in Indonesia Indonesia is located in an area with a high damage and losses amounted to Rp 29,100 risk to several types of disasters. According trillion. Other disasters also followed to EMDAT CRED ranking on six types of such as the Earthquake in West Sumatra natural disasters (Table 1), Indonesia (September 2009), the Earthquake in Tasik ranked first on two natural disasters: Malaya (September 2009), and the Flood tsunami and landslide. Of the 76 countries, in Wasior, the Earthquake and Tsunami Indonesia ranked the first for tsunami risk in Mentawa Islands and the Eruption of with more than 5 million people exposed, Mount Merapi in October 2010 (Table 2). while for landslide it ranked first from 162 countries with more than 195,000 people Empirical studies show that in the exposed. aftermath of a major natural disaster, it will usually be followed by: According to the World Bank’s 2005 publication entitled “Natural Disaster • Slowing economic growth Hotspots - a global risk analysis”, Indonesia • An increase on budget deficit ranked 12th of 35 countries with high • An increase on inflation disaster risk in which more than 40 percent • A decrease on interest rates of the population had a high risk of • An increase on foreign loans exposure to disasters. Economically, the impact of earthquake Within a ten-year period (2004-2014), and tsunami in Aceh and Nias was Indonesia was hit by various major relatively small with only 0.3% of national disasters causing damage and losses. One GDP (Gross Domestic Product) but it was of the tsunamis occured in Indonesia which very significant at regional level with has caused major damage and casualties approximately 45% of the RGDP (Regional was the tsunami in Aceh and Nias on the GDP) of Aceh. Similarly, the Earthquake in 26th December of 2004 with 110,229 Yogyakarta in 2006 was amounted to 41% people died, 12,132 missing and 703,518 of its RGDP and the Earthquake in West people were displaced and a loss of US$ Sumatra in 2009 was amounted to 30% of 4.5 billion, equivalent to Rp 41,400 trillion. its RGDP. Moreover, the disasters in early Likewise, the Earthquake in DIY-Central Java 2014 caused an inflation of 1.07%, higher which occurred in May 2006 caused major than in January 2013 of 1.03%. Hazard type Population Percentage of population Country ranking exposed 0 5 10 20 40 Cyclone 1.636 67th out of 89 Drought 2.029.350 36th out of 184 Flood 1.101.507 6th out of 162 Landslide 197.372 1st out of 162 Earthquake 11.056.806 3rd out of 153 Tsunami 5.402.239 1st out of 76 1 The total damage and losses of disaster Kerugian 41400 Milyar 29150 Milyar 3,92 Milyar 7300 Milyar Jenis Kejadian Gempa bumi dan Gempa bumi DIY Gempa Nias Luapan Lumpur Tsunami Aceh & Jawa Tengah Sidoarjo Waktu Kejadian Juni 2004 Mei 2006 Maret 2005 Mei 2006 34000 Milyar 3628,7 Milyar 348,9 Milyar Erupsi Gunung Gempabumi dan Bencana lain- Merapi Tsunami di Men- nya tawai 2004-2010 Okt 2010 Okt 2010 8340 Milyar 1356,6 Milyar 865 Milyar Banjir Gempabumi aceh Letusan Gunung Jabodetabek dan Bener Meriah Sinabung Jan 2013 Jul-2013 Jan-2014 2 events in Indonesia (2004-2014) 5184 Milyar 1080,7 Milyar 1790,9 Milyar Gempabumi Banjir Gempabumi Bengkulu dan Jabodetabek Sumatera Barat Sumatera Barat Feb 2007 Mei 2007 Sep 2007 280,16 Milyar 21.600 Milyar 1691,5 Milyar Banjir Bandang Gempabumi di Banjir dan Tanah di Wasior, Papua Tasikmalaya, Jawa Longsor - Jawa Barat Barat Timur Sep 2010 Sep 2009 Feb 2007 1255 Milyar 20 Milyar 221000 Milyar Letusan Gunung Kebakaran Hutan Kebakaran Hutan Kelud dan Lahan dan Lahan Jan 2014 Mar 2014 Feb-Mar 2015 Total Kerugian : 381.865,28 Milyar 3 2 2. Challenges in Financing Post Disasters According to the Law No. 24 of 2007 on The challenge related to post-disaster disaster management, National, Sub- recovery financing through social social national governments and the community assistance in form of grants is a delay on share the responsibility in managing delivery between the event of disaster disasters. Government of the affected areas and the receipt of disaster rehabilitation would be the leading party in charge of and reconstruction fund in the afected disaster response starting from the phase areas. In a workshop organized by BNPB in of preparedness, emergency response and collaboration with the World Bank on 15-16 post-disaster recovery, rehabilitation and April 2015 on ‘Opportunities to strengthen reconstruction. DRFI 2015-2020’, Dody Ruswandy as the Secretary General of BNPB stated that: At the phase of post-disaster rehabilitation “Experience in the last 5 years showed and reconstruction, it is stated in the that there were problems in funding the Government Regulation No. 21/2008 Rehabilitation and Reconstruction (RR) on the Implementation of Disaster phase. It is in contrast to the emergency Management, that if a Regency/City has response fund with its On-Call Fund which no adequate budget, then the it may has already had clear and adequate budget request the assistance of the Provincial mechanisms and processes. As for the post Government and if the Provincial disaster phase, some obstacles still remain, Government is also not capable, then the namely: request can be submitted to the National Government through the National Disaster a) There is no sufficient and specific Management Authority (BNPB). funding for Rehabilitation and Reconstruction; Disaster management funding is stipulated in the Government Regulation No. b) There is no an overall policy framework 22/2008 on Financing and Management for Rehabilitation and Reconstruction; of Disaster Assistance. There is a term of c) There is still lack of clarity in its “social assistance in form of grants” in this implementation mechanism”. Government Regulation which is a fund The availability of Disaster Reserve Fund provided by the Government to the local from BUN (State Treasury) 999-08 account government as an aid for post-disaster especially for the Social Assistance Fund reconstruction. This fund comes from the in form of Grant has been experiencing State Budget (APBN), particularly from the problems since 2012. This affected the disaster management budget for activities post-disaster recovery as experienced by during emergency response and post- Mando which was hit by flash flood in disaster phases. The disaster management January 2014 only to receive funding in budget is currently managed by the mid 2015 or one and a half years after the National Disaster Management Authority disaster. The delay can also be attributed (BNPB) as the Authorized Budget User to the audit findings of the Supreme Audit (KPA) while the Ministry of Finance as the Agency (BPK) that the nomenclature in the Budget User (PA), because the Reserved Government Regulation 22/2008 needs to Fund for Disaster is included in the account be revised as the term “Social Assistance in of State General Treasury (BUN) for Other the form of Grant” is not recorgnized in the Expenditures (code 999.08). 4 State financial mechanism. However, GR reconstruction. The time lag problem that revision process is not easy and requires has been experienced so far was one year a long time to be implemented while on if the event of disaster occurs at the end the other hand, the post-disaster recovery of the fiscal year, in which the state budget cannot be delayed. has already been made and fund budgeting for the rehabilitation and reconstruction The short-term solution proposed by can only be allocated in the following year. the Ministry of Finance to accelerate the disbursement of Disaster Reserve Fund Another challenge related to financing to be used for the Rehabilitation and post-disaster rehabilitation and Reconstruction process was by preparing reconstruction fund is about the financial a Minister of Finance Regulation (PMK) responsibility of the sub-national 162/2015 on Grant from the National governments. Although Law No. 23 Government to Local Governments as year 2014 on Regional Government has Assistance for Post-Disaster Rehabilitation stipulated that disaster management is and Reconstruction. The legal basis for also among the mandatory responsibilities issuing this PMK was the Government of provincial and local governments, Regulation 2/2012 on Regional Grants, in practice local budgets are still not and the State Budget Law Year 2015 made available. As Law No. 24 of 2007, article 16 paragraph 2 which stated that clearly stated that disaster management the Government may provide grants to is a common responsibility among local governments in the context of post- government, local government, and the disaster rehabilitation and reconstruction. society, the role of local (government and society) needs to be made mandatory in Despite the issuance of the PMK, there contributing to financing post-disaster remain issues of time lag and multi- recovery through some sort of cost sharing years allocation for rehabilitation and methods. Box 1. Multi-Year Funding Challenge Problems related to multi years occur during the usage of the fund for rehabilitation and reconstruction as the usage cannot extend the relevant fiscal year so that its execution must be halted. Even if it can be extended by 2 years as set in BPNB Regulation No. 14 year 2011 on Technical Guidance on the procedure for filing and managing Social Aid Fund in form of grant for Post-Disaster Rehabilitation and Reconstruction year 2011 and the Regulation of Director General of Treasury, Ministry of Finance No. Per-63/Pb/2011 dated on 29 September 2011 on the Procedure of Post-Disaster Reconstruction and Rehabilitation Fund Disbursement year 2011. Nonetheless, the implementation still experienced a delay in its completion, as was the case with the rehabilitation and reconstruction after the 2010 earthquake in Mentawai Islands which had to refund as much as Rp. 383 billion to the State Treasury in 2013 of the total received fund amounted to Rp 486.4 billion. This also happened to the eruption of Merapi in 2010, Yogyakarta Province and Sleman Regency respectively had to refund Rp 15 billion of the total fund received amounting to Rp 110 billion and Rp 72.67 billion of total received fund amounted to Rp 189 billion, and the Flood in Wasior had to refund as much as Rp 42 billion of Rp 83 billion received fund. 5 3 3. Indonesia’s Disaster Risk Financing and Insurance Framework As a country prone to natural disasters, aseet owner holds the primary financial Indonesia is heading toward the responsibility); and implementation of disaster risk financing mechanism that embraces the concept of 3. There shall be diversification of funding risk layering with diverse financing sources sources for financing post disaster (Figure 1). recovery. Currently, the disaster financing in International experiences from the Indonesia is still handled case by case countries that have high levels of economic and not as a Portfolio and has yet to be development and disaster risk profiles integrated as a mosaic of instruments similar to Indonesia today (such as Mexico, as illustrated in Figure 2. Disaster Columbia and Turkey) show that disaster risk financing which only relies on State budget allocation is no longer sufficient. Acceleration in developing infrastructure by itself will increase and create new risks. Therefore, it is the time for Indonesia to implement Risk Layering concept as part of DRFI Framework. Initial studies conducted by Ministry of Finance, BNPB and the World Bank in 2011 estimated that to deal with medium and large-scale disasters, the Government would require access to financing of approximately US$ 1.6 billion (Rp 20 trillion) to meet the needs of post-disaster management financing still relies entirely recovery. Initial estimation shows that the on State fund allocation through the amount could provide protection against Reserved Fund (999-08), which is actually events with a cycle of 100 years. only suitable for managing a small-scale recurrent disasters. In order to finance Various efforts have been undertaken post-disaster recovery in achieving targeted in studying feasibility and selection goals, some of the followings need to be of financing and insurance schemes considered as requirements: for disaster management, but the implementation is still very limited to some 1. The funds shall be available in a timely areas only and generally still relies on manner and it is still usable after the conventional budgeting system. The case of fiscal year; flood in 2014 occured in Manado, that has 2. There shall be a firm and clear division been flooded again this year and has not of responsibilities for financing the been addressed, is an example that during rehabilitation and reconstruction based the past 5 years we still have not made on teh oenwrship of the assets (i.e., meaningful progress in implementing this framework. 6 4 4. Implementation Status of DRFI Framework in Indonesia DRFI management must cover all existing Rehabilitation and Reconstruction instruments as depicted in the mosaic was enacted in August 2015. This has above as-a-whole rather than as stand- provided a legal basis for providing alone instruments. For the entire mosaic grant to local governments for to work it cannot be separated from the post disaster reconstruction. But efforts to make the fund available for post- detailed mechanisms for managing disaster rehabilitation and reconstruction the reconstruction activities funded quickly and in a timely manner. The nature by the grants are yet to be fully of post-disaster recovery that typically developed. requires more than one year means that it  The government has also had an is necessary for the fund to be able to be carried forward to the following year. Emergency Fund regulatory system by means of PP 44/2012 designed At the time of this Technical Note for the situation of a national level preparation, the various risk financing disaster. However, its substances instruments in the mosaic were still at can be used in preparing the legal different stages of implementation in framework governing the disaster that they have not provide a ‘universal’ funding mechanism at provincial and coverage to all assets that may be affected regency/city levels. by disasters. However, some notable progress have been made including: b. Fiscal Protection Insurance:  The Directorate General for Financial a. On-Call Fund (‘disaster reserve’): Risk and Funding Management has  BNPB had implemented On-Call developed an insurance scheme Fund (DSP) mechanism which can and estimating premium for fiscal be disbursed and distributed fast at protection based on earthquake risk the time of emergency response. modelling that has already existed for This mechanism has been running the country. well for emergency response phase.  Draft Finance Minister Regulation However, efforts to expand the scope to the post-disaster recovery (PMK) for this scheme has been phase still causes concerns on the prepared but not yet ratified. management side of budgeting/  Budget for the premium payment has finance and nomenclature. been proposed in the Budget Year of  Based on the Budget Law No. 2015, but eventually the scheme was 3/2015 Article 16 and PP 2/2012 not implemented. on Regional Grants, Regulation c. Funding Pooling (BLU/Public Service of the Minister of Finance No. Unit): 162 year 2015 concerning Grants from Central Government to Local  The Directorate General of Budget Government in the Framework of has conducted a study on the Financial Assistance for Post-disaster feasibility of establishing a pooling mechanism for managing allocated 7 disaster funds that can be drawn in relied upon by regions in allocating the event of consecutive disasters. budgets to insure local assets. The primary consideration was that The procurement prosess uses many relatively small but frequent a procurement mechanism for disasters typically would not trigger standard services which are not the insurance which remains to be suitable for financial services. handled by means of funding from  This program can be synchronized the State Budget. with the central assets insurance so  DPR (House of Representatives) that there will be a synergy between usually approve RR fund on the basis the State Financial Law and the of the Action Plan prepared by BNPB, Regional Government (Financial) but experience showed that the Law. implementation was always more than one budget year. f. Public Assets Insurance:  Financial Services Authority (OJK)  Pool establishment can solve this problem and could learn from has a regulatory well as advocacy the experience of the Education mandate. On the advocacy side, Endowment Fund (LPDP) a wide range of micro-insurance establishment, which also has a post- products have been introduced, disaster rehabilitation mandate for including for emergency conditions. the education sector.  OJK was studying the feasibility d. Insurance of National Assets: of implementing traffic accident insurance scheme as a model for  The Directorate General for State disaster insurance. Assets has prepared Government  Traffic accident insurance has Regulation 27/2014 on Government Assets, which will include acrticle on universal coverage, based on assets protection insurance. contributions drawn through various means (vehicle registration renewal,  Public assets was estimated at transport ticket prices, etc), and also around Rp 1,900 trillion, with initial provided benefits in form of basic premium value calculation of Rp 1.1 compensation. T per year (rate of 0.068%).  It is possible to apply the same  This program can be managed by scheme to public assets insurance a public service unit (BLU – which by using electricity or property tax could be the same BLU with that for payment for premium collection. the fund pooling), and a PMK draft was being prepared. g. Private Assets Insurance:  Private assets insurance has been e. Local Government Assets Insurance: driven by market forces, but its  The Ministry of Home Affairs had penetration needed to be further issued a Regulation of the Ministry enhanced using government policy of Home Affairs that had been supports. 8 5 5. Viable Policy Options Given the above progress in advancing fund allocation which has already the policy and regulatory discourse in been approved by the Parliament aligning the various DRFI instruments until the completion of the recovery to form a mosaic/framework that will program using such funds. The cover the financing needs of different DRFI BLU can serve as both fund asset ownership, Indonesia is actually on manager, pool, and insurance agent the right path toward a comprehensive of the Government. framework for DRFI implementation. There b. Budget allocation coordination are several concrete actions that could be by the Ministry of Finance (e.g., further implemented to strengthen DRFI in Directorate General for Financial Indonesia, including: Risk and Funding Management) 1. Preparing risk profiles based on various and BNPB to ensure that sufficient perils and regions in Indonesia that will funding and/or insurance coverage serve as the basis for developing fiscal are provided in accordance with the strategy and developing market for ownership of the assets. risk transfers. Such profiles can initially c. Implementing scheme and standard be focused on major perils such as procurement for Insurance of earthquake and tsunami and floods. Central Government Assets (BMN) 2. Clarifying the division of financial and Local Government Assets responsibilities and contingent liability (BMD) including clear legal certainty for rehabilitation and reconstruction that premium payment will notbe among the stakeholders, either the considered as state losss in the central government, local government, event that a disaster occur but public or private parties based on payout is not trigerred. the ownership of assets that may be d. Improving the existing regulations impacted by the disasters. Codfying on the provision of grant from this policy through amending explicit National Government to sub- articles into key existing government national governments and regulations on disaster management, community using transfer public finance, and regional mechanisms and budget lines that governance. would ensure timely availability 3. Operationalising several key of the RR funds and shared instruments by establishing or responsibilities and accountability designating institution(s) and between different level of formulating implementation governments. procedures for: e. Gradually expand the mandate and tasks of the DRFI BLU to diversify a. Disaster Reserved Fund that uses its financial sources beyond the budgetary vehicle in the form of state budget contribution to include Public Service Unit (BLU) with combination of risk transfers specific mandate to manage (insurance and catastrophe bonds), Rehabilitation and Reconstruction and regional fund pooling. 9 6 6. Key Lessons • DRFI is a complex and multi-faceted • Clear budgetary responsibilities and cross-sectoral subject that no and processes for post disaster single government agency could reconstruction is a must before more manage the entire spectrum. sophisticated instruments such as insurance, catastrophe bonds, stand-by • In order for the DRFI to work as a credit and others could be useful. framework joint leadership is required comprising at least of the BNPB, • Budgetary vehicle in the form of a BLU Ministry of Finance (involving various provides viable options to ensure that directorates general), and Ministry of a combination of different financing Home Affairs. instruments still falls within the State Finance Law mechanism. 10 The Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and www.gfdrr.org Recovery (GFDRR) is a global partnership that helps developing countries better understand and reduce their vulnerabilities to natural hazards and adapt to climate change. Working with over 400 local, national, regional, and international partners, GFDRR provides grant financing, technical assistance, training and knowledge sharing activities to mainstream disaster and climate risk management in policies and strategies. Managed by the World Bank, GFDRR is supported by 34 countries and 9 international organizations. Technical Note 7 Recent Experiences in Resettlement for Disaster Prevention and Recovery in Indonesia ia es on nI r y i fo nd er ent ec tlem d R et ov an es on in R nti s ve ce re ien r P er ste xp sa t E Di cen Re Content I. Introduction.......................................................................................................................................................... 1 II. Disaster Impact on Housing and Settlement....................................................................................... 8 III. Resettlement as an Option to Keep People Safe from Hazards .............................................13 IV. Recent Experiences in Resettlement for Disaster Risk Management...................................18 V. Lessons for Scaling Up................................................................................................................................34 1 Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION Typology of Disaster Impacts in Yogyakarta and Central Java Overview Indonesia is one of the most disaster-prone countries in the world. The Indonesian archipelago - recognized to be one of the largest in the world - has more than 13,000 islands out of which 6,000 are inhabited. Situated on the Pacific Ring of Fire and at the meeting of the active Indo-Australian plate in the South, the Eurasian plate in the North and the Pacific plate in the East, the country is highly exposed to numerous different hazards and vulnerabilities and have differing levels of disaster response capacity and ability to manage the consequences of crises1. INDONESIA FACT SHEET 13,466 islands 237 million people largest archipelago in the world 4th most populated in the world 34 Provinces MEGA BIODIVERSITY 416 Districts 10% plants, 12% of mammals, 16% of reptiles, 15% fish, 98 municipalities 17% of bird 7,024 sub-districts in the world live in Indonesia 3rd largest in the world 81,626 villages/urban villages 129 active volcanoes 81,000 KM coastline 1st in the world 2nd longest in the world 1 USAID (2014) Indonesia: Disaster Response and Risk Reduction, USAID’S Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance (USAID/OFDA), 24 October 2014, available at https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/ files/documents/1866/FactSheet_Indonesia_DRRR_2014.pdf 2 ia es on nI r y i fo nd er ent ec tlem d R et ov an es on in R nti s ve ce re ien r P er ste xp sa t E Di cen Re History of the Formation of based on stratigraphic analysis, Merapi’s history Merapi Volcano can be grouped into four stages: Stratigraphic research shows that the history From the chronology, it can be seen that of Merapi Volcano formation is very complex. the increase in volcanic activities of Mount Wirakusumah (1989) divided the geology of Merapi in 2010 occurred very rapidly that the Merapi into two big groups, i.e. Young Merapi Center for Volcanology and Geological Hazard and Old Merapi. Further research (Berthomier, Mitigation changed the status of Mount Merapi 1990; Newhall & Bronto, 1995; Newhall et.al, from Normal to Beware in less than one week; 2000) found more detailed stratigraphic units something uncommon with the previous of Merapi. According to Berthommier (1990), eruption events. ADD GRAPH History of Merapi infographics 3 Merapi Eruption and its Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources. Impacts Since 26 October - 4 November 2010, Merapi continued to produce pyroclastic flows and In the middle of post-2006 earthquake recovery, lahar; expanding the danger zone to 10 km from in the last quarter of 2010, particularly on 26 the top of the mountain. Displaced people were October 2010, Merapi volcano erupted and concentrated in several points in four districts afflicted damages to communities in Central in the two province, i.e. the Special Region of Java and the Special Region of Yogyakarta. Yogyakarta and Central Java. Around 61,154 people were displaced, 341 died, and 368 injured and needed hospitalization Merapi eruption on 25 November 2010 was due to the eruption. Pyroclastic flow and fallen a 100-year cycle that was characterized by materials damaged 3,307 houses, schools, big eruption with pyroclastic flow reaching community health centers, and markets. up to 18 km through Gendol River. The 2010 hazard event was beyond the capacity of According to the Head of District Decree on the local communities in understanding the Prohibited Zones in Mount Merapi areas, characteristics and symptoms of pyroclastic during the Beware status, people were not flows. Pyroclastic flows even reached a radius allowed to conduct activities in these areas. The beyond the defined pyroclastic flows hazard local people were then evacuated to evacuation areas, which include areas within 7-10 km from shelters or areas that were considered safe as the eruption center. recommended by the Geology Agency of the ADD GRAPH Locations and Number of Displaced People 4 ia es on nI r y i fo nd er ent ec tlem d R et ov an es on in R nti s ve ce re ien r P er ste xp sa t E Di cen Re Chronology of 2010 Merapi pyroclastic flows and finally big eruption that Eruption was followed by lahar flood. Mount Merapi has long exhibited a phenomenal Sleman District Government has long eruption that attract the attention of people not conducted close monitoring of Merapi situation, only from Yogyakarta and Central Java, but so any development that may indicate potential also from the national level. Since September eruption is well monitored. The following section 2010 people’s attention was directed again presents the chronology of events that lead to to the volcano, due to the abnormal activities Mount Merapi eruption, based on the data and demonstrated by Merapi. The natural processes records from the Center for Volcanology and that happened within the volcano started to Geological Hazard Mitigation Yogyakarta. resurface, starting from smoke expulsion, ADD GRAPH Above: Timeline chronology of 2010 Merapi eruption. Below: Impacts of 2010 Merapi Eruption 5 Lahar Flooding: Merapi Lahar flooding hazard also threatened many Volcano’s Secondary Hazard villages in Sleman District. High risk of lahar flood from Gendol River included Guling, On 5 December 2011, lahar flood affected Jaranan, Plumbon and Karanglo Sub-villages, some areas in the District of Magelang, making in Glagaharjo Village. Opak River might bring around 2,836 people displaced, 746 houses lahar flood to Kliwang and Teplok Sub-villages, destroyed and swept away. in Wukirsari Village. Lahar Flood in Magelang 6 ia es on nI r y i fo nd er ent ec tlem d R et ov an es on in R nti s ve ce re ien r P er ste xp sa t E Di cen Re Landslide Risk in Bantul really undermine development gains. Studies District in recent years have demonstrated that disaster is particularly damaging to the marginal people, The District of Bantul faces multi hazards poor people, female-headed households, the including earthquake, landslide, drought, elderly, people with disabilities and people that strong wind and tsunami. Awareness of disaster have poor health. has been increasing with the earthquake in Yogyakarta and Central Java on 27 May 2006, In Bantul District, areas that are prone to which constitutes a major disaster with huge landslide are those that have extreme slopes. impacts to Bantul District. They are distributed in several sub-districts such as Piyungan, Pleret, Dlingo, Imogiri, some Regular hazard events such as flooding, parts of Pundong, and some parts of Pajangan. landslide, and strong wind have sometimes been ignored by the public. However, these regular Amidst the high risk of landslide, pressure to hazard events that come nearly every year are the land continues to increase. Communities actually damaging to the people’s economy and that have only limited capacity and resources livelihoods, particularly poor people that do not continue to build their houses in areas that are have alternative to live their life. Disaster can actually not fit for settlements. Landslide Risk Map 7 Land Areas Affected by Landslide in Bantul District Community settlements in landslide-prone areas 8 ia es on nI r y i fo nd er ent ec tlem d R et ov an es on in R nti s ve ce re ien Chapter 2 r P er ste xp sa t E Di cen Re DISASTER IMPACT ON HOUSING AND SETTLEMENT Post Merapi Eruption Recovery overall recovery effort. Vertical and horizontal coordination had to be enhanced, and the role Merapi eruption has destroyed numerous of the national government was key in this houses, buildings and settlements around the regard, as Merapi eruption has been declared vicinity of the volcano that are affected by the as a national disaster. pyroclastic flows and hot ashes. More than 2900 houses have been damaged beyond To maintain effective coordination among repair due to the pyroclastic flows of Merapi in the sectors, both vertically and horizontally, 2010, and the other infrastructures have also the government issued Presidential Decree been affected. The housing and settlement Number 16 of 2011 on the Coordination Team sector constitutes the most affected sector in for the Rehabilitation and Reconstruction 2010 Merapi eruption. of Areas Affected by Merapi Eruption in the Province of Special Region of Yogyakarta and After the damage caused by Merapi eruption, Central Java. the government developed a recovery plan to help survivors of the eruption regaining Post-disaster recovery activities were done to and rebuilding their lives and implemented meet the basic needs of the people and were rehabilitation and reconstruction of the areas. also used as a means of building the capacity of The government understood that this effort the people in strengthening their preparedness might require huge resources, as it aimed at and disaster risk reduction capacity: creating better lives livelihoods that are safe from Merapi hazard. • Post-disaster rehabilitation and reconstruction activities were done to Recovery of the damages suffered in various stimulate the affected people’s economy different sectors needed a concerted effort as part of the efforts to achieve sustainable and cross-sectoral coordination that will ensure development goals, in the medium and long that each sector performed its functions in the term; Impacts of 2010 Merapi eruption on housing and settlements 9 • Spatial planning, land use and land-use The scope of post-Merapi eruption rehabilitation control in Merapi volcano areas to develop and reconstruction that used resettlement protected forests, productive farmlands, and approach as outlined in the Directives of the RI settlements that are risk sensitive; Vice President, which would be implemented in • Utilization of some parts of the forests for stages for three years covering the budget year development purposes outside forestry- of 2011-2013 was as the following: related activities, without changing the functions and designated land-use of the • Housing and settlement recovery that was forest areas; based on the policy of safe resettlement • Employing an approach that was transparent, using risk-sensitive spatial planning and with provision of guidelines, technical design; guidance and accurate information on • Public infrastructure recovery to support the rights and obligation of the survivor people’s mobility and economy in the areas, communities in the post-disaster including vital infrastructure for disaster rehabilitation and reconstruction process mitigation; that emphasized disaster risk reduction. • Recovery of the social live of communities; • Economic recovery that employed community-empowerment approach Map of Affected Areas in Spatial Pattern 10 ia es on nI r y i fo nd er ent ec tlem d R et ov an es on in R nti s ve ce re ien r P er ste xp sa t E Di cen Re The effort to regain the people’s life and Post-disaster rehabilitation and reconstruction livelihoods through the rehabilitation and process was not an easy endeavor that could reconstruction program has its own challenges. be completed in a short time. Experiences have People living in Disaster-Prone Zone III, which shown that it would take at least three years for were the most affected and the most dangerous a proper recovery. Some stages would need to areas, needed to be resettled to safer areas. be covered as the following: Safer life and livelihoods needed to be provided to survivors that are resettled. • Land Acquisition. Land acquisition to provide lands for survivors resettled The resettlement process required land for at • Environmental Impact Assessment. The least 2900 houses that needed to be resettled. local government would issue permit after Scarcity of land availability would need a the environmental impact assessment that breakthrough, both in terms of land acquisition needed to be carried out in areas that have and the legal status of the land. Support from high values for conservation and cultural the government had been limited to stimulant heritage funding, while this support should actually also • Local Wisdom. Cultural approach needed cover appropriate funding for an effective and to be used in land acquisition for building efficient resettlement. resettlements as people were more comfortable if resettlement project paid attention to their local wisdom. Diagram of Land Acquisition Process for Village Land Badan DPPD SLEMAN BIRO PEMERINTAHAN Permusyawarahan Desa Dinas Pengendalian Pertanahan Daerah [*] Membuat persetujuan pelepasan 1. Pengkajian Administrasi Permohonan 1. Pengkajian Administrasi Permohonan Tanah Kas desa yang dimuat di dalam 2. Peninjauan lokasi / lapangan 2. Peninjauan lokasi / lapangan Surat Keputusan BPD Desa terkait 3. Meminta pertimbangan instansi terkait lainnya 3. Meminta pertimbangan instansi terkait lainnya 4. Membuat Rekomendasi ke Bupati Sleman 4. Membuat Rekomendasi ke Gubernur PEMOHON Ya BPBD PROVINSI DIY GUBERNUR PEMERINTAHAN DESA BUPATI SLEMAN D.I. YOGYAKARTA [*] Menyampaikan Surat Permohonan 1. Membuat Surat Keputusan Kepala Desa/lurah Menerima / menolak permohonan Menerima / menolak permohonan Pelepasan Tanah Kas Desa kepada Kepala desa yang bersangkutan 2. Menyusun Proposal Rencana Penggunaan Tanah Kas Desa disertai gambar letak TKD yang dimohonkan. Ya 3. Membuat surat permohonan ke Bupati Sleman Surat Izin dari Gubernur D.I. Yogyakarta KECAMATAN 1. Mengetahui keputusan Kepala Desa dan keputusan BPD 2. Membuat Rekomendasi PEMERINTAHAN DESA Permohonan dari Desa 11 As the government considered the 2010 Mapping of High Risk Areas in Merapi eruption as a national disaster, the Bantul District central government coordinated with the relevant partners to accelerate post-disaster Considering that landslide hazard event might rehabilitation and reconstruction in the incur casualties and significant economic affected areas. Considering the importance losses, as well as impoverishing members of the of an effective and efficient rehabilitation community and erasing years of development and reconstruction, the President issued gains, the District Government of Bantul is Presidential Decree Number 16 of 2011 on the committed to take the necessary measures to Coordination Team for the Rehabilitation and mitigate and reduce the risks of landslide that Reconstruction of Areas Affected by Merapi may affect community members living in critical Eruption in the Province of Special Region of lands that are prone to landslide in the district. Yogyakarta and Central Java. The District Disaster Management Plan, as The decree was prepared with the intention mandated by Law Number 24 of 2007 on of accelerating the rehabilitation and Disaster Management and Government reconstruction of the post-disaster areas, Regulation Number 21 of 2008 on the Conduct including through the integration of disaster of Disaster Management, consists of: risk reduction into the local government development agenda in the Province of the • disaster management plan, Special Region of Yogyakarta and Central Java. • disaster risk reduction, Coordination and synchronization were key • prevention, in ensuring post-disaster programming that • integration to development plan, was well-managed, well-directed, transparent, • disaster risk analysis requirements, accountable and integrated, with support from • spatial planning and implementation, the central government, the local government, • education and training and community and international organizations. • technical standards for disaster management. With the above mentioned condition, Bantul government saw that there is a need to make a mapping of landslide risks. The mapping was needed to identify the exact points of possible landslide and the number of people potentially exposed. The availability of such information and the number of potential people exposed might help the local government in planning mitigation and preparedness programs that were needed and also in securing the fiscal and other required resources. 12 ia es on nI r y i fo nd er ent ec tlem d R et ov an es on in R nti s ve ce re ien r P er ste xp sa t E Di cen Re From historical records of earlier landslide As the first step to engage in better landslide hazard events, some areas have been identified disaster risk management, the government as prone to landslide in Bantul District. Those of Bantul District proposed to the Project areas are presented in the following map. Management Unit (PMU) of Rekompak program in the Ministry of Public Works that Areas that have often been affected by landslide implemented the post-2006 Earthquake hazard include the following villages: rehabilitation and reconstruction, to assist in • Srimartani, Piyungan the conduct of a more in-depth and scientific • Wonolelo, Pleret analysis of areas that were considered as highly • Wukirsari, imogiri prone to landslide hazard. • Selopamioro, Bambanglipuro • Mangunan, Dlingo • Karang Tengah, imogiri • Muntuk, Dlingo • Sriharjo, Imogiri • Srimulyo, Piyungan • Seloharjo, Imogiri • Girirejo, Imogiri Landslide Disaster Events Map of Bantul District 13 Chapter 3 RESETTLEMENT AS AN OPTION TO KEEP PEOPLE SAFE FROM HAZARDS Resettlement in Aceh Post 2004 Earthquake and Tsunami In the morning of 24 December 2004, an Aceh had been brushed away. On that day, life earthquake with a magnitude of 9.1 on the for many people in Aceh went back to zero. Richter Scale and an epicenter 150 kilometer from the region, jolted Aceh. This earthquake The calamitous damage caused by the tsunami was followed by a much more damaging hazard also affected other countries such as Thailand, event, the tsunami. The Aceh tsunami was Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, India and even East recorded as the biggest disaster in more than Africa. At least 52 countries were affected by the 40 years. The general public was initially not so tsunami that was known as the Aceh Tsunami. aware of this catastrophic event. The biggest loss from the catastrophe was the In just minutes, houses in the vicinity of Aceh loss of lives of more than 220,000 people in and Nias coastal areas were swept away. just a short time. More than 635,000 people Major damage occurred everywhere in the lost their homes. Many people were gravely affected areas, with much of the infrastructure injured and many others became permanently totally destroyed including roads, bridges, and disabled. Households lost their family heads. seaports. Many hospitals, markets, fishing Children lost their parents and whole families boats, fish farms and people’s houses were also were suddenly scattered. The President at that damaged beyond repair. Utilities like electricity time directly declared the tsunami as a national and clean water were very badly damaged. disaster and called for international assistance The power of the huge tsunami could even to deal with the aftermath of the disaster. move a big diesel-powered electric generator ship from Banda Aceh beach inland three The Government of Indonesia established kilometers away from the coast. Approximately a team for assessing the damage and loss 800-kilometer of coastlines along the West caused by the Aceh tsunami. The team worked Impacts of Aceh 2004 Tsunami 14 ia es on nI r y i fo nd er ent ec tlem d R et ov an es on in R nti s ve ce re ien r P er ste xp sa t E Di cen Re for around two weeks under the leadership of The government, which was represented the National Development Planning Board. by Bappenas and BRR, and the donors and Report from the team maintained that the Aceh World Bank agreed that community-based Tsunami was the worst disaster in Indonesian approach would primarily be used in housing history, with a total loss of around USD 6.2 reconstruction. The community-based recovery billion. The damages inflicted by the disaster has led to the birth of a program called Rekompak, have gravely affected the national government which stands for Rehabilitasi dan Rekonstruksi as well as Aceh government. Masyarakat dan Permukiman Berbasis Komunitas (Community-based Rehabilitation To direct coordination and implementation and Reconstruction of Communities and of recovery programs in Aceh and Nias, the Housing). The approach also emphasized the Government of Indonesia formulated an action rebuilding of disaster survivors’ livelihoods. plan based on the damage and loss report with the underlying principle of “building back some key aspects of the Rekompak approach better”. Mitigation and preparedness to face included partnership with stakeholders from all future disasters became an integral part of the government tiers through a clear and supporting reconstruction effort. policy, and community members as decision makers that were supported by facilitators that Aceh rebuilding was conducted by using played the role as catalyst. Basically the model community-based approach and maximizing put a complete trust on the communities to the engagement of the community members as take the right decisions that might affect their a way of accelerating trauma healing. Bappenas everyday life and their environment. The MDF and the Agency for the Rehabilitation and Rekompak project implemented by the World Reconstruction of Aceh agreed to employ a Bank has been successful in completing 15,000 community-based approach in Aceh recovery. houses in Aceh. Reconstruction of post-tsunami Aceh 15 Post-2006 Earthquake assessment by Bappenas and donors estimated Resettlement in Bantul, the damage and loss to be around USD 3.1 Yogyakarta billion. The economic impact of the earthquake had been felt by nearly 650,000 people working On 27 May 2006, an earthquake with a in small and medium enterprises in the affected magnitude of 6.3 on the Richter Scale shook areas. In Bantul District, Yogyakarta, 70% of Yogyakarta and Central Java, leaving a trail of houses suffered various degrees of damage. destruction that was far beyond what had ever been imagined. Big buildings were relatively Based on successful experiences from housing untouched by the earthquake, but many houses reconstruction in Aceh, and as requested by had been destroyed or heavily damaged by the Governor of Yogyakarta Province, the the hazard event. It was indicated that the Government of Indonesia preferred to use houses built by ordinary people did not meet Rekompak approach. Lessons learned from earthquake resistance construction standards. Aceh were implemented to conduct post- This has caused needless damages and losses disaster recovery in Yogyakarta. Rekompak of human lives that were actually preventable performance of was strengthened and results with an earthquake with a magnitude of 6.3 on better than Aceh reconstruction had been the Richter Scale. achieved. The earthquake lasted for 52 seconds and With support from donors’ funding through caused more than 5,700 deaths, more than the Java Reconstruction Fund provided to the 40,000 people injured and 350,000 houses Government of Indonesia and managed by destroyed. Many disaster victims were trapped the World Bank, USD 75 million out of a total and buried under collapsing weak structures. An of USD 94 million had been disbursed for the An example of ‘slum’ challenges that needs to be addressed in PNPM Urban areas. Left: a house in settlement area in northern Semarang city facing constant land subsidence; Right: a slum settlement in Makassar (source: rdwiyani) 16 ia es on nI r y i fo nd er ent ec tlem d R et ov an es on in R nti s ve ce re ien r P er ste xp sa t E Di cen Re rehabilitation and reconstruction of survivor’s infrastructure, and the revitalization of people’s houses, which employed a community-based economy and the local economy. Initial support approach through the Rekompak program. had been provided to meet temporary shelter needs, housing and community recovery, The housing reconstruction strategy in Java while later support was provided for economic was aligned with the National Action Plan for recovery. Rehabilitation and Reconstruction, and was focused on the recovery of housing and public In addition to housing reconstruction and donor- supported activities that employed Rekompak approach, the Government of Indonesia also implemented this approach in a wider scope through the entire housing and settlement reconstruction in Java, to address post-disaster recovery of subsequent earthquake disaster in West Java and tsunami in Pangandaran. In less than two years, nearly 200,000 houses had been built employing Rekompak approach in Java. This achievement was considered as one of the fastest housing reconstruction experiences in the world. Post-earthquake reconstruction process in Yogyakarta 17 Post-2010 Merapi Eruption have showcased the values and effectiveness Resettlement in Yogyakarta of community-based approach. It is evident and Central Java that when communities are empowered to have their voices in rebuilding their houses and The Rekompak program that responded to communities, with some clear limitations and the earthquake and tsunami in Java had nearly guidelines, the results will be highly satisfactory been completed when Merapi Volcano erupted for the owners of the house. throughout October-November 2010. At the time of the eruption, the Java Rekompak The government has once again decided to program 2006 would be completed by use community-based approach through November 2011. Rekompak program for post-2010 Merapi eruption recovery. The Rekompak approach The Government of Indonesia called for an obliged house owners to be responsible for the emergency meeting with Java Reconstruction reconstruction and rehabilitation of their houses. Fund donors to discuss Merapi issue. This has led to higher quality and satisfaction Responding to government’s request, JRF than similar other reconstruction programs. Steering Committee agreed to extend JRF The Rekompak program gave disaster-affected program for one year until December 2012 to communities the opportunity to rebuild their help survivors of Merapi eruption. houses and public infrastructure through funding directly channeled to communities with direct JRF allocated USD 3.5 million to implement grants from the government to community. recovery program in the aftermath of Merapi eruption. Since Rekompak program still had Rekompak approach has empowered activities and field facilitators in the affected communities to take their own decisions areas, it was easy for Rekompak to mobilize and organize their housing and settlements response very rapidly and increase support recovery on their own; something that has through on-going Rekompak programs in the given people a sense of achievement and field. Due to its capacity for scaling-up activities, control of their future after their misfortune. JRF became the first program that provided Through communal actions (gotong royong), significant allocation for Merapi while the other Rekompak at the same time assists the healing programs were still mobilizing resources. process of disaster survivors. Rekompak provides an approach that is flexible and can be The post-2006 Aceh tsunami reconstruction continuously developed and adapted to meet and post-2006 Yogyakarta reconstruction various different conditions in Indonesia. 18 ia es on nI r y i fo nd er ent ec tlem d R et ov an es on in R nti s ve ce re ien Chapter 4 r P er ste xp sa t E Di cen Re RECENT EXPERIENCES IN RESETTLEMENT FOR DISASTER RISK MANAGEMENT Housing Reconstruction and is calculated based on the present value. Due Settlement Rehabilitation in to its importance, it is highly required to take Merapi into account the period of time. If the recovery should be done in a long period of time, damage might significantly increase. DAMAGE AND LOSS ASSESSMENT Immediately after the disaster, damage and loss Based on the data as of 31 December 2010, assessment was done to determine the extent it was identified that Mount Merapi eruption in of damage and loss caused by the Merapi Yogyakarta and Central Java caused damage eruption. Assessment, damage and loss in all and loss amounted to IDR 3.62 trillion detailed sectors were calculated using ECLAC. This as IDR 2.14 trillion in the province of DI method has been used to analyze post-disaster Yogyakarta and IDR 1.48 trillion in Central Java. damage and loss in various countries and has It was recorded that as many as 3,023 houses in been continuously improved since 1970. This Sleman Regency were severely damaged and method could determine the amount of loss destroyed, 156 homes were damaged and 632 and damage, needs for disaster recovery and homes were slightly damage. Recovery efforts impacts on each sector. after the Merapi eruption in 2010 were carried out through rehabilitation and reconstruction The assessed sectors are i) infrastructures activities. They were in accordance with the consisting of housing, water, roads and transport, action plan for post-disaster rehabilitation and energy, and telecommunications, ii) social reconstruction of the Mount Merapi eruptions sector including education, health, religion, and in Yogyakarta and Central Java Province during facilities for the vulnerables and the poors, iii) 2011-2013 published by BAPPENAS (National productive sector including agriculture, animal Development Planning Agency). husbandry, fishery, irrigation, trade, industry, finance, tourism, and iv) cross-sectors including governance and environment. ECO-RESETTLEMENT This methodology also takes into account the Arrangement of housing and settlements in the overall macroeconomic impact, which was province of Yogyakarta and Central Java were divided into three parts, namely: implemented by a program called Rekompak. Considering the damage caused by Merapi Damage. These are direct impacts, referring eruptions, Indonesian government asked the to assets, inventories and property rights. World Bank to extend Rekompak program up The assessment considers the extent of the to the areas affected by Merapi eruption in damage. Typically, they are categorized into Yogyakarta and Central Java. three categories namely heavily damaged, damaged and lightly damaged. In conducting the rehabilitation and reconstruction using relocation method, Loss. The indirect impacts refer to the affected an approach that took into account the areas such as: reduced production, declined environment and spatial planning was also revenue, and additional costs, for a certain used. For that purpose, the approach used was time period until economic activities and eco-resettlement. affected assets could be recovered. These loss 19 The efforts undertaken in the recovery process overall. Preparation of RPP/CSP (Settlement of the people’s livelihood affected by the Arrangement Plan) would be participatory disaster on the basis of community-based which meant that it would involve three major Rekompak program are described as follows. construction elements, namely: public sector, government sector and business sector in the Settlement Arrangement Plan. Before decision making process, especially by giving a conducting relocation, a document on stronger role to the public sector for whom the Settlement Arrangement Plan (RPP) was construction was done. Steps in preparing RPP prepared in advance. Settlements Arrangement can be seen in the following flowchart. Plan (RPP) or Community Settlement Plan (RPP/CSP) was a development plan at village Build Back Better Principle. In its level for a period of 5 years which was prepared implementation, the relocation used “Build Back based on aspirations, needs and future Better” principle, as the integrating element goals from the society to improve settlement for Disaster Risk Mitigation to the relocation environment condition and to encourage program. This relocation was implemented society readiness against disasters. by using Eco-resettlement concept namely integrated resettlement development and The purpose of RPP was as a guidance for paying attention on the environment and nature, people in building their villages by using a better so that the preservation of nature would remain planning, a spatial planning which was more intact. By using an integrated or clustered responsive to disaster and better than ever system, it was suitable to be used in limited Flowchart in preparing Settlement Arrangement Plan 20 ia es on nI r y i fo nd er ent ec tlem d R et ov an es on in R nti s ve ce re ien r P er ste xp sa t E Di cen Re land area. It was applied for resettlement during a capacity building activity was conducted to this Merapi post-eruption relocation. This enhance the community’s capability, especially eco-settlement concept was also applied in a in the areas of procurement, accounting, communal cages and communal IPAL (Waste reporting, banking system and understanding Water Treatment Plant). disaster risks in their region. Land Acquisition. Land Acquisition for Each settler group consisted of around 10-15 relocating the community used several households. It had an organizational structure methods as follow: consisting of a Chairperson, Treasurer, Secretary and Executive Team. Selection process for each 1. Communal Village Land Assets - according position was done by means of deliberation to the Regulation of the Governor of DI and consensus method which manifested the Yogyakarta, Village Land Assets cannot existing local wisdom in the community. be used for housing or residential area so there should be a special permit related Direct Assistance. Direct assistance used a to land development for rehabilitation and team of facilitators. Each team consisted of 9 reconstruction after the Merapi disaster. personnels with expertises in civil engineering, 2. Communal Independent Land - people architecture, economics and social. Each jointly bought a large land to be used for team provided direct assistance to 10-15 residential construction related to post- settler groups. This pattern was very influential Merapi rehabilitation and reconstruction. toward the speed of relocation program 3. Individual Independent Land - land used to implementation, of which approximately 500 build settlements belonged to the owner homes could be completed within one year. himself. The facilitators who assisted the community Rekompak Principles and Values. These were recruited on the basis of expertise and principles were critical in the program. skills assessment undertaken by District The principles were solidarity, openness, Management Consultants (DMC). As for transparency, accountability, independence administration and payroll were done by and the use of local resources. the Work Unit for Building and Environment Planning (PBL,) of the Public Works While the values were community-dependent Department of DI Yogyakarta. development, which meant that the program was to put the community as the main Legal Basis for Recovery Implementation. resettlement development actors, and value- To be used as the basis for therehabilitation and focused development, which meant that the reconstruction, Presidential Decree Number reconstruction process was based on the 16 year 2011 regarding Coordination Team development of community values. for Regional Rehabilitation and Reconstruction after Mount Merapi eruption in D.I Yogyakarta Community-based Approach. The approach and Central Java was stipulated; of which was system was a community-based approach followed by the stipulation of: system for mapping, site plan and implementing program relocation activities after the eruption 1. Regulation of the Head of BPNB (National of Merapi. In order to implement the program, Board for Disaster Management) No. 5 21 year 2011 on the Action Plan for Regional added by 50 m2 per house for public and social Rehabilitation and Reconstruction after facilities, therefore the total provided land area Mount Merapi eruption in D.I Yogyakarta and was 150 m2 per household. Central Java as a reference in implementing rehabilitation and reconstruction; Earthquake Resistant Building 2. Regulation of the Head of BNPB No. 6 year Construction. The building had to meet 2011 on the Organizational Structure of criteria of earthquake-resistant structures of Technical Supporting Team Technical for which should be through a direct assistance in Regional Rehabilitation and Reconstruction its construction. Residential construction was after Mount Merapi eruption in D.I Yogyakarta carried out by the government and stakeholders and Central Java; implemented this relocation activities using 3. Decree of the Head of BNPB No. 127 year a community-based approach. A series of 2011 on the Appointment of Technical activities were carried out in order to achieve Supporting Team Personnels for Regional the program objectives, such as: Rehabilitation and Reconstruction after Mount Merapi eruption in D.I Yogyakarta and Settlement construction planning consisted of: a Central Java; coordination meeting for socializing and selecting volunteers, training volunteers, and FGD on the In the action plan for the rehabilitation and reflection of village development impact and reconstruction after Mount Merapi eruption, planning. Data collection and mapping consisted it was clearly stated that the rehabilitation of the following activities: self-mapping, and reconstruction activities shall be carried community discussion to determine prospective out by using an approach of residential housing assistance beneficiaries and damage relocation from Disaster-Prone Areas (KRB) level of houses, as well as public assessment. III using REKOMPAK scheme. Residential Settlement Arrangement Plan (RPP) consisted relocation and settlement activities became of: establishing a Planning Team (TIP), the locomotive for the rehabilitation and preparing RPP, women and vulnerable group reconstruction activities, which provided input meetings in preparing RPP, village discussion, to Spatial Planning revision of Sleman, Klaten, and inter-village discussion. RPP integration in Boyolali and Magelang regencies. the regional development plans consisted of: RPP draft consultation, RPP finalization, and All citizens, who were willing to be relocated, RPP workshops at district/city level. House were facilitated with land redressing. The value construction consisted of: the establishment was calculated by considering the Taxable of settler groups (KP), preparation of technical Object Value (NJOP) of the original location and details of housing construction plan (DTTP), was provided with land ownership certificate. women and vulnerable groups in the context As for the provisions for providing assistance, of preparing DTTP, and DTTP verification. the details were as follow: Disbursement of funds and development implementation. Housing construction assistance was amounted to IDR 30,000,000,-/unit; The community was Permanent Residential Implementation given a freedom in determining the house type, Process. Selecting Beneficiaries was with a provision of minimum building area of 36 conducted by following the criteria specified in m2; Total land area for each house was 100 m2, Rekompak program. 22 ia es on nI r y i fo nd er ent ec tlem d R et ov an es on in R nti s ve ce re ien r P er ste xp sa t E Di cen Re Criteria for Prospective Home Fund Recipients CRITERIA EXPLANATION Households that had lost their houses • The recipients of BDR were “Households”. It means that if due to Merapi eruption or affected by there were many families in one house, they would have the it in DIY and Central Java right only for one BDR house. Conversely, if there was only one person in the household (single and there was not any other family members), she/he would still receive BDR fund allocation for one BDR. • Household/family in question was a unit of family or individual person who lived in the house and cared for themselves prior to the Merapi eruption in 2010 or the cold lava flood that followed Their house was located in a prone to • The prone to disaster areas were Prone to Disaster Areas disaster area (KRB) of Merapi, which based on the Center of Volcanology and Geological Disaster Mitigation (PVBMG) were categorized into 3 KRBs, namely KRB III, KRB II, and KRB I • KRB III was a prohibited area for settlement Their house was lost/collapsed/ • Lost means that all or most part of the house was covered by heavily damaged and not appropriate volcanic materials (sand and rocks) or cold lava. for settlement due to the eruption • Collapsed means that the house was collapsed after being hit or cold lava flood and they had not by volcanic materials or cold lava. built another house outside the area • Heavily damaged means that the house was not proper of KRB III by using private fund or for settlement any longer based on technical assessment assistance from other parties. although it was still on the land. They had legal ownership of the The status of ownership should be proved by a testimonial house letter from the village. They had land use right on the new • Land title: it could be proved by a certificate/letter C/other location testimonial letters or by a testimony from the surrounding neighbors (neighbor who lived on the left, right, front or behind the house) • Land Use Right: it could be proven by a testimonial letter saying that they would be granted/inherited/permitted the use for at least 15 years and signed by a testifier. They were not and/or in the process of acquiring similar assistance from Clear other parties. They had an intention to re-build • A safe location was a safe location based on the categories of or settle in a safe location or in a prone-to-disaster areas as set by PVMBG residential areas stated in the spatial • A location which was located in the residential area as stated plan set by the local government in the spatial plan set by the government. It means that the location should be in accordance for its land utilization as set by the local government through the Regional Spatial Planning (RTRW) of the City/ District or other regulations. They were willing to tear down their house on the old site They were willing to follow any Clear stipulated regulations 23 Stages for Selecting BDR Recipient Candidates 24 ia es on nI r y i fo nd er ent ec tlem d R et ov an es on in R nti s ve ce re ien r P er ste xp sa t E Di cen Re Land Selection. Geologically, land selection Environmental and social safequard. In for relocation was done by BPPTK (Center terms of Environmental and Social Safeguard, for Geological Disaster Research and the construction of permanent housing had Technological Development), based on the to refer to general policies and guidelines to historical impacts of previous Mount Merapi achieve the following objectives: eruptions. Thus, a safe area could be known and determined for relocating the citizens. The 1. Protecting human health; venues were as shown in the map below. 2. Preventing or redressing any loss of livelihood; Village Land Assets Conversion and Their 3. Preventing environmental damage as a result Licensing. According to the Regulation of the of individual investments or their cumulative Governor of DI Yogyakarta, Village Land Assets impacts; could not be used for housing or residential 4. Avoiding or minimizing involuntary land so there should be a special permit related to acquisition and/or relocation, and handling land development for the rehabilitation and the impacts of land acquisition/relocation, if reconstruction after the Merapi eruption. any; Avoiding conflict among the community members and strengthening social bond Lands which were left by their owners remained among the community; as the owners’ property and got land titles, but 5. Preventing or compensating any loss those lands should not be used for residential/ of livelihood caused by land loss, or loss of settlements and could only be used for economic access to natural resources including those activities, such as agriculture or plantation. As for generated by the project; the lands located in the relocation site have been 6. Restoring livelihood conditions of the certified on behalf of the concerned and should affected communities. not be handed over/sold or pawned. Distribution map of relocation sites 25 Flowchart for Village Land Assets Acquisition for the Relocation Site Diagram of Independent/Personal and Group Land Acquisition Process 26 ia es on nI r y i fo nd er ent ec tlem d R et ov an es on in R nti s ve ce re ien r P er ste xp sa t E Di cen Re Earthquake Resistant Housing Construction FOUNDATION FRAME STRUCTURE FRAME STRUCTURE FRAME STRUCTURE 27 Parallel process in housing reconstruction at the community level 28 ia es on nI r y i fo nd er ent ec tlem d R et ov an es on in R nti s ve ce re ien r P er ste xp sa t E Di cen Re ECO-RESTORATION a row of sengon trees, a row of papaya trees The eco-restoration program was the speedy were planted and on the boundaries between restoration of the affected regional ecosystems farmers’ fields, usually in form of terraces, fruit to support the community-based rehabilitation plants or Multi-Purpose Tree species were and reconstruction program after the Merapi planted. Because the land conditions before eruption in 2010. The goal was to seek for being converted into demplot were varied opportunities and efforts that could be made and there were different needs of the farmers, for recovering community lands affected by the there were variations of implementation. The Merapi eruption. Another goal to be achieved activities consisted of: by this program was to provide an alternative income for the affected community in short and A brief assessment of the field situation. long terms. A survey was conducted to determine on-site physical conditions. An assessment toward the The eco-restoration program was done in 5 physical condition of the land was done by direct hamlets in Kepuharjo village, Cangkringan observation after coordinating with the village Sub-district, Sleman District. The restored land government regarding priority locations to be area used as a demonstration plot (demplot) used as demonstration plots. An assessment was more than 15 hectares with an intensive toward socio-economic conditions was also community engagement using a community- conducted through interviews with various based approach. The selected locations were sources, program socialization discussions in two regions affected by the eruption, namely and group discussions. The team providing Direct-Affected Area (ATL) I and II. ATL I was direct assistance lived in the assisted villages closer to Merapi and has a thickness of eruption to triangulate the data obtained from various material up to 3 meters. ATL II has a thickness sources by direct observation on the people’s of less than 1 meter. daily life. The selection of vegetation was done to meet Determining Assisted Groups and short-term and long-term goals of the program Demonstration Plot Location. Criteria for determined previously. For the short term, ecosystem restoration program participants or fruit-producing plants such as banana and target groups defined by the direct assistance papaya were planted. As for the long term, agency were villagers whose lands or sengon trees were planted. In addition to the settlements were destroyed by the eruption of goal of improving community’s economy, the Merapi, covering ATL I and ATL II in Kepuharjo program was also aimed for land conservation village. Initially, it was only implemented in and adaptation to climate change. Selection of Kopeng hamlet, but then Batur, Jambu and different types of vegetation starting from small Petung hamlets were added, citing the need for plants to woody plants was also intended to demonstration plots in land with thick eruption create complex agroforestry which was similar material, the need for spots to learn agroforestry, to natural forests. the need to learn how to protect vulnerable disaster points such as river banks and areas The cropping patterns which were generally vulnerable to landslides. Palemsari hamlet was used were alternate rows of which forest plants added recently to support tourism village and and agricultural crops were planted alternately to support the community businesses. In total, with a space between each forestry plants was the total area reached 15.8 hectares. 6 meters, as well as for agricultural crops. After 29 Involvement of other parties in availability of land and the willingness of the implementing the project. Socialization community to engage in the program. of ecosystem restoration activity plan for villages affected by the Merapi eruption Ecosystem restoration participatory to the community was conducted through planning. Participatory planning at farmer meetings facilitated by Rekompak in temporary group level was conducted through a series of residential area in Plosokerep and Gondang. meetings starting from promoting the program, During the socialization, village governments extracting information about community’s were involved to ensure smooth coordination livelihood patterns before and after the Merapi since the beginning of the program. The village eruption in 2010 and community’s expectation government also participated in determining on the alternative livelihood patterns that two locations in the village. The involvement of could be applied during the rehabilitation and farmers owning the demonstration plots was reconstruction period. Restoration program was conducted through socialization to explain the perceived by the community as a program to program purposes as well as to get inputs and generate income from agriculture by planting feedbacks from the community. This process a commodity of which the market was clearly generated inputs on the types of plants preferred available. Community planning process resulted by the community as well as information on the in agroforestry design and cropping patterns. HAMLET WIDTH ACTIVITIES NAME Kopeng 8.9 ha Thai Papaya and Jeunjing/sea sengon were planted using alternate rows system with a spacing of 3x3 m. Under the Sea Sengon and Papaya, seasonal crops such as beans, chili or grass to feed livestock were planted. Those plants also had a function to strengthen the terraces. Terraces were also interspersed with fruit trees such as banana, jackfruit, avocado and durian. Selection of vegetation was done by discussion. Sea Sengon was chosen because the farmers knew these plants well. As for papaya, it was because the market was wide open and this plant might grow well in this environment. Petung 1.3 ha Mixed garden was designed to become a stand with a storied header of forestry vegeations at the top of the canopy and plantation crops and vegetables at the top of the canopy. The plants were jackfruit, mango, banana, papaya, avocado and nutmeg. Sweet potatoes and cassava were also planted. Batur 1.4 ha Being a land in ATL I, restoration of soil structure was the first action to perform in restoring an ecosystem, namely by strengthening the terraces and creating land boundaries using Lamtoro plant, then providing input in forms of soil and organic materials which allowed plants to grow optimally. Riverbanks and inter-land ter- races were planted with Lamtoro and Gamal to strengthen the slopes and terraces by utilizing the roots ability to bind the soil. Planting vegetation also aimed to restore humus through fallen leaves to improve availability of nutrients in the soil Jambu 1.7 ha Rehabilitation of soil condition by stabilizing soil which was exposed to rain or its flow and increasing organic material from the fallen leaves. Lamtoro and Gamal were planted on the inter-field boundaries. Papaya plants were combined with Jeunjing (Seas Sengon) and coconut trees with a spacing of 3x3m and 2x3m. Water tank was made to anticipate dry season. Palemsari 2.5 ha The program was conducted also to support the tourism village program and to provide an example of land optimization for community economic empower- ment. The implemented pattern was enrichment with new plants to enrich the composition of existing plants. The implemented pattern was along-the-boundary vegetation and enrichment plants with a space of 3x3 m and adapted to the land. Terrace-strengthening plants other than grass as well as acacia, were used as fuel and also batik Soga dye. 30 ia es on nI r y i fo nd er ent ec tlem d R et ov an es on in R nti s ve ce re ien r P er ste xp sa t E Di cen Re The success of the overall program reached Community involvement in mapping landslide 70% of the total planted area. The existing land risk was carried out based on the following in ATL I got a lower production rate. Community objectives: income increased with an additional income of up to IDR 500,000 per month, because of the 1. Providing an understanding of landslide- existence of marketing system formed as a prone areas existed in each village part of the program. Community involved in the 2. Communicating technical parameters as program were given an additional 15 hectares well as matters related to landslide-prone of restoration land by the Regional Government condition along with 25,500 trees. 3. Communicating the stages in the landslide study Resettlement for Landslide From the landslide study results, there were Risk Mitigation in Bantul 618 Houses (inhabited by 658 Households) Regency included in the red zone (high risk level) spread over three (3) relocation pilot villages; A landslide risk study was conducted in a Srimartani as many as 158 houses, Wukirsari as participatory manner in which the community many as 279 houses and Wonolelo as many as participated on site to learn about landslide 181 houses. parameters. Among others, the parameters were: Number of Houses with High Risk NO VILLAGE RED ALERT Parameters for Landslide Risk Study 1 Srimartani 158 NO PARAMETER 2 Wukirsari 279 1 Soil Texture Class 3 Wonolelo 181 2 Thickness of Land solum 3 Rocks Weathering Rate Risk-mapping for landslides was continued to 4 Slopes 8 villages and the results were shown in the 5 Morphology Types following table. 6 History of landslides 7 Vegetative Density Number of Houses with High Risk 8 Land Use NO VILLAGE RED ALERT 9 Rainfall data 1 Selopamioro 461 2 Mangunan 113 3 Karang Tengah 63 4 Muntuk 116 5 Sri Harjo 119 6 Sri Mulyo 281 7 Seloharjo 224 8 Giri Rejo 21 TOTAL 1396 31 Of the number of houses with high risk above, the The construction was implemented gradually, Local Government of Bantul Regency made a both for construction of houses and public follow-up action by means of relocation program facilities. Those activities consisted of: to a safer place. The first relocation program was implemented with support from the Rekompak Permits Preparation. Land Conversion and program which was close to completing the permit land conversion were done in Wukirsari rehabilitation and reconstruction in the areas and Srimartani villages which have used village affected by the 2006 earthquake in Yogyakarta. land assets for the relocation. The process was In this relocation program, the government carried out through a mechanism of village provided converted village land assets approved regulation making regarding land conversion of by the provincial government of DI Yogyakarta. agricultural land into residential land. The village regulation was submitted to regency level and Number of Relocated Household Heads after acquiring receipt from the Regent of NO VILLAGE TOTAL Bantul, it was later submitted to provincial level 1 Srimartani 13 to acquire a Decree from the Governor of DI Yogyakarta on village land assets conversion. 2 Wonolelo 20 The Governor’s Decree on land conversion in 3 Wukirsari 36 Wukirsari and Srimartani villages were legalized 4 Wukirsari (Replication) 25 by the Governor of DI Yogyakarta. 5 Sriharjo (Replication) 11 Map of Areas Prone to Landslides in Wukirsari Village, Imogiri Sub District 32 ia es on nI r y i fo nd er ent ec tlem d R et ov an es on in R nti s ve ce re ien r P er ste xp sa t E Di cen Re Construction Permit (IMB) and Land provided by PLN. The availability of water and Drying. Residents benefited from a relocation electricity would support the occupancy rate of program needed to have IMB and Land Drying the constructed houses. Permit for agricultural land to be used or built as houses. IMB application for Wukirsari, Wonolelo Bantul would also build a drainage system in the and Srimartani Villages and Land Drying for relocation sites. Construction of drainage would Wonolelo and Srimartani Villages was submitted use Regional Budget (APBD). While it had not in form of proposals through Kesbangpol Bantul been built yet, natural drainage was utilized. of which was forwarded to Bantul Regent along with a copy to the relevant SKPD. The implementation process as mentioned above was also applied in Wonolelo and Srimartani SITE PLAN PLANNING villages. Principles and mechanisms of the Bantul Regency was committed to fulfilling Rekompak program were implemented properly community needs for clean water and to ensure environmental setting in a safer place electricity. The needs of clean water were away from landslide risks in accordance with the fulfilled from PDAM pipelines. Electricity was purpose of the relocation activities. Implementation of Construction in Wukirsari Village NO WORK ITEMS IMPLEMENTATION TARGET 1 House • 32 houses on the village land assets 100 % of RAB (Budget until the roof tiling work had finished. Plan) , up to rafter and • 4 houses on private land until the roof lath works tiling work had finished 2 Talud 634m3 (100 %) 634 m3 3 Concrete Block Road 140 m (100 %) 140 m 4 Communal MCK (Public Walls were painted. (100 %) Finished and painted Bathing, Washing and Toilet) Wukirsari Village Site Plan 33 Land relocation region of Wukirsari village land Land relocation region of Wukirsari village land asset 0 % asset 10 % Land relocation region of Wukirsari village land Land relocation region of Wukirsari village land asset 20 % asset 50 % Land relocation region of Wukirsari village land Land relocation region of Wukirsari village land asset 70 % asset 100% 34 ia es on nI r y i fo nd er ent ec tlem d R et ov an es on in R nti s ve ce re ien Chapter 5 r P er ste xp sa t E Di cen Re LESSONS FOR SCALING UP The rehabilitation program after the Merapi eruption in 2010 was considered successful in relocating the impacted communities using a community-based approach. The use of the community-based approach through direct assistance and coordination between government agencies was the key to the success of the program. Housing and Resettlement Rehabilitation in Mount Merapi Learning from the relocation program in • The capacity building of the community in Sleman Regency, Special Region of Yogyakarta planning and managing community-based and Magelang Regency, Central Java province, regional development programs. there were some key activities that can be • The opportunity to implement better and used as a lesson. The rehabilitation and more efficient governance and relationship reconstruction program with a community- between actors within the government. based approach was implemented within the following framework: The scope of the rehabilitation and reconstruction after the Merapi eruption • The fulfillment of basic human needs, used a community-based approach by paying means of developing community capacity attention to the followings: to increase preparedness and disaster risk reduction, community economic stimulation • The rehabilitation of housing and settlements and the achieving the goals of sustainable referred to relocation policy that was safe for development, both medium-term and long- settlement regarding the space layout and term. design that was based on mitigation and • Structuring, utilization and control of space in disaster risk reduction. the area of Mount Merapi for the development • The restoration of public infrastructure of protected forest areas, productive land and supported the mobility of the people and settlements using an approach with disaster the economy of the region including vital risk reduction. infrastructure for disaster management. • The utilization of some areas of the forest • The restoration of the social and economic for development outside forestry activities life of the society. without changing the function of the forest. • The application of the principles of The program was designed and implemented transparency approach, by providing by the central government and was handed guidance, technical assistance and over to the local government. The program was accurate information about the rights and ended in November 2014, and was followed up obligations of the affected communities in by the local government. the process of post-disaster rehabilitation and reconstruction activities that promote disaster risk reduction. 35 Once the permanent housings were built, Resettlement for Landslide Sleman Regency Government continued to Risk Mitigation in Bantul make efforts to ensure the recovery process of District the affected people could be achieved. There were also efforts to ensure that the people Follow-up to the Risk Map Assessment. would keep inhabiting the houses and to Bantul Government with the support of the prevent them to return to the old houses. The central government through the Rekompak efforts made are as follows. program conducted relocation activities with a community-based approach and independent • Increasing the welfare of the residents by and communal methods. The communal enabling them to provide for the family by method was the use of village land, while the providing trainings on home industry with the independent method was the use of people’s goal of creating new economic resources, land. such as mushroom cultivation, batik making, and food manufacturing. • The relocation program was started • Issuing new certificates for the old land with relocation piloting projects in three and labeling the cover with the words “not villages at high risk with the support of the for occupancy”, in anticipation of the ideas ongoing Rekompak Program in Bantul circulating among the residents that the land after the earthquake in Yogyakarta in 2006. would be taken by the state. This certification The piloting program implemented in also explained the legal status of the land and Srimartani Village involved 13 households, avoided the problems of land ownership in In Wonolelo village 20 households, and in the future. Wukirsari village 36 households. A total of • To follow up the issue of social change such 69 households of the 618 households in as environmental hygiene, the Government the three villages with a high risk have been of Sleman conducted intensive socialization relocated to a safer place. on waste treatment. • With the support of the Global Facility for • To follow up the issue of social change such Disaster Reduction and Recovery (GFDRR) as the neighboring system (RT/RW), the through the Disaster Risk Management social system in the old location was adopted (DRM) Unit of the World Bank, in ….. Bantul in the new location. The neighboring system Regency continued the assessment to in the new location was the same as the old location. • To anticipate environmental problems, the Sleman Government facilitated waste processing in the new location and provided various plants for green open spaces. • There was a communal Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) to avoid environmental contamination in the new location. 36 ia es on nI r y i fo nd er ent ec tlem d R et ov an es on in R nti s ve ce re ien r P er ste xp sa t E Di cen Re another eight villages. Bantul Government Resettlement for Local and followed up the results of the risk assessment International Learning by including the relocation program and its financing into the local government’s The Rehabilitation and Reconstruction program work program and budget (APBD). In the in Yogyakarta was considered successful, early stages, Bantul Government planned therefore it could be a learning center for to relocate people to a safe place with a disaster management around the world. For minimum target of five households per year. that reason, the relocation area has become • In 2013, Bantul government was able one of the visit spots for guests from various to relocate 11 households in Sriharjo regions and countries. Some of the study visits Village with the funding of IDR 20 million to the relocation site are as follows. per household. In 2015 the provincial government of Yogyakarta and Bantul • The delegation from the Philippines visited government were successful in relocating the relocation residence residential and 25 families in Wukisari Village, Imogiri Sub- did consultation with the parties involved District with IDR 30 million per household. to get a clear picture related to the process • In 2014, funded by the local government’s of implementation, including the policy budget, Bantul government has also level, implementation and the community- replicated the regional mapping study based approach used. This study visit had assessment to the area with high risk of the purpose to learn good practices in landslides in five villages and in two sub- relocation program to be implemented in districts. In Pajangan Sub-District they were the rehabilitation and reconstruction of the three villages namely Guwosari Village, Haiyan storm, which impacted one million Village, Sendansari Village, and Triwidadi people. Other countries that visited the area Village, while in Dlingo Sub-District were were Laos, Gambia, New Zealand, USA, Jatimulyo Village and Terong Village. Japan, Timor Leste and the participants of the • Bantul government still tried alternative 5th Asian Ministerial Meeting on Disaster Risk funding outside the local government budget Reduction (AMCDRR) in Yogyakarta. to accelerate the relocation programs for • At the local level, local governments from the people living in the areas at high risk of other regions studied the implementation of landslides. the resettlement of the affected community of the Merapi eruption. The local governments, represented by the Regional Disaster Management Agency (BPBD) from West Sumatra, Aceh, Sinabung and Manado visited the BPBD of Sleman to understand the processes carried out so that the implementation of relocation in their region could occur with high occupancy rate. • Other parties that visited the relocation sites in Sleman Regency were donors and non- governmental organizations; among others were USAID and Hope International. 37 Key Messages to Successful Resettlement Community revitalization with a community- based approach can be done successfully without significant social upheaval and the high occupancy rate could be achieved due to some important factors. The key factors were as follows: • The certainty of land availability for relocation to the people and the status of the land - including the status of the abandoned land, and access to livelihoods in the new area. • The capacity of the government to implement the relocation program including coordinating the existing supporting resources. • The availability of the supporting systems, the qualification of the facilitators, and a system that could develop the capacity of the direct assistance. • The availability of stimulus funding from the government as core funding for the relocation activities. Technical Note 8 Knowledge Sharing for Capacity Building of Indonesia’s Disaster Risk Management Agencies The World Bank Office Jakarta Indonesia Stock Exchange Building, Tower II/12-13th Fl. Jl. Jend. Sudirman Kav.52-53 Printed June, 2016 © 2016 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank 1818 H Street NW Internet: www.worldbank.org This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Rights and Permissions The material in this work is subject to copyright. Because The World Bank encourages dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for noncommercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given. Authors: Iwan Gunawan Lingga Kartika Suyud Ruby Mangunsong Theresia Wuryantari Photo Credit: Ruby Mangunsong Copyright: World Bank Design, Layout, Infographic: Indra Irnawan First Edition, June 2016 Content I. The Need of Disaster Knowledge Management for Building Capacity of DRM Agencies in Indonesia................................................................................................................1 II. Knowledge as the Solution to Building the Capacity of DRM Agencies.........................9 III. The Development of Knowledge Management Capacity at BNPB and BPBDs ... 15 IV. Next Step and Lessons Learned................................................................................................. 23 Abbreviations and Acronyms BAKORNAS PB National Coordination Agency for Disaster Management BNPB Badan Nasional Penanggulangan Bencana/National Disaster Management Authority BNSP Badan Nasional Sertifikasi Profesi/National Professional Certification Body BPBD Badan Penanggulangan Bencana Daerah/Local Agency for Disaster Management DIBI Data dan Informasi Bencana Indonesia/Indonesia's Disaster Data and Information DM Disaster Management DRM Disaster Risk Management GDLN Global Development Learning Network GDP Gross Domestic Product INA DRR KC Indonesia Disaster Risk Reduction Knowledge Center INA DRTG Indonesia Disaster Relief Training Ground INASAFE Indonesia Scenario Assessment for Emergency IRBI Indeks Risiko Bencana Indonesia/Indonesia's Disaster Risk Index Jakstra Kebijakan dan Strategi/Policy and Strategy KE Knowledge Exchange KM Knowledge Management KMS Knowledge Management System KS Knowledge Sharing OKS Organizational Knowledge Sharing OSM Open Street Map Pusdalops Pusat Pengendalian Operasi/Operation Control Center REKOMPAK Rehabilitasi dan Rekonstruksi Masyarakat dan Permukiman Berbasis Komunitas/ Community Based Rehabilitation and Resettlement RPJMN Rencana Pembangunan Jangka Menengah Nasional/The National Medium Term Development Plan RPP Rencana Pembangunan Permukiman/Community Settlement Plan VDIC Vietnam Development Information Center 1 Chapter 1 THE NEED OF DISASTER KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT FOR BUILDINGCAPACITY OF DRM AGENCIES IN INDONESIA Overview Indonesia FACT SHEET Indonesia is one of the most disaster-prone countries in the world. The Indonesian 17,000 islands archipelago - recognized to be one of the The largest archipelago in the world largest in the world - has more than 17,000 islands out of which 6,000 are inhabited. Situated on the Pacific Ring of Fire and at the meeting of the active Indo-Australian plate 34 Provinces in the South, the Eurasian plate in the North 416 Districts and the Pacific plate in the East, the country is highly exposed to numerous different hazards 98 Municipalities and vulnerabilities and have differing levels 7,024 Sub-districts of disaster response capacity and ability to manage the consequences of crises1. 81,626 Villages/urban villages Disaster Risk Profile 81,000 km coastline 2nd longest in the world Hazards Indonesia, being an equatorial tropical 237 million people 4th most populated in the world archipelago, annually witnesses several hydro-meteorological and climatological hazards. Based on the nationwide disaster risk assessments the Government of Indonesia has 129 active volcanoes 1st in the world listed twelve hazards of national importance as stipulated in the Law Number 24 of 2007 on Disaster Management2. Some hazards are natural and man-made, and others are social and human made, and they include: Natural hazards Non-natural hazards Social hazards earthquake, tsunami, technological failure, social conflicts between volcanic eruption, flood, modernization failure, community groups, drought, typhoon, epidemic and pandemic, terrorism landslide 1 USAID (2014) Indonesia: Disaster Response and Risk Reduction, USAID’S Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance (USAID/OFDA), 24 October 2014, available at https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1866/FactSheet_ Indonesia_DRRR_2014.pdf 2 GOI (2007), Law of Republic of Indonesia Number 24, Year 2007 concerning Disaster Management, Government of Indonesia, available at http://www.preventionweb.net/files/10841_indonesialaw242007concerningdisaste.pdf (in English) and http://www.bnpb.go.id/uploads/migration/pubs/1.pdf (in Indonesian) Knowledge Sharing for Capacity Building of Indonesia’s Disaster Risk Management Agencies TECHNICAL NOTE 8 Figure 1 Disaster Risk Index Map of Indonesia, 2013 Vulnerability and Risk The National Disaster Management Authority (BNPB)’s Indonesia Disaster Risk Index or 497 (Indeks Risiko Bencana Indonesia/IRBI) 323 174 of 2013 indicates that out of the total 508 districts (415 rural and 93 urban), 497 districts/ districts/cities prone moderate risk high risk to disaster cities have been listed as prone to disaster, out of which 323 districts/cities (65%) have district/cities district/cities been identified as “high risk” and 174 (35%) as “moderate risk” districts. In addition to inheriting post-colonial poorly consructed school facilities, inadequate health services, poverty and regional inequalities, these districts also undergo rapid but unplanned urbanization and population growth and environmental 93 urban 508 district 415 rural degradation. Coupled with the effect of climate change communities living in the districts and municipalities are increasingly exposed to new hazards, aggravating the already existing vulnerabilities. Among the most vulnerable Source: IRBI BNPB, 2013 population are the elderly, children, women (especially pregnant and lactating women), and persons with disability. 2 3 Figure 2. Flood in one of the main road in North Jakarta, 2013 Disaster loss and mortality In terms of disaster losses, Indonesia ranks 12th among the most vulnerable countries with high mortality risk from multiple hazards3. According to Indonesia’s Disaster Data and Information (DIBI), floods followed by strong winds, landslides and droughts killed the largest number of people in Indonesia between 1815 and 2015. During the period of 2005 and 2015 alone, some 189,711 people lost their lives due to natural disasters. Hydrometeorological disasters such as flood, strong wind, landslide and forest fires accounts for 82 % of the natural disaster events in the country. DIBI’s most recent data recorded that in January 2016 alone, 174 hazard events claiming 20 lives, with around 700,000 people affected and/ or displaced and almost 3000 units of houses damaged from these events4. indonesia ranks12th most vulnerable country 1815 flood, strong wind, landslide, drought, caused casualities 2015 2005 189,711 people lost their lives 2015 174 20 700,000 3,000 disaster people units of houses january events casualties affected damaged 2016 flood, strong wind, landslides, drought, forest fire forest fire 82 % of the natural disaster events 3 World Bank and UNISDR (2009) Disaster Risk Management Programs for Priority Countries Summary http://www.unisdr.org/files/14757_6thCGCountryProgramSummaries1.pdf 4 www.dibi.bnpb.go.id Knowledge Sharing for Capacity Building of Indonesia’s Disaster Risk Management Agencies TECHNICAL NOTE 8 disaster has a larger economic impact 2004 4.5 US$ 30 US$ billion A major aceh earthquake = 3% indonesian gdp earthquake billion could cause losses 2006 2015 30 % US$ Yogyakarta earthquake estimated losses of regional gdp land & forest fires 16.1 billion Disaster economic loss in Indonesia at least IDR 221 trillion (USD 16.1 relation to GDP billion), equivalent to 1.9% of 2015 GDP, and A report by the World Bank and GFDRR shows more than twice the reconstruction cost after that while the annual economic impact of the Aceh tsunami6. natural disasters is estimated at 0.3% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) over 2000-2010, DIBI has also recorded that overtime, with simulations show that a major earthquake cumulative impacts from small and recurrent (which occur once in 250 years) could cause disasters can also equal or even exceed those losses in excess of US$30 billion or 3% of GDP from larger catastrophes, thus exacerbating of Indonesia. It is evident that disasters have economic loss, reinforcing poverty and a larger economic impact at local and sub- compounding the hardship that poor national levels. The 2004 earthquake in the communities have endured, especially when province of Aceh, for instance, was estimated disaster events lead to damage and loss of to lead to economic impact of US$4.5 billion public infrastructure and facilities. The loss of (i.e. 1% of national GDP), which represents private assets, mostly housing, also contributes 54% of the province’s GDP. Likewise, the to significant and consistent ranking in 2006 earthquake in the province of Yogyakarta damage and loss assessment reports. These caused losses estimated at 30% of the regional stagerring figures highlights the importance GDP5. The World Bank also recently estimated of managing Indonesia’s disaster and climate that major land and fores fires which occurred risks if the country were to protect its hard in 2015 alongside a string El Nino had cost fought development gains. Figure 3. The SAR Team operation during the landslide in Banjarnegara, Central Java, 2015. 5 The World Bank & GFDRR, “Indonesia: Advancing a National Disaster Risk Financing Strategy – Options for Consideration,” available at http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTDISASTER/Resources/Indonesia_DRFI_Report_ FINAL.pdf 6 World Bank (2015) Indonesia Economic Quarterly, Reforming amid uncertainty http://pubdocs.worldbank.org/pubdocs/publicdoc/2015/12/844171450085661051/IEQ-DEC-2015-ENG.pdf 4 5 Understanding risk: national commitment Management 2015-2019, and Sendai The National Medium Term Development Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015 Plan (RPJMN) for 2015-2019 had identified - 2030.7 The Jakstra will become the guideline 136 most vulnerable districts/municipalities for a coordinated, integrated and targeted that will experience rapid development, and conduct of disaster management as mandated targeting the reduction of disaster risk index by Article 4 of the Disaster Management Law in these regions by at least 20% by 2019, 24 year 2007. including through contribution of knowledge sharing in disaster management and disaster The RPJMN8 outlined strategies that includes: risk reduction. A detailed policy and strategy (Jakstra) on disaster management to achieve a. To internalize disaster risk reduction in such target has been issued by the BNPB in national and local development planning April 2016, which is based on the national b. To reduce community’s vulnerability to medium term development plan (RPJMN) of disaster 2015-2019, the National Plan for Disaster c. To improve the capacity of governments at the national and local levels and community in disaster management. Figure 4. A densely settlement along the riverbanks in Malang, East Java. 7 Kepala BNPB Tandatangani Dokumen Kebijakan dan Strategi Penanggulangan Bencana 2015 – 2019, 22 April 2016”, see http://www.bnpb.go.id/berita/2910/kepala-bnpb-tandatangani-dokumen-kebijakan-dan-strategi- penanggulangan-bencana-2015-2019 8 GOI, 2015, National Medium-Term Development Planning (RPJMN) 2015-2019, available at http://www.bappenas. go.id/index.php?cID=5009 Knowledge Sharing for Capacity Building of Indonesia’s Disaster Risk Management Agencies TECHNICAL NOTE 8 Disaster Risk Management The key differences between BAKORNAS and (DRM) Agencies in Indonesia BNPB are that, while the former was known only as having ad-hoc inter-ministerial status, The enactment of the Disaster Management the latter is a larger organization with full agency Law Number 24 year 2007 post the status, headed by a Cabinet Minister level Aceh Tsunami marked a significant step official reporting directly to thePresident. In an in the strengthening of national disaster emergency phase, the BNPB has the authority management capacity. As mandated by the to direct line ministries, and is independently Law, a new legal structure called the National resourced including to support other Disaster Management Authority (BNPB) was ministries, sub-national governments, and non established with responsibility to coordinate and government actors. BNPB is also mandated to manage the conduct of disaster management, coordinate the line ministries in implementing substituting the previous policy coordination preventative measures and leading recovery body called the BAKORNAS-PB.9 BNPB main from the impact of disasters. The new law tasks are to formulate policy, prepare guidelines, and related DM structures demonstrate a and coordinate activities related to disaster commitment from the Indonesian government management; share disaster management and the parliamentarians to change the way knowledge with the public; sets national DRM conduct was done and creates a genuine standards for disaster management; manages opportunity to make disaster risk management and coordinate national and international as collective responsibilities of many actors, assistance related to post disaster recovery. but with strong coordination and resources to facilitate timely actions. Figure 5. The main office of Indonesian National Disaster Management Authority (BNPB) in Jakarta. Photo Credit: Pusdatin BNPB 9 BAKORNAS, National Coordinating Agency for Disaster Management 10 This is based on the data at the time of this Note preparation in May 2016. 6 7 As Indonesia is highly decentralized, the competent DRM institution is a daunting organizational structure of the BNPB is also challenge. Even the same types of disaster replicated at the provincial and district/municipal may have different impacts, different solutions, levels. There are currently10 34 provincial different responses and different characteristics level disaster management agency called the due to locations, cultures, preparedness, and Provincial BPBDs, and 342 Local DM Agencies local knowledge. Recent examples of major at district and municipal levels called the district disasters of similar type but with different or municipal BPBDs. Under the decentralized characteristics, impacts and responses in principles, the BPBDs are the instrument of sub- Indonesia include the violent eruption of Mt. national governments (i.e., established through Merapi in Central Java in October-November by law of the respective administration). The 2010 killing many people, continued eruptions same principles also transfer both administrative of Mt. Sinabung since 2013 hampering local and fiscal responsibilities from the national to livelihood, and brief eruption of Mt. Kelud in provincial and district/municipal governments, February 2014 forcing closures of 8 airports. including in terms of BPBDs management, The challenge for Indonesia’s DRM agencies is financing and operations. to learn from every disaster of today for better and more effective response and recovery in the next one. Challenges in Building Disaster Risk Management (DRM) In addition, as BNPB and the BPBDs are Capacities relatively new institutions with new legal structure, shifting the culture from response to With a backdrop of its multi-hazards, risk and risk reduction, especially at the local level some vulnerabilities, geographic size and archipelagic located in remote islands, building a capacity to nature, compounded by the complex deliver consistent services will require serious administrative and fiscal decentralization, investment and innovation in human resources, managing Indonesia disaster and building infrastructure and organizational processes. Figure 6. The Rapid Response Team during the Disaster Drill in Bengkulu. 11 World Bank. “Indonesia: Strengthening Knowledge Sharing Capacity of the National Agency for Disaster Management.” Aide-Memoire of World Bank Mission, June 11-19, 2013 Knowledge Sharing for Capacity Building of Indonesia’s Disaster Risk Management Agencies TECHNICAL NOTE 8 General institutional challenge DM agencies at the national and local level have to cover at least 12 main types of hazards and multi-hazards occurrences and 12 hazard types of 1500 per year recurrences with differing levels of disaster response capacity and ability to manage the incident consequences of crises at the local level. With a high frequency of occurrences of more than 1,500 incidents per year (or approximately 4.3 events per day), BNPB and BPBDs must manage and coordinate collaboration among many stakeholders from government (central & 4,3 per day events regional levels, armed forces, national police), private sector (equipment suppliers, the media), general public (NGOs & CSOs, universities, 400 offices bpbd 20 in each office community), which is a very huge task. Under decentralization BNPB does not have a direct +/- staff authority over BPBDs. But as Indonesia is also a unitary state, a general lack of local capacity and resources means that local disasters may eventually become a National Government Source: World Bank estimation, 2016 problem. Figure 7. Mount Semeru Community Preparedness and Drill, East Java. 8 9 BNPB therefore continues to invest in building documentation and sharing of BNPB’s the technical capacity and resources of these operational experience, insufficient use BPBDs. Many innovative approaches are being of IT systems to capture and disseminate invented to enable capacity and resources knowledge, significant loss of institutional to be able to timely flow to the disaster areas memory through high turnover of BNPB regardless whether disaster management is managers, and insufficient training of new administratively and fiscally decentralized or managers and staff due to their heavy daily not. As building local resilience takes time, administrative and operational duties. delay in disaster response and recovery • Knowledge sharing at the domestic assistance means that the affected population level between BNPB 400 provincial and will be denied the proper care and services that local disaster risk management agencies they are entitled to. (BPBDs) and among the BPBDs is limited as there is insufficient capture of the lessons But, building institutional capacity is a long learned in the implementation of DRM process. As an illustration, to provide training to regulations and guidelines, BNPB currently each of the existing 400 provincial and district cannot meet the high training needs of the BPBDs, there is no enough day in a year. On local BPBDs, domestic knowledge sharing the other hand, managing a mass training for between BNBP and BPBDs and among more than 8,000 BPBD personnel (assuming BPBDs is often ad hoc and not systematic, each BPBD has 20 staffs and volunteers), and DRM experiences in other line ministries will require large centralized training facilities and agencies are not captured. and air travel. This illustrates that building the • Finally, BNPB’s knowledge sharing capacity of Indonesia’s DRM agencies cannot at the international level is restricted be done through traditional training approach. by insufficient clarity on the objective for international knowledge sharing and the responsibilities for managing those activities, Challenges in knowledge unclear lack of strategic selection and management/exchange validation of Indonesia’s DRM experiences Findings of a joint mission carried out in 2013 worth sharing, limited cataloging of by the World Bank Institute, the East Asia Indonesian DRM experiences for sharing, and Pacific Sustainable Development unit limited awareness and understanding of and BNPB determined that there are strong results-orientation and possible instruments potential linkages and synergies between for knowledge sharing, and insufficient BNPB’s internal knowledge management with overview of financial resources for its knowledge sharing activities at domestic and international knowledge sharing activities. international levels. The mission also identified capacity challenges needs at all three levels – Through the joint mission, BNPB leadership internal, domestic, and international11: was aware of many of these lacks of capacity and needs for improvement. Since 2013, the • Within BNPB, knowledge management World Bank’s assistance for strengthening and sharing is hampered by limited capacity in knowledge sharing in disaster mechanisms and procedural obstacles in management addressed the three levels of internal communications and sharing of need at the internal, national and international practical experiences, lack of systematic as previously outlined. Knowledge Sharing for Capacity Building of Indonesia’s Disaster Risk Management Agencies 11 Chapter 2 Knowledge as the Solution to Building the Capacity of DRM Agencies Why Knowledge is important for DRM Agencies Knowledge exchange is the process of peer- on finding ways to transfer raw data into to-peer learning for sharing, transferring, and useful forms of information that will eventually enhancing a successful result in the development be transformed into knowledge. Meanwhile process. In knowledge exchange, development knowledge sharing (KS) is the process by practitioners learn the practical knowledge which individuals collectively and iteratively from those who have had the experience or refines thoughts, ideas or suggestions in the are in the progress of experiencing them. In light of experience or the process of developing, this knowledge exchange, it is important to transferring, integrating, and using knowledge be connected and to have prompt access to effectively and efficiently. For the purpose of practical knowledge and solutions. this document, the last definition by the World Bank is used. The World Bank has a number of working definitions around knowledge. One definition Although there are a number of disciplines coined during Technical Coordination Meeting for and sectors whose works are characterized Training and Education in Disaster Management by constant discovery of issues, challenges defines knowledge management (KM) as and solutions, Disaster Risk Management, a series of tools, techniques, and strategies especially in Indonesia, stands out as one that for retaining, analysing, organizing, enhancing is most compelling. First, although sometimes and distributing knowledge and operational predictable, disasters always have unexpected experiences of an organization. KM focuses elements and each event is unique. Disaster Figure 8. Knowledge exchange visit of the Indonesian DRM agencies to the Korean National Disaster Management Institute (NDMI) in South Korea, June 2016. Knowledge Sharing for Capacity Building of Indonesia’s Disaster Risk Management Agencies TECHNICAL NOTE 8 Figure 8. A workshop on knowledge management held by the BNPB's Center for Training and Education (Pusdiklat). management profession is always faced by the How Knowledge is Captured challenge of having to quickly learn on-the-job. and Documented For Indonesia, in particular, disaster occurs so frequently and in many different locations in that the window of opportunity to learn from one With various operational practices from pre event is so short, before the next one comes. disaster, during disaster, and post disaster, the This is where knowledge capture, storage and knowledge and experiences can be captured, sharing become very important. documented, and packaged into manual, module or guidelines. A case that contains In view of the challenges faced by DRM agencies a specific experience, how the situation or in Indonesia as outlined above, in 2013 the disaster was managed, the challenges, lessons World Bank supported Government of Indonesia learned, solutions and actions taken is called a through BNPB a pilot program for strengthening knowledge asset. Knowledge assets which are the capacity of BNPB and the BPBDs to capture based on actual operational experiences can and share its experiences on disaster risk help policy makers faces the same situation management across the country. The objective in other locations make critical decisions. was to foster domestic retention and scale Knowledge assets ideally should be pooled up of DRM knowledge and expertise, use the in a (digital) library and accessible for all knowledge to improve operational effectiveness staffs, which in this case are those of BNPB in managing disaster risks in Indonesia, and to and BPBDs. A digital library containing these share the DRM knowledge internationally. knowledge assets can be the fastest way to get practical information on how to manage 12 13 rekompak community settlement plan usd 2.6 million for housing 2015 usd 450,000 for settlement infrastructure magelang sleman sleman, klaten, magelang, boyolali 106 villages 312 basic infrastructure 106 villages 476 units of houses 2,040 units of houses 1,145 basic infrastructure disaster, good resources for research, good of how knowledge assets can be transferred resources for training, and not limited to to solve problems with similar situations. organizational learning prosess. Learning from The Mount Merapi erupted in 2010 and left experiences would help to a better delivery or hundreds of casualties, damaged houses service in disaster management. and livelihood, and left thousands of people evacuated. The local government issued a The case of relocating community living in a risk map of risk area prohibiting communities to area of Mount Merapi, one of the most active live in the risk zones. By using a Community volcanoes in Indonesia, is a good example Based Rehabilitation and Resettlement of Figure 9. The house built by local community after the Merapi eruption in Yogyakarta. Knowledge Sharing for Capacity Building of Indonesia’s Disaster Risk Management Agencies TECHNICAL NOTE 8 Communities (REKOMPAK) approach, local million) for housing through collective work. governments convinced the community to The best practice in Mount Merapi could be understand the risk of living in their previous a good example for other local governemnt settlement and it has led to a voluntarily to apply the same approach to relocate relocation. community affected by other volcano eruption, such Mount Sinabung, North Sumatra in 2013. The REKOMPAK has developed a Community The challenge, however, is to identify and Settlement Plan (RPP) for 106 villages and transfer the appropriate level of knowledge that built 476 units of houses in Magelang district, can be applied in Sinabung. Central Java and 2,040 units in Sleman district with 312 basic infrastructure activity points, including infrastructure for disaster risk How Knowledge is Shared and reduction. REKOMPAK has also facilitated Transferred the development of 1,145 basic infrastructure activity points in 106 villages affected by The experiences that are relevant for disaster the eruption and lahar flows in the districts management effectiveness usually are made of Sleman, Klaten, Magelang and Boyolali. by actors, players, policy makers. During pre- REKOMPAK had also been able to bring back disaster, officials at BNPB or BPBD levels often the value of collective work that has been do not think of how the lessons and experiences the social characteristic and strength of the can be shared with staffs. Their experiences community, resulting in a value equal with or tacit knowledge are often forgotten or lost IDR 5.7 billion (USD 450,000) for settlement wihout being documented. infrastructure and IDR 22.2 billion (USD 2.6 Figure 10. BNPB's Emergency Operation Center (Pusdalops) during the visit from the World Bank delegation. 14 15 Following the Art of Knowledge Exchange government and non-government, gather by the World Bank Institute (2013), different and share the experiences and practices in ways of sharing knowledge could be applied managing local disaster. to implement knowledge sharing activities between BNPB and BPBD. For example, BNPB From the capacity strengthening initiative in holds a coordination meeting every year with all knowledge exchange, the benefit for BNPB BPBDs in Indonesia. Experts from ministerial and BPBD by applying knowledge exchange is level, leaders at provincial and distric level, from reflected in the following table. Scope Benefit Increasing awareness and trust Knowledge Exchange (KE) can build the culture of experience on the importance of learning exchange with different people, regions, or countries with the hope from direct experience (“seeing is to improve the quality of DRM agencies’ operational practices in believing”). disaster management Strengthening organisation’s • KE can reduce the time needed for formal learning policies and governance in • KE can serve as one of the ways to retain knowledge and managing knowledge experience in the community of knowledge Building skills and capacity in how • KE can identify new innovative and interactive practices in DM to capture, document & package, • KE can create appropriate pattern for the mechanism of and share knowledge information presentation or knowledge management • KE can improve performance in DM through the rapid provision of practical guidelines and field experience Figure 11. The Chief of BNPB as a speaker during the Third High-Level Meeting on Country-led Knowledge Sharing in Washington D.C., 2016. Knowledge Sharing for Capacity Building of Indonesia’s Disaster Risk Management Agencies Volcano Merapi 17 Chapter 3 The Development of Knowledge Management Capacity at BNPB and BPBDs Together with the initiatives and modalities Visioning Knowledge Based that the Indonesian DRM agencies have DRM Agency made available, the World Bank has carried out the following activities in the Capacity A visioning workshop was held in September Strengthening for Knowledge Sharing program 2013 involving 20 middle and senior managers during 2013-2015. (Echelon 1 and 2) of the BNPB to initiate the development of a Knowledge Sharing policy framework document. Senior managers agreed Figure 2 Knowledge sharing capacity pyramid to aim for a vision in which “BNPB is a center of excellence for DM in Indonesia, the region and globally, and an efficient knowledge sharing institution providing innovative and effective DM solutions.” Using a knowledge sharing international capacity pyramid, the visioning wokshop became a reference for BNPB senior managers to establish a task force and set up a good communication framework between leaders to domestic staffs and partners. Table below shows the objectives and the expected results that BNPB wanted to achieve internal as a result of the visioning workshop. Level Objective Expected Results International Develop Indonesia as a Knowledge capture Knowledge Hub on DM Documentation of skills and knowledge on knowledge and experience through the creation of archive and database systems; standard templates or formats for reporting and presentation; effective simple procedures Domestic Foster the sharing of Knowledge documentation and packaging good practice on DM • Skills and knowledge on knowledge products or other across Indonesia to learning materials such as leaflets, brochures, fact sheet, make DM efforts more work procedures, videos of operational field experience effective; enhance learning accessible to BPBDs and other agencies mechanisms and trainings • Innovative and interactive capacity building activities, on DM, based on local such as case studies or exchange visits to disaster areas evidence Internal Improve BNPB’s and Knowledge sharing BPBDs internal processes • Skills and knowledge on how to package Indonesian to more effectively build experience to become generic knowledge for use by and retain DM capacity other countries • Exchange of experience in Indonesia in international forums • Use of InaDRTG as a knowledge Hub in DRM, at least in Asia Pacific region Knowledge Sharing for Capacity Building of Indonesia’s Disaster Risk Management Agencies TECHNICAL NOTE 8 Provision of Legal and Institutional Framework Capacity Building in Knowledge Capture Through a knowledge sharing policy and governance workshop involving BNPB senior The Art of Knowledge managers, a national policy on knowledge Exchange management for disaster management was The “Art of Knowledge” training was held for issued as a Regulation of the Head of BNPB BNPB senior and mid management officials, (Perka) Number 21 year 2014 and a subsequent their staffs, and selected partners in April Inter-Deputy Working Group was established. 2014 to develop BNPB’s internal capacity This regulation became the basis for setting to systematically design and implement up key principles, knowledge sharing activities, knowledge sharing activities domestically and implementation guidelines for actors active and internationally. The training provided in disaster management in Indonesia. The the methodological underpinning for result- regulation stipulates the main role of the INA oriented knowledge sharing, and resulted in DRTG (see below) as the centre of knowledge the development of several tools to allow for and experience in disaster management to more results-oriented planning, delivery and facilitate knowledge sharing not only internally follow-up of knowledge sharing activities on within the DM agencies, but also nationally and DM in Indonesia through a DM Solutions Finder internationally. System. In addition, the Art of Knowledge Exchange guide has subsequently been A working group or Task force consisting translated to Indonesian for more extensive of each unit in BNPB was tasked to share use. data, information, operational practices and experiences, as well as to evaluate, review, and provide inputs of BNPB’s knowledge products. Figure 12. BNPB's Prime Secretary on his opening remarks at the Knowledge Sharing Policy and Governance Workshop. 18 19 The Art of Knowledge capturing and packaging A 3-day workshop on knowledge capturing and 2014 -2015 packaging of operational experiences was held from March 26-28 at Gadjah Mada University 14basic training sessions and Training-of-Trainers (UGM) in Yogyakarta. The workshop brought together 45 participants from UGM, the local 350participants from BNPB, BPBDs, NGOs, and universities BPBD and BNPB staff and management from Jakarta. The Art of Knowledge Capturing 70Knowledge Assets and Packaging developed the capacity for systematic capturing and documentation of 2Knowledge Capturing modules operational lessons learned from disaster management, that included how to document +10master trainers tacit lessons learned from actual stakeholders involved in incidents. and produced a core body of 6 initial trainers. Subsequently several trainings were offered to district-level disaster management agencies TOT of The Art of Knowledge (BPBDs) and resulted in the development of capturing and packaging the first completed knowledge assets. The To scale up the standardized methodology on main objective of the TOT was to create a systematically capturing lessons learned from first cadre of trainers who will scale up the actual operational experiences on disaster delivery of knowledge capturing skills and management in Indonesia, a Training of methodologies across BNPB. The outcome Trainers (TOT) was held in September 2014 of the TOT was an initial group of “knowledge Figure 13. The practice of Knowledge Capture with local students and BPBDs in Yogyakarta. Knowledge Sharing for Capacity Building of Indonesia’s Disaster Risk Management Agencies TECHNICAL NOTE 8 capturing” specialists who were equipped addition, support included training on distance with a methodology, technical video recording learning methodologies and technology such skills, and pedagogical tips to train others on as video conferencing and e-learning. knowledge capturing. As a follow up, the INA-DRTG conducted a study In 2014-2015, BNPB has already conducted 14 visit to Vietnam Development Information Center basic training sessions and Training-of-Trainers (VDIC), facilitated by DRM Unit of the World Bank involving 350 participants from BNPB, BPBDs, Office Jakarta. 4 staffs from INA-DRTG learned NGOs, and universities; has 70 Knowledge about: 1) VDIC’s facility and its management Assets from a variety of disaster management experience as a distance learning facility; 2) experiences in Indonesia; 2 modules on VDIC’s experience in managing blended learning Knowledge Capturing processes for facilitators activities using video conferencing technology; and participants; +10 master trainers; and 3) planning, designing, and implementing a Knowledge Management System (KMS)/ distance learning activities in VDIC; 4) building Solution Finder Apps. capacity for local disaster management agencies in Vietnam, including managing knowledge Distance Learning and sharing activities between Disaster Management Blended Learning training Centers (DMC) at national and local levels; 5) A Distance Learning and Blended Learning organizing and conducting a video conference training was provided for BNPB in July 2014 in real time by connecting with several sites, at the INA-DRTG. This includes an analysis of observing the learning process, and managing current capacities and development of a skills technical problems. matrix to strengthen existing staff, as well as strengthening the team in selected positions. In Figure 14. BNPB hosted the session of a Global Development Learning Network. 20 21 Try out of Knowledge Sharing In line with knowledge sharing supports, Damage and Loss Assessment working World Bank – GFDRR have also supported with the OpenStreetMap (OSM) tools a range of domestic and international and community, and how the data was knowledge sharing activities. integrated into the national database.  Learning from Community of Practice in  Learning from flood preparedness from the Disaster Management. DRM Agency of DKI Jakarta WB-GFDRR together with AIFDR With the World Bank facilitation, a number developed the INASAFE tool to help of countries have come to Indonesia to local and national DRM agencies in learn about the community of practice improving preparedness and disaster risk in flood preparedness in Greater Jakarta reduction. In June 2013, BNPB became (DKI Jakarta) province from the local DRM the host for a meeting session with Global agency (BPBD). Development Learning Network (GDLN), in which GDLN Tokyo was the hub. It  Learning from flood collaborative mapping was BNPB’s first experience to become in post Merapi eruption the host for a GDLN session, connecting The experience of the collaborative 4 countries: Indonesia, the Philippines, mapping in post Merapi eruption areas Mongolia, and Srilanka. BNPB shared its has been used and adapted in the Slum knowledge on how participatory mapping Resettlement Program of the Ministry of has been used by the Government of Public Works and Settlement. Indonesia in contingency planning and Figure 15. A visit of the Government of Gambia delegation to the AHA Center in Jakarta. Knowledge Sharing for Capacity Building of Indonesia’s Disaster Risk Management Agencies TECHNICAL NOTE 8  Learning from Emergency Response in Indonesia BNPB’s Modalities and The government of Mongolia, the Good Practices to Support Philippines, and Lao PDR made an exchange the Initiative in Knowledge visit to Indonesia to learn from BNPB about Exchange/Sharing their emergency response regulation and facilities. Both the Government of Indonesia and BNPB are determined to both foster domestic retention  Learning from Post Disaster Rehabilitation and scale up of its DM expertise, as well as and Reconstruction to share its DM knowledge internationally. A WB-GFDRR facilitated countries in the number of modalities, initiatives, and good regional level up to Africa to learn from practices exist partly as a result of the technical BNPB about post-disaster rehabilitation assistance provided by the World Bank that and reconstruction. Countries like Timor show the commitment of the Government and Leste, Lao PDR, Gambia, Mongolia, and the BNPB as well as government institutions for Philippines learned directly how affected disaster management related in meeting the communities rebuild their houses and vision to become the centre of excellence on self-reliantly relocated to safer places. The disaster management in Indonesia, the region, Government of Mongolia, during the visit in and globally, and an efficient knowledge sharing 2014, was in the progress of reviewing their institution providing innovative and effective law on disaster management, and had sent disaster management solutions: their disaster management agency, NEMA, to learn from BNPB about emergency BNPB established the Indonesia-Disaster Relief response and coordination between Training Ground (INA-DRTG) and Indonesia ministries and institutions, including legal Disaster Risk Reduction Knowledge Center aspects in disaster management. (INA DRR KC). The INA-DRTG serves as the Figure 16. Two government officials from the government of Mongolia during their visit to BNPB. 22 23 Headquarters and Secretariat of the Disaster Knowledge exchange or peer-to-peer learning, Management Rapid Response Unit, centre is an effective way to share, transfer, and for disaster information and monitoring and expand successful experience in development. assessment of disaster risks, backup operation Development practitioners are keen to learn control centre (Pusdalops), and centre for practical experiences from those who have training and simulation of the Pusdalops, and had the experience or are having similar international disaster management training experience. People need to be connected with academy. each other and have easy and quick access to knowledge and practical solutions, including At the same time INA DRR KC has continually in disaster risk management. been the centre for knowledge collection (disaster histories, indigenous wisdom, past BNPB’s mandate states that it needs to researches), knowledge exploration (research, collaborate with partners and local DRM assessments), and prediction for early warning. agencies (BPBDs) to ensure effective and live Both the INA-DRTG and the INA DRR KC saving execution of disaster management. Local are some of the major steps in achieving mechanisms, including knowledge sharing, are BNPB’s vision as a centre of excellence in crucial in ensuring this success. disaster management both nationally and internationally. No single disaster is alike. Even the same types of disaster may have different impacts, different The facilities have been used accordingly, solutions, different responses and characteristics evidence of how knowledge sharing can be due to locations, cultures, preparedness, and conducted at low cost without face-to-face local knowledge. Each incident is a singular meeting, by President Jokowi who held a video learning experience. The following three cases Conference in November 2014 to get first of volcano eruption response and management account of the situation of internally displaced in three volcano hazard areas show that learning people affected by Sinabung eruption and flood from each individual at post-crises stage is in West Aceh. The Head of BNPB, Minister of important to be able to provide effective and live Social Affairs, and Minister of Bappenas were saving responses to future crises and disaster also present during the video conference. risk reduction efforts. Figure 17. Indonesia's Disaster Relief Training Ground in Sentul, West Java. Knowledge Sharing for Capacity Building of Indonesia’s Disaster Risk Management Agencies TECHNICAL NOTE 8 24 Museum Tsunami Aceh 25 Chapter 4 Next Step and LessoNs Learned Building Organizational knowledge sharing in its own organizational Knowledge Sharing (OKS) culture and knowledge sharing behaviors as second nature that are integrated into daily operations, internally within the organization With the systematic development of knowledge and replicated to regional organizations such management capacity at the BNPB and BPBDs as BPBDs or immediate stakeholders such as from visioning, to planning, capacity building, universities and NGOs. and initial piloting, there is now an opportunity to scale up and integrate the process as part As the first phase of support had been of institutionalizing the knowledge practices. provided to introduce the Art of Knowledge The main goal of developing Organizational Exchange with various processes from Knowledge Sharing (OKS) is to infuse capturing to packaging, storing and to delivery. within the DNA of the organization the A number of trainers and facilitators have institutional character that will put knowledge been trained in the knowledge management as the default operational requirement of process and knowledge sharing mechanisms the organization. The OKS engagement with throughout the engagement, equipped with BNPB is a needs-based and interest-based tools to disseminate the process and replicate capacity building process that involves internal results. The knowledge assets that have been and external audiences, and has taken place produced as knowledge products and the at internal and domestic levels. The phases trainers and facilitators are organizational assets of OKS covers the 8 pillars of Knowledge of BNPB to scale-up its knowledge sharing Sharing Capability Framework that should be operations, making them integral within the adapted in scope, scale, and timeframe based organization, provide innovative add-ons to their on ongoing activities and work plan of BNPB, existing learning programs, and securing the executed based on the challenges identified collection of documented knowledge within the and vision established at the initial stage of the organization. Through making knowledge as engagement that frames the OKS process. In part of the basic requirement for BNPB officers an OKS engagement, BNPB should embed to operate, regular capacity building program Figure 17. BNPB's Emergency Operation Center on a daily activity. Knowledge Sharing for Capacity Building of Indonesia’s Disaster Risk Management Agencies TECHNICAL NOTE 8 and resources that the organization have general practitioners outside within and outside allocated can now be utilized to adopt the the government, a recognition system through new tools and methodology, and gradually professional certification is being developed apply them in the conduct of capacity building by an independent committee accredited by of institutions and personnel involved in DRM the National Professional Certification Body in Indonesia. Such an organizational scale of (BNSP). The committee’s primary role is to the knowledge management practice will ensure facilitate a process of assessing the professional that Indonesia’s DRM practice will gradually qualification of an individual who have fulfilled move from operation and response- based to a specific minimum requirement to receive a knowledge and planning based. This approach particular level of proficiency. At present, the will be fully in line with the basic philosophy certification process for DRM professional is still of Law 24/2007 on Disaster Management under development and will gradually provide from re-active to preventive. Results of the OKS recognition for 3 levels of expertise: operator, efforts could in turn be shared to other countries analyst, and expert. Within each level, there are to secure Indonesia’s aim as a knowledge hub 3 grades: entry, junior, and senior. on DRM. A similar professional recognition system can also be found within the Indonesian civil service career system, called the functional track. Many Toward Building Professional areas of professions such as lecturers, medical Track for DRM Practitioner workers, or researchers have had functional career track ladders developed for civil servants. Each professional area usually has a national As part of the effort to professionalize DRM government agency serving as its lead (e.g., the expertise, there are two tracks of recognition development of researcher functional career is that DRM practitioners could pursue. For lead by the Indonesian Science Institute). Figure 18. The practice of knowledge capturing with the Jakarta province Disaster Management Agency. 26 27 The BNPB could consider taking the lead in by using every disaster as an opportunity to developing this functional career track for learn and improve. Such an attitude is key the staffs of BNPB and BPBDs or of other in making knowledge management more government ministries and agencies who wish concrete/tangible for an action-oriented to pursue professional functional career in agency like BNPB and BPBDs. the area of DRM. The Indonesian civil service b. The Inclusion of knowledge sharing system already has a well-developed merit and mechanism in BNPB: The Head of BNPB’s its corresponding remuneration system for Regulation on Knowledge Sharing for these functional career tracks. disaster management provides a policy framework that sets out the key principles Knowledge Management in DRM combined for actors active in disaster management with this functional track system will provide in Indonesia. The next step is to make use DRM practitioners in BNPB and BPBDs with of this policy framework to ensure that tools and processes that will allow them to claim knowledge capturing, documentation, and credit points for the operational knowledge sharing become a mandatory requirement they have accumulated, documented, and for all BNPB and BPBD staffs to work on as shared. These credit points could then be part of their day-to-day assignment. assessed through a structured peer review c. A change in working culture is required process to determine the qualification level for knowledge to strengthen operational of government DRM practitioners. Those capacity: As disaster risk management deals practitioners who are Government employees with concrete subjects that often do not and have had professional qualifications from provide options, but need to be confronted, the independent professional certification body changing the mindset of DRM professionals could also receive comparable professional from reactive to reflective becomes recognition from the Government functional important. While DRM practitioners need to track system. be able to properly react to particular disaster circumstances, the habit of reflecting on what works and what doesn’t from past operations Lessons Learned will improve capacity over time. d. The formation of the Working Group on KS/ KE helped build a pool of change for the Although it is still in its early stages of entire organization: The working group that development, the adoption of Knowledge was established under the Head of BNPB’s Management approach by BNPB has provided regulation on knowledge management useful lessons for further improvement and/or served as an effective mechanism to adoption by other sectors. These include the create a pool of change agents that can following key aspects: bring influence and culture change toward knowledge orientation to the rest of the a. The importance of leadership and organization. While initially the task of being commitment to use knowledge to strengthen in the working group is seen as additional operational effectiveness: BNPB leaders and burden, eventually the new knowledge key staffs have recognized the importance accumulated and visibly utilized are seen as of practical knowledge and experiences to rewarding by the working group members. improve operational effectiveness quickly Knowledge Sharing for Capacity Building of Indonesia’s Disaster Risk Management Agencies TECHNICAL NOTE 8 28