Kuala Lumpur | Johor Bahru | George Town | Kuantan | Kota Kinabalu | Kuching of Competitive Cities in Malaysia Achieving a System Annexes Achieving a System of Competitive Cities in Malaysia Annexes World Bank Reimbursable Advisory Service Social, Urban, Rural, and Resilience Global Practice November 2015 For further information refer to: Director General, Economic Planning Unit Prime Minister’s Department Block B5 & B6 Federal Government Administrative Centre 62502 PUTRAJAYA Website: www.epu.gov.my All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, copied, stored in any retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means - electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise; without prior permission of Economic Planning Unit, Prime Minister’s Department, Malaysia. TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables................................................................................................................................................... 4 List of Figures.................................................................................................................................................. 5 List of Boxes.................................................................................................................................................... 5 1. Data Resources for Economic Analysis (Annex for Chapter 2)......................................................................... 7 1.1. Data Utilization.......................................................................................................................................................... 7 1.1.1. Data received from the Government of Malaysia...................................................................................7 1.1.2. What have we done with the government data?....................................................................................7 2. Additional Information on Spatial Analysis (Annex for Chapter 3).................................................................. 8 2.1. Standardized Groupings of Land Use Classes........................................................................................................... 8 2.2. Technical Recommendations on the Management of GIS Data in Malaysia............................................................ 9 2.3. Modelling the impact of Malay Reserve Land on housing affordability in Johor Bahru.........................................11 3. Institutional Issues (Annexes for Chapter 4).............................................................................................. 14 3.1. Institutional Mapping.............................................................................................................................................. 14 3.2. List of Meetings for Institutional Analysis.............................................................................................................. 81 3.3. Institutional Analysis: Selected Global Case Studies............................................................................................. 82 3.3.1. Case study one: Decentralization in Indonesia.................................................................................. 82 3.3.2. Case study two: Decentralization in Mexico....................................................................................... 85 3.3.3. Case study three: Decentralization in Spain....................................................................................... 87 3.4. Metropolitan Management – Approaches and Implications..................................................................................89 3.4.1 Why metropolitan management matters for Malaysia ...................................................................... 89 3.4.2. The need for metropolitan governance through political transformation..........................................91 3.4.3. Metropolitan governance models........................................................................................................ 92 3.4.4. Global experiences............................................................................................................................... 92 3.4.5. Metropolitan (regional) authority: city examples............................................................................... 97 3.4.6. Metropolitan-level planning through non-governmental organizations............................................ 98 3.4.7. Metropolitan-level / regional government: city examples.................................................................. 99 3.4.8. Consolidated local government: city examples................................................................................ 102 3.4.9. Large infrastructure projects: special situations.............................................................................. 103 3.4.10. Lessons learned and policy implications.......................................................................................... 104 3.5. Mayor’s Wedge Analysis for Greater KL/KV PBTs.................................................................................................. 107 3.5.1. The Mayor’s wedge framework: a standardized framework for city governments.......................... 107 3.5.2. Overview: Greater Kuala Lumpur and Klang Valley PBTs................................................................. 108 3.5.3. Malaysia’s intergovernmental environment.......................................................................................110 3.5.4. Economic development strategy........................................................................................................ 112 3.5.5. City service delivery............................................................................................................................114 3.5.6. Business regulations and licensing....................................................................................................119 3.6. Examples of Formulae for Intergovernmental Fiscal Transfers............................................................................ 120 3.6.1. Formulae for Intergovernmental Fiscal Transfers in Australia........................................................ 120   Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  3  3.6.2. Formulae for Intergovernmental Fiscal Transfers in Indonesia........................................................122 3.7. Annex 3 References................................................................................................................................................ 125 4. Social Exclusion (Annexes for Chapter 5).................................................................................................. 131 4.1. Field Work Implementation Details........................................................................................................................131 4.1.1. Calendar of events for qualitative field work..................................................................................... 131 4.1.2. Summary of participants in focus group discussions........................................................................133 4.1.3. Focus group discussion questionnaire...............................................................................................134 4.1.4. Guidelines for focus group discussions............................................................................................ 136 4.1.5. General Structure of the Focus Group Discussion.............................................................................137 4.1.6. List of agencies in round table discussions.......................................................................................138 4.1.7. Agenda: Agency Meeting: EPU November 3rd, 2014.........................................................................138 4.1.8. List of Civil Society Organizations in Malaysia working with youth at risk..................................... 139 4.2. List of Federal Government Programs for Youth................................................................................................... 143 4.3. Case Study: England supports affordable housing through land planning and policy........................................ 147 4.4. Annex 4 References................................................................................................................................................ 148 LIST OF TABLES Table 2-1: Land use classifications by city............................................................................................................................ 9 Table 2-2: Estimated increase in rents and land values when MRL is excluded from urbanization................................. 13 Table 3-1: Institutional Map - Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur...................................................................................... 14 Table 3-2: Institutional Map: Federal Territory of Putrajaya.............................................................................................. 22 Table 3-3: Institutional Map: Selangor................................................................................................................................30 Table 3-4: Institutional Map: Penang State.........................................................................................................................40 Table 3-5: Institutional Map: Iskandar Malaysia Region, Johor..........................................................................................48 Table 3-6: Institutional Map: East Coast Economic Corridor area / Pahang......................................................................56 Table 3-7: Institutional Map: Kota Kinabalu, Sabah............................................................................................................64 Table 3-8: Institutional Map: Kuching, Sarawak.................................................................................................................. 72 Table 3-9: Meetings for Institutional Analysis..................................................................................................................... 81 Table 3-10: Metropolitan governance models.......................................................................................................................94 Table 3-11: Characteristics of metropolitan authorities....................................................................................................... 97 Table 3-12: Allocation of expenditure responsibilities for metropolitan-wide vs. local service provision......................106 Table 3-13: Comparing the mayor’s wedge of South Africa, Indonesia and Malaysia....................................................... 110 Table 3-14: DAU Variable Weights, 2011............................................................................................................................. 123 Table 4-1: Calendar of events for quantitative field work..................................................................................................131 Table 4-2: City by city gender participation..................................................................................................................... 133 Table 4-3: City by city ethnicity breakdown of participants............................................................................................ 134 Table 4-4: Educational attainment among focus group participants............................................................................... 134 Table 4-5: Structured questionnaire for the study on social inclusion............................................................................ 135 Table 4-6: Agencies in round table discussions................................................................................................................ 138 Table 4-7: CSOs in Malaysia working with youth at risk................................................................................................... 139 Table 4-8: Federal government programs for youth.......................................................................................................... 133 4 Annexes LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2-1: Malay Reserve Land and FELDA land in Johor Bahru conurbation.....................................................................11 Figure 2-2: The urban economics model on the impacts of Malay Reserve Land................................................................12 Figure 3-1: Greater Kuala Lumpur jurisdictions.................................................................................................................... 91 Figure 3-2: The Mayor’s Wedge Framework (scope and capacity).....................................................................................108 Figure 3-3: Greater Kuala Lumpur/Klang Valley PBTs.........................................................................................................109 Figure 3-4: Density compared to two transit factors.......................................................................................................... 276 Figure 3-5: Greater Manchester........................................................................................................................................... 118 Figure 3-6: LEPs in the UK.................................................................................................................................................... 119 Figure 3-7 Allocation Process of DAK................................................................................................................................. 125 Figure 4-1: City by city participants in focus group discussions....................................................................................... 133 Figure 4-2: Proportion of focus group discussants working............................................................................................... 134 LIST OF BOXES Box 3-1: Greater Vancouver Regional District: An evolutionary approach to regional, district-based metropolitan planning & management.....................................................................................................................................99 Box 3-2: New York Metropolitan Region: A legitimized civil society approach to megapolitan planning: the pioneering role of the regional planning association................................................................................ 101 Box 3-3: Seoul Metropolitan Government: Leadership from the metropolitan core..................................................... 105 Box 3-4: Selected recommendations for teen and young adult unemployment in U.S. cities...................................... 114 Box 3-5: Polycentricity and public transport: Los Angeles and Seoul........................................................................... 116 Box 3-6: Greater Manchester Combined Authority......................................................................................................... 118 Box 3-7: Regional arrangements for local authorities in the UK.................................................................................... 119   Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  5  1. DATA RESOURCES FOR ECONOMIC ANALYSIS (ANNEX FOR CHAPTER 2) 1.1 Data Utilization 1.1.1 Data received from the Government of Malaysia »» Population Census: for 2000 and 2010, disaggregated to the mukim level. [data and shape files] »» Household Expenditure Survey: for 2009/10, data at the conurbation level provided recently. »» Household Income Survey: for 2012, data at the conurbation level provided recently. »» Economic Census: for 2010, at the conurbation level, for manufacturing and services. »» Labor Force Survey: for 2008-2012, at state-level, with rural-urban differentiation. 1.1.2 What have we done with the government data? 1. Population Census: »» Calculated population density at conurbation level; »» Constructed the density gradient of each conurbation, which exhibits the population density by distance from the city center; »» Density gradients reflect the spatial form of cities, shaped by interactions between land markets, public investment, and regulations; »» Spatial structure can have important impacts on economic efficiency of cities — deficient spatial structure fragments labor and consumer markets, contributes to higher transactions costs by unnecessarily increasing distances between people and places, and increases the length of infrastructure network and as a result raises capital and operating costs. 2. Household Expenditure Survey: »» Calculated the cost of living in terms of share of transport and housing cost in total household expenditure; »» Association with productivity of conurbations. 3. Economic Census: »» The total factor productivity (TFP) by conurbation and industry, and its relation with economic density, education attainment, employment structure (ratio of non-Malay employees), ownership and legal status; »» Labor share and production structure; »» Capital intensity, return to capital and access to capital; »» Industrial specialization of conurbations using location quotient;   Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  7  »» Clustering of the six selected conurbations in the “sunset” and “sunrise” industries. 4. Labor Force Survey: »» Combined with Economic Census data; »» Analyzed education attainment by conurbation and industry (2-Digit level); »» Examined how it is related to productivity and household income in respective conurbation and industry. 5. Other data sources: Oxford Economics Global Cities Dataset, World Bank East Asia Urban Expansion Dataset, CEIC Malaysia data, and Global Risk Data Platform from United Nations Environment Programme for calculat- ing: »» Benchmarking with other large cities in the region; »» Economic density (measured by value of production per km2 and jobs per km2), industrial structure and productivity; »» Relation between public amenities and productivity; »» Capital investment at the state level; »» Built-up land in urban agglomerations with populations of 100,000 or more from satellites image data; »» Economic density as measured by GDP per km2. 2. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON SPATIAL ANALYSIS (ANNEX FOR CHAPTER 3) 2.1 Standardized Groupings of Land Use Classes 6. GIS data on current (“semasa”) land use were obtained as follows: »» Greater Kuala Lumpur: from DBKL for the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur (FTKL), and JPBD Selangor for the eight local authority areas adjacent to FTKL »» Johor Bahru: from JPBD Johor »» George Town: from JPBD Pulau Pinang »» Kota Kinabalu: from DBKK 7. As the land use classes used by each of these data sources varied somewhat, the classifications were standardized as shown in the table below. 8 Annexes Table 2-1 Land use classifications by city Standardized Greater Kuala Lumpur Johor Bahru George Town Kota Kinabalu Pertanian Pertanian Tanaman Agriculture Penternakan Ternakan Agricultural Penternakan dan Penternakan dan Akuakultur Akuakultur Perniagaan Perniagaan Perniagaan Commercial Area Perniagaan Terancang Perniagaan dan Perniagaan dan Commercial Perkhidmatan Perkhidmatan Perkhidmatan dan Perniagaan PD Hutan Hutan Hutan/Belukar/Paya Kawasan Hijau Hutan/Tumbuhan Semulajadi Tanah Kosong Tanah Kosong Tanah Kosong Semulajadi Tanah Lapang Tanah Lapang Tanah Lapang Green/Open Space Tanah Lapang/Bukit Tanah Lapang dan Tanah Lapang dan Rekreasi Rekreasi Sedia Ada Dikekalkan KL KRKL Industri Industri Industri Industrial Area Lombong Perlombongan Industrial Rizab Lombong ID Bekalan Air Infrastruktur Bekalan Elektrik Infrastruktur dan Utiliti Infrastruktur dan Utiliti Utiliti Awam Infrastructure and Utilities Jalan Jalanraya Pelupusan Sisa Pepejal Pembetungan Infrastructure Pengairan dan Perparitan Pengairan dan Saliran Pengangkutan Pengangkutan Pengangkutan Traffic and Transportation Kemudahan Pengangkutan IU TR   Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  9  Table 2-1 Continued Standardized Greater Kuala Lumpur Johor Bahru George Town Kota Kinabalu Institusi Institusi Institusi Kerajaan/ Badan Berkanun Institusi dan Kemudahan Institusi dan Kemudahan Government and Masyarakat Masyarakat Community Facility Keagamaan Tempat Ibadat Keselamatan Kesihatan Institutional Pendidikan Pendidikan Lain-lain Kemudahan Kemudahan Awam Masyarakat INT KBR Perkuburan KKA Perkhidmatan dan Kemudahan Bangunan Other Bangunan Kosong Kediaman Kediaman Kediaman Residential Area Perumahan Terancang Taman Perumahan Residential Rumah Kebajikan KD STG Badan Air Badan Air Laut/Sungai/Tasik Water Bodies Water Bodies Badan Air Buatan SG 2.2 Technical Recommendations on the Management of GIS Data in Malaysia 8. Based on the experience of working with GIS data on land use from five different sources in Malaysia, the World Bank team offers the following technical recommendations for improving the management of GIS data in Malaysia: »» Standardize the land use classifications, ideally using nested classifications that allow for aggregation (see Annex 3-1 for a summary of the non-standardized nature of classifications currently). »» Standardize the map projections used. Currently, different data sources use different map projections. »» Synchronize the data collection schedule across the country, so that data for the same year(s) is available for each city. For example, DBKL has land use data for 2000 and 2010, while JPBD Selangor has data for 2002 and 2008. 10 Annexes 9. When editing land use files, make sure that the integrity of the typology remains intact. For example, to add water bodies, avoid drawing polygons on top of an existing layer, which results in overlapping polygons that will create area calculations errors later; instead, water bodies need to be integrated into the layer. 2.3 Modelling the impact of Malay Reserve Land on housing affordability in Johor Bahru 10. “Malay Reserve Land,” detailed under the Malay Reservation Enactment or ERM, refers to a special category of land situated within the territorial boundaries of a state, which can be owned and dealt over only by Malays or the natives of the state. Limiting access to Malay Reserve Land undervalues the prices of these properties, and puts unnecessary upward pressure on neighboring land prices. As a result there is a limited market for the trading of Malay Reserve Land. Reports suggest that, when the government acquires such land for development or when Malay developers buy the land, they are reluctant to pay a high price or compensation because of the limited market and the lack of financial resources. These buyers may lose interest in the deal since landowners set high prices. As a result, the land remains undeveloped (Omar, 2002). 11. To understand how the segregation of MRL from the land market could potentially affect housing and land affordability, a theoretical framework that reflects the interplay between households’ localization decisions, project developers’ construction decisions and transport costs is required. The standard urban economics model as defined by Fujita (1989) based on the pioneering works of Alsonso (1964), Mills (1967) and Muth (1969) is well suited to conduct such a study. The aim of this study is precisely to evaluate the impact of excluding Malay reserves from urbanization in relative terms compared to a situation where Malay reserves are entirely available to urbanize. 12. In this exercise we use such a standard model and inform it by using real world inputs from Malaysia and Johor Bahru in particular. First, we calculate how much space MRL occupy, identify their locations within the city, and exclude these areas from potential urbanization. According to the data provided by the local government, approximately 14.5% of the land within the conurbation line is MRL, as shown in the map below. Figure 2-1: Malay Reserve Land and FELDA land in Johor Bahru conurbation   Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  11  13. This model aims to explain the variation in land costs in cities and level of real estate prices together with the distribution of households and buildings in an urban area. Classically, it is based on two very simplified, yet realistic, fundamental mechanisms. First, households, when choosing where to live, trade-off between the proximity to the city centre and the level of real estate prices (or equivalently between the proximity to the city centre and the size of the dwelling they will occupy). Second, the project developers (or landowners) maximise their profits and choose to build more or less housing surface in a given place depending on the level of real estate prices. The higher the real estate prices, the denser the developers choose to build. In this model version, landowners are assumed to live outside the city, which means that land rents are not recycled into the local economy as income. 14. In the present study, we use this model with a certain number of simplifying hypotheses. First, we assume that all households commute every day to the centre of Johor Bahru, where jobs are assumed to be located. Second, the model also relies on the hypothesis that all households within the urban area earn the same average income. 15. With a limited amount of data describing the size of the population, average households’ income, the transport system (in this case in a very simplified manner), land use, construction costs, and households and developers’ behavior, the mechanisms described above can reproduce the main features of an urban area in a schematic way. The main outputs of such a model are: rents expressed in currency/sq meter of housing space, dwelling size in sq meters, housing density or equivalently building heights in number of floors and population density expressed in households/sq km. Other outputs can be computed such as land values expressed in currency/sq meters of land. See charts below that exhibit the main outputs of the model. Figure 2-2: The urban economics model on the impacts of Malay Reserve Land 12 Annexes 16. In this simplified representation of Johor Bahru and without detailed calibration data, the outputs of the model should be considered with precaution. However, although the actual value of each output variable is unlikely to match real values (because calibration is very basic and real world features such as transport networks are absent), their variation when a shock is introduced in the urban system (such as excluding land from potential urbanization) is meaningful and likely to change only marginally with more spatially detailed information. 17. The table below presents the modelling results on the increase in rents and land values for the scenario when MRL is excluded from urbanization. The first row presents the result when the value of ß (the share of income devoted to housing expenditures) is set as 0.16, which is based on existing data for Johor Bahru. The impacts are increase in rents of 1.30% and increase in total land values of 4.60%. The increase is not huge, but neither is it negligable. This is not only related to the size of the MRL in Johor Bahru, but also the location – some of the MRL areas are located quite close to the city center where the rents are high. The following rows in the table present results of the sensitivity analysis with different values of ß. Table 2-2: Estimated increase in rents and land values when MRL is excluded from urbanization Value of ß Variation in rents Variation in total land values 0.16 +1.29% +4.59% 0.10 1.26% 4.48% 0.15 1.30% 4.64% 0.2 1.20% 4.29% 0.25 1.12% 3.97% 0.3 1.08% 3.85%   Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  13  3. INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES (ANNEXES FOR CHAPTER 4) 14 Annexes 3.1 Institutional Mapping Table 3-1: Institutional Map - Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Town And Country Jabatan Perancangan Fizikal Selangor State Planning Act 1976 [Act Zoning & Land use Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur (DBKL) Government 172] Ministry of Federal Territories Amendments Road Network Act 231 Akta Lembaga Lembaga Lebuhraya Lembaga Lebuhraya Private Private Highways Ministry of Works Private Concessionaire Lebuhraya Malaysia Malaysia Malaysia Concessionaire (Perbadanan) 1980 Federal Highways / Jabatan Kerja Raya (Department of Public Works) Ministry of Works Federal Road Act 1959 Roads Ministry of Works Road Transport Act 1987 Ministry of Federal Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur (DBKL) Street, Drainage and Municipal Roads Territories Ministry of Federal Territories Building Act 1974 (1994) Transport Network Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur (DBKL) Ministry of Federal Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur (DBKL) Public Parking OR DBKL By laws Territories Ministry of Federal Territories Private Developers Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur (DBKL) Dewan Bandaraya Ministry of Federal Private Parking OR Kuala Lumpur Private Developers DBKL By laws Territories Private Developers Private Developers (DBKL) Dewan Bandaraya Bus Network & Kuala Lumpur Suruhanjaya Pengangkutan Awam Darat Land Public Transport Suruhanjaya Pengangkutan Awam Darat (SPAD) Stations (DBKL) Ministry of (SPAD) Act 2010 Federal Territories Publicly owned Corporations Publicly owned Corporations MRT Corp Suruhanjaya Rail Network & Suruhanjaya Pengangkutan Awam Darat MRT Corp KTMB (Keretapi Land Public Transport Pengangkutan Stations (SPAD) KTMB (Keretapi Tanah Melayu Berhad) Tanah Melayu Act 2010 Awam Darat (SPAD) MyRapid (LRT & Monorail) Berhad) MyRapid (LRT & Monorail) Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Land Public Transport Taxis Suruhanjaya Pengangkutan Awam Darat (SPAD) Act 2010 Other Land Public Land Public Transport Suruhanjaya Pengangkutan Awam Darat (SPAD) Transport Act 2010 Department of Civil Aviation Department of Civil Aviation Airports Malaysia Airports Holdings Berhad Civil Aviation Act 1969 Ministry of Transport Ministry of Transport Ministry of Federal Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur (DBKL) Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur (DBKL) Cycling Network DBKL By laws Territories Ministry of Federal Territories Ministry of Federal Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur (DBKL) Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur (DBKL) Pedestrian Network DBKL By laws Territories Ministry of Federal Territories Jabatan Pengairan & Saliran (Departmetn Jabatan Pengairan Jabatan Pengairan of Irrigation & Jabatan Pengairan & Saliran & Saliran Jabatan Pengairan Drainage) & Saliran (Department (Department & Saliran Drainage & Ministry of Natural Ministry of Natural (Department of Irrigation & of Irrigation & (Department Drainage Works Act Irrigation (Flood Resources & Resources & of Irrigation & Drainage) Drainage) of Irrigation & 1954 (1988) Mitigation) Environment Environment Drainage) Ministry of Natural Ministry of Natural Drainage) OR Resources & Resources & Majlis Perbandaran Environment Environment AND/OR Selangor State Government Street, Drainage and Building Act 1974 (1994) Local Government Act Drainage & Ministry of Natural Municipal OR (1976): (Peninsular) Irrigation (Local Resources & Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur (DBKL) Private Developers Town and Country Drainage Network) Environment Planning Act 1976 MBPJ EarthWorks By Law (MPSJ) 2007 Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  15    Table 3-1 Continued Construction / Maintenance / 16 Annexes Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Jabatan Suruhanjaya Perkhidmatan Suruhanjaya Akta Perkhidmatan Perkhidmatan Pembentungan Perkhidmatan Pembetungan 1993 (Act Air Negara - (Sewerage Services Air Negara - Indah Water 508) Sewerage Indah Water Konsortium (IWK) SPAN (National Department) SPAN (National Konsortium (IWK) Act 654 Suruhanjaya Water Services Ministry of Energy, Water Services Perkhidmatan Air Commission Green Technology Commission) Negara Act 2006 & Water (KETTHA) Jabatan Pengurusan Jabatan Pengurusan Perbadanan Sisa Pepejal Negara Sisa Pepejal Negara Pengurusan (National Solid (National Solid Sisa Pepejal dan Perbadanan Pengurusan Sisa Pepejal dan Akta Perbadanan Ministry of Urban Waste Management Waste Management Pembersihan Awam Solid Waste Pembersihan Awam (PPSPPA) Pengurusan Sisa Pepejal Wellbeing, Housing Department) Department) (PPSPPA) (Collection) Ministry of Urban Wellbeing, Housing & dan Pembersihan Awam & Local Governmen Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of Local Government (Akta 673) Urban Wellbeing, Urban Wellbeing, Urban Wellbeing, Housing & Local Housing & Local Housing & Local Government Government Government Jabatan Pengurusan Jabatan Alam Sisa Pepejal Negara Jabatan Pengurusan Sisa Pepejal Negara Dewan Bandar Sekitar (National Solid Act 672 Solid Waste Ministry of Urban (National Solid Waste Management Kuala Lumpur ( (Department of Waste Management Solid Waste and Public Cleansing Wellbeing, Housing Department) DBKL) Environment) Department) (Disposal - Public) Management Act 2007 & Local Government Ministry of Urban Wellbeing, Housing & Ministry of Federal Ministry of Natural Ministry of (effluent) Local Government Territory Resources and Urban Wellbeing, Environment Housing & Local Government Jabatan Pengurusan Jabatan Pengurusan Sisa Pepejal Negara Jabatan Alam Sisa Pepejal Negara (National Solid Sekitar (National Solid Act 672 Solid Waste Ministry of Urban Waste Management (Department of Waste Management and Public Cleansing Solid Waste Wellbeing, Housing Department) Private Concessionaire Environment) Department) Management Act 2007 (Disposal - Private) & Local Government Ministry of Ministry of Natural Ministry of Local Government Urban Wellbeing, Resources and Urban Wellbeing, (Amendment) Act 2007 Housing & Local Environment Housing & Local Government Government Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Syarikat Bekalan Air Selangor Bhd (Syabas), Puncak Suruhanjaya Jabatan Bekalan Air Suruhanjaya Niaga Sdn Bhd Act 654 Suruhanjaya Perkhidmatan (Sewerage Services Perkhidmatan (PNSB), Konsortium Perkhidmatan Air Air Negara - Department) Air Negara - Water Syarikat Bekalan Air Selangor (SYABAS) Abbas Sdn Bhd Negara Act 2006 SPAN (National Ministry of Energy, SPAN (National (Abbas) and Act 655 Water Service Water Services Green Technology Water Services Syarikat Pengeluar Industry Act 2006 Commission) & Water (KETTHA) Commission) Air Selangor Holdings Bhd (Splash). Act 610 Energy Tenaga Nasional Electricity Network Tenaga Nasional Tenaga Nasional Tenaga Nasional Commission Act 2001 Suruhanjaya Tenaga Berhad OR Private Suruhanjaya Tenaga (Distribution) Berhad Berhad Berhad Act 447 Electricity Developer Supply Act 1990 Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 Telecommunications Malaysia Communications and Multimedia Malaysia Communications and Multimedia Private Telecommunications Companies Communications and Network Commission Commission Multimedia Commission Act (1998) Gas Malaysia Gas Supply Suruhanjaya Tenaga Gas Malaysia Berhad ( MMC Company) Suruhanjaya Tenaga Berhad ( MMC GAS SUPPLY ACT 1993 Company) Public Buildings and Core Urban Services Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  17    Table 3-1 Continued Construction / Maintenance / 18 Annexes Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur (DBKL) Ministry of Federal Territories Dewan Bandaraya AND/OR Jabatan Public Markets & Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur (DBKL) Kuala Lumpur Alam Sekitar Hawkers Ministry of Federal Territories (DBKL) Ministry of (Department of Federal Territories Environment) Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment Open Spaces & Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur (DBKL) Public Parks Ministry of Federal Territories Ministry of Home Affairs AND/OR Jabatan Perancang Polis Diraja Malaysia Bandar dan Desa Police Stations (Police Department) Ministry of Home Affairs Ministry of Ministry of Home Affairs Urban Wellbeing, Housing and Local Government Ministry of Urban Wellbeing, Fire Department (BOMBA) Fire Services Act 1988 Fire Stations Housing and Local Ministry of Urban Wellbeing, Housing and Local Government (Act 341) Government Ministry of Health AND/OR Jabatan Perancang Hospitals and Bandar dan Desa Bahagian Pembangunan Ministry of Health Medical Care Ministry of Ministry of Health OR Private Hospital Urban Wellbeing, Housing and Local Government Schools Ministry of Education Institute of Higher Ministry of Higher Education Learning Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Libraries Ministry of Information, Communication and Culture Art & Cultural Ministry of Information, Communication and Culture Centers Innkeepers Act 1952 Ministry of Tourism Private Developers Ministry of Tourism & Culture Hotels (Federal Territory Hotels & Culture Of Kuala Lumpur) Act 2003 Welfare Department Welfare Department Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of Act 308 Child Care Homes, Nurseries & Women, Family Women, Family Women, Family Private Business Owner Women, Family Centre Act Kindergardens & Community & Community & Community & Community 1984 Development Development Development Development Community Centers (Including Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur (DBKL) Sports Facilities, Ministry of Federal Territories Multipurpose Halls, etc) Public Housing-PPR Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur Jabatan Perumahan Negara (Funded Federal) (DBKL) Ministry of Federal Territories Jabatan Perumahan PR1MA (Private) PR1MA JMB PR1MA Negara Public Servant Jabatan Perumahan Negara JMB Housing (PPA1M) Rumah Wilayah Ministry of Federal Persekutuan Jabatan Perumahan Negara JMB Territories (Federal Housing) Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur Kuala Lumpur Advertisements Private Companies Private Companies (DBKL) Ministry of (DBKL) Ministry of Federal Territories Federal Territories Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur (DBKL) Ministry of Traffic Management/ Federal Territories Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur (DBKL) Congestion Control AND/OR Police Ministry of Federal Territories and Monitoring Diraja Malaysia (PDRM) Ministry of Home Affairs Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  19    Table 3-1 Continued Construction / Maintenance / 20 Annexes Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Land Valuations Section 144, Local Property Management & Land Valuation Department (DBKL) (DBKL Land) Government Act 1976 Land Valuations Valuation and Property Services Department, Ministry of Finance (Federal Land) Building Control Ministry of Ministry of Street, Drainage And Urban Wellbeing, Urban Wellbeing, Building Act 1974 Housing and Local Housing and Local Dewan Bandaraya Uniform Building By Government AND Private Owners/ Government AND Kuala Lumpur Laws Commercial Private Developers Dewan Bandaraya JMB Dewan Bandaraya (DBKL) Ministry of Building And Common Kuala Lumpur Kuala Lumpur Federal Territories Property (Maintenance (DBKL) Ministry of (DBKL) Ministry of And Management) Act Federal Territories Federal Territories 2007 [Act 663] Ministry of Ministry of Street, Drainage And Urban Wellbeing, Urban Wellbeing, Building Act 1974 Housing and Local Housing and Local Dewan Bandaraya Uniform Building By Government AND Private Owners/ Government AND Kuala Lumpur Laws Residential Private Developers Dewan Bandaraya JMB Dewan Bandaraya (DBKL) Ministry of Building And Common Kuala Lumpur Kuala Lumpur Federal Territories Property (Maintenance (DBKL) Ministry of (DBKL) Ministry of And Management) Act Federal Territories Federal Territories 2007 [Act 663] Ministry of Ministry of Urban Wellbeing, Urban Wellbeing, Housing and Local Housing and Local Dewan Bandaraya Street, Drainage And Government AND Government AND Kuala Lumpur Building Act 1974 Public Buildings Respective Ministries Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya (DBKL) Ministry of Uniform Building By Kuala Lumpur Kuala Lumpur Federal Territories Laws (DBKL) Ministry of (DBKL) Ministry of Federal Territories Federal Territories Heritage Commission Malaysia AND/OR Heritage Commission Malaysia AND/OR Private Developers/ National Heritage Act Heritage Buildings Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur (DBKL) Respective Ministry 2005 Kuala Lumpur Ministry of Federal Territories (DBKL) Ministry of Federal Territories Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Ministry of Transport (Department of Ministry of Ministry of Transport (Department of No Fly Zones Aviation) AND Transport Aviation) AND Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Private Developers (Building Heights) Dewan Bandaraya (Department of Lumpur (DBKL) Kuala Lumpur Aviation) Ministry of Federal Territories (DBKL) Ministry of Federal Territories Special Reserves / Zones Control Special Economic Zone (E.G TRX Ministry of Finance Exchange) Multimedia Super Ministry of Finance AND   Corridor Zones Multimedia Development Corporation Heritage Commission Malaysia AND/OR Heritage Commission Malaysia AND/OR Private Developers/ National Heritage Act Heritage Zones Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur (DBKL) Respective Ministry 2005 Kuala Lumpur Ministry of Federal Territories (DBKL) Ministry of Federal Territories Jabatan Pengairan & Saliran Jabatan Pengairan (Departmetn & Saliran of Irrigation & (Departmetn Drainage) Jabatan Pengairan & Saliran of Irrigation & Jabatan Pengairan & Saliran Ministry of Natural (Departmetn of Irrigation & Drainage) Drainage) (Departmetn of Irrigation & Drainage) Waters Act 1920 (Act River Reserve Resources & Ministry of Natural Resources & Ministry of Natural Ministry of Natural Resources & 418) Environment Environment Resources & Environment OR Environment Dewan Bandaraya OR Kuala Lumpur Private Developers (DBKL) Ministry of Federal Territories National Forestry Act Forestry Department Forest Reserve 1984 (Amendment Ministry of Natural Resources & Environment 1993) Protected Areas And Restricted Zones Ministry of Home Affairs Protected Places Act 1959 Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  21    Table 3-2: Institutional Map: Federal Territory of Putrajaya Construction / Maintenance / 22 Annexes Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Town And Country Selangor State Planning Act 1976 [Act Zoning & Land use Jabatan Perancangan Fizikal Perbadanan Putrajaya Ministry of Federal Territories Government 172] Amendments Road Network Act 231 Highway Lembaga Lebuhraya Lembaga Lebuhraya Private Private Highways Ministry of Works Private Concessionaire Authority Malaysia Malaysia Malaysia Concessionaire (Incorporation) Act 1980 Jabatan Kerja Raya Federal Highways / Jabatan Kerja Raya (Department of Public Works) Ministry of Works (Department of Federal Road Act 1959 Roads Ministry of Works Public Works) Road Transport Act 1987 Ministry of Federal Perbadanan Putrajaya Municipal Roads Street, Drainage and Territories Ministry of Federal Territories Building Act 1974 (1994) Transport Network Perbadanan Ministry of Federal Perbadanan Putrajaya OR Putrajaya Public Parking Perbadanan Putrajaya Territories Private Developers Ministry of Federal Territories Licensing of Private Perbadanan Perbadanan Ministry of Federal Perbadanan Carparks (Federal Private Parking Putrajaya OR Putrajaya OR Private Developers Territories Private Developers Putrajaya Territory of Putrajaya) Private Developers Private Developers By- Laws 2002 Perbadanan Bus Network & Putrajaya Ministry Suruhanjaya Pengangkutan Awam Darat Land Public Transport Suruhanjaya Pengangkutan Awam Darat (SPAD) Stations of Federal (SPAD) Act 2010 Territories Publicly owned Publicly owned Publicly owned Corporations Corporations Corporations MRT Corp MRT Corp MRT Corp Suruhanjaya Rail Network & Suruhanjaya Pengangkutan Awam Darat KTMB (Keretapi KTMB (Keretapi KTMB (Keretapi Land Public Transport Pengangkutan Stations (SPAD) Tanah Melayu Tanah Melayu Tanah Melayu Act 2010 Awam Darat (SPAD) Berhad) Berhad) Berhad) MyRapid (LRT & MyRapid (LRT & MyRapid (LRT & Monorail) Monorail) Monorail) Land Public Transport Taxis Suruhanjaya Pengangkutan Awam Darat (SPAD) Act 2010 Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Other Land Public Land Public Transport Suruhanjaya Pengangkutan Awam Darat (SPAD) Transport Act 2010 Department of Civil Aviation Department Of Civil Aviation Airports Malaysia Airports Holdings Berhad Civil Aviation Act 1969 Ministry of Transport Ministry Of Transport Ministry of Federal Perbadanan Putrajaya Cycling Network Perbadanan Putrajaya Territories Ministry of Federal Territories Ministry of Federal Perbadanan Putrajaya Pedestrian Network Perbadanan Putrajaya Territories Ministry of Federal Territories Jabatan Pengairan & Saliran (Department of Irrigation & Drainage) Jabatan Pengairan & Saliran Jabatan Pengairan & Saliran Drainage & Ministry of Natural Ministry of Natural (Department of Irrigation & Drainage) (Department of Irrigation & Drainage) Drainage Works Act 1954 Irrigation (Flood Resources & Resources & Ministry of Natural Resources & Ministry of Natural Resources & (1988) Mitigation) Environment Environment Environment Environment OR Majlis Perbandaran AND/OR Selangor State Government Street, Drainage and Building Act 1974 (1994) Drainage & Ministry of Natural Municipal OR Local Government Act Irrigation (Local Resources & Perbadanan Putrajaya Private Developers (1976): (Peninsular) Drainage Network) Environment Town and Country Planning Act 1976 Jabatan Suruhanjaya Perkhidmatan Suruhanjaya Sewerage Services Act Perkhidmatan Pembentungan Perkhidmatan 1993 (Act 508) Air Negara - (Sewerage Services Air Negara - Indah Water Sewerage Indah Water Konsortium (IWK) Act 654 Suruhanjaya SPAN (National Department) SPAN (National Konsortium (IWK) Perkhidmatan Air Negara Water Services Ministry of Energy, Water Services Act 2006 Commission Green Technology Commission) & Water (KETTHA) Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  23    Table 3-2 Continued Construction / Maintenance / 24 Annexes Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Jabatan Pengurusan Jabatan Pengurusan Perbadanan Sisa Pepejal Negara Sisa Pepejal Negara Pengurusan (National Solid (National Solid Sisa Pepejal dan Perbadanan Pengurusan Sisa Pepejal dan Solid Waste And Public Ministry of Urban Waste Management Waste Management Pembersihan Awam Solid Waste Pembersihan Awam (PPSPPA) Cleansing Wellbeing, Housing Department) Department) (PPSPPA) (Collection) Ministry of Urban Wellbeing, Housing & Management Corporation & Local Government Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of Local Government Act 2007 (Act 673) Urban Wellbeing, Urban Wellbeing, Urban Wellbeing, Housing & Local Housing & Local Housing & Local Government Government Government Jabatan Pengurusan Jabatan Alam Sisa Pepejal Negara Jabatan Pengurusan Sisa Pepejal Negara Sekitar (National Solid Perbadanan Act 672 Solid Waste Ministry of Urban (National Solid Waste Management (Department of Waste Management Solid Waste Putrajaya Ministry and Public Cleansing Wellbeing, Housing Department) Environment) Department) (Disposal - Public) of Federal Management Act 2007 & Local Government Ministry of Urban Wellbeing, Housing & Ministry of Natural Ministry of Territory (effluent) Local Government Resources and Urban Wellbeing, Environment Housing & Local Government Jabatan Pengurusan Jabatan Pengurusan Sisa Pepejal Negara Jabatan Alam Sisa Pepejal Negara (National Solid Sekitar (National Solid Act 672 Solid Waste Ministry of Urban Waste Management (Department of Waste Management and Public Cleansing Solid Waste Wellbeing, Housing Department) Private Concessionaire Environment) Department) Management Act 2007 (Disposal - Private) & Local Government Ministry of Ministry of Natural Ministry of Local Government Urban Wellbeing, Resources and Urban Wellbeing, (Amendment) Act 2007 Housing & Local Environment Housing & Local Government Government Syarikat Bekalan Air Selangor Bhd (Syabas), Puncak Suruhanjaya Jabatan Bekalan Air Suruhanjaya Niaga Sdn Bhd Act 654 – Suruhanjaya Perkhidmatan (Sewerage Services Perkhidmatan (PNSB), Konsortium Perkhidmatan Air Negara Air Negara - Department) Air Negara - Water Syarikat Bekalan Air Selangor (SYABAS) Abbas Sdn Bhd Act 2006 SPAN (National Ministry of Energy, SPAN (National (Abbas) and Act 655 Water Service Water Services Green Technology Water Services Syarikat Pengeluar Industry ACT 2006 Commission) & Water (KETTHA) Commission) Air Selangor Holdings Bhd (Splash). Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Act 610 Energy Tenaga Nasional Electricity Network Tenaga Nasional Tenaga Nasional Tenaga Nasional Commission Act 2001 Suruhanjaya Tenaga Berhad OR Private Suruhanjaya Tenaga (Distribution) Berhad Berhad Berhad Act 447 Electricity Developer Supply Act 1990 Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 Telecommunica- Malaysia Communications and Multimedia Malaysia Communications and Multimedia Private Telecommunications Companies Communications and tions Network Commission Commission Multimedia Commission Act (1998) Gas Malaysia Gas Supply Suruhanjaya Tenaga Gas Malaysia Berhad ( MMC Company) Suruhanjaya Tenaga Berhad ( MMC Gas Supply Act 1993 Company) Public Buildings and Core Urban Services Perbadanan Putrajaya Ministry of Federal Territories AND/ Perbadanan OR Jabatan Alam Market (Federal Territory Public Markets & Perbadanan Putrajaya Putrajaya Ministry Sekitar of Putrajaya) By- Laws Hawkers Ministry of Federal Territories of Federal (Department of 2003 Territories Environment) Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment Open Spaces & Perbadanan Putrajaya Ministry of Federal Territories Public Parks Ministry of Home Affairs AND/OR Jabatan Perancang Bandar dan Desa Polis Diraja Malaysia Police Stations Ministry of Home Affairs Ministry of (Police Department) Ministry of Home Affairs Urban Wellbeing, Housing and Local Government Ministry of Urban Wellbeing, Fire Department (BOMBA) Fire Services Act 1988 Fire Stations Housing and Local Ministry of Urban Wellbeing, Housing and Local Government (Act 341) Government Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  25    Table 3-2 Continued Construction / Maintenance / 26 Annexes Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Ministry of Health AND/OR Jabatan Perancang Hospitals and Bandar dan Desa Bahagian Pembangunan Ministry of Health Ministry of Health Medical Care Ministry of Ministry of Health OR Private Hospital OR Private Hospital Urban Wellbeing, Housing and Local Government Ministry of Education Schools   Institute of Higher Ministry of Higher Education Learning Libraries Ministry of Information, Communication and Culture Art & Cultural Ministry of Information, Communication and Culture Centers Ministry of Tourism Hotels Private Developers Ministry of Tourism & Culture Innkeepers Act 1952 & Culture Welfare Department Welfare Department Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of Homes, Nurseries & Women, Family Women, Family Act 308 Child Care Women, Family Private Business Owner Women, Family Kindergardens & Community & Community Centre Act 1984 & Community & Community Development Development Development Development Community Centers (Including Perbadanan Putrajaya Sports Facilities, Ministry of Federal Territories Multipurpose Halls, etc) Public Housing-PPR Perbadanan Putrajaya Jabatan Perumahan Negara (Funded Federal) Ministry of Federal Territories Jabatan Perumahan PR1MA (Private) PR1MA JMB PR1MA Negara Public Servant Jabatan Perumahan Negara JMB Housing (PPA1M) Rumah Wilayah Ministry of Federal Persekutuan Jabatan Perumahan Negara JMB Territories (Federal Housing) Perbadanan Perbadanan Advertisement(Federal Putrajaya Ministry Putrajaya Ministry Advertisements Private Companies Private Companies Territory of Putrajaya) of Federal of Federal By- Laws 2002 Territories Territories Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur Traffic (DBKL) Ministry of Management/ Federal Territories Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur (DBKL) Ministry of Federal Territories Congestion Control AND/OR Police and Monitoring Diraja Malaysia (PDRM) Ministry of Home Affairs Land Valuations (Putrajaya Property Management & Land Valuation Department (DBKL) Holdings) Land Valuations  Valuation and Property Services Department. Ministry of Finance   (Federal Land) Building Control Ministry of Ministry of 1. Street, Drainage And Urban Wellbeing, Urban Wellbeing, Building Act 1974 Housing and Housing and Perbadanan 2. Uniform Building By Local Government Private Owners/ Local Government Putrajaya Ministry Laws Selangor Commercial Private Developers AND Perbadanan JMB AND Perbadanan of Federal 3. Building And Common Putrajaya Ministry Putrajaya Ministry Territories Property (Maintenance of Federal of Federal And Management) Act Territories Territories 2007 [Act 663] 1. Street, Drainage And Building Act 1974 Ministry of Ministry of 2. Uniform Building By Urban Wellbeing, Urban Wellbeing, Laws Selangor Housing and Housing and Perbadanan 3.Housing Development Local Government Private Owners/ Local Government Putrajaya Ministry Residential Private Developers (Control And Licensing) AND Perbadanan JMB AND Perbadanan of Federal 1966 [Act 118] Putrajaya Ministry Putrajaya Ministry Territories 4. Building And Common of Federal of Federal Property (Maintenance Territories Territories And Management) Act 2007 [Act 663] Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  27    Table 3-2 Continued Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation 28 Annexes Ministry of Ministry of Urban Wellbeing, Urban Wellbeing, Housing and Housing and Perbadanan 1. Street, Drainage And Local Government Local Government Putrajaya Ministry Building Act 1974 Public Buildings Respective Ministries AND Perbadanan AND Perbadanan of Federal 2. Uniform Building By Putrajaya Ministry Putrajaya Ministry Territories Laws Selangor of Federal of Federal Territories Territories Heritage Commission Malaysia AND/ Heritage Commission Malaysia AND/OR Private Developers/ National Heritage Act Heritage Buildings OR Perbadanan Perbadanan Putrajaya Ministry of Federal Respective Ministry 2005 Putrajaya Ministry Territories of Federal Territories Ministry of Transport (Department of Ministry of Ministry of Transport (Department of No Fly Zones Aviation) AND Transport Private Developers Aviation) AND Perbadanan Putrajaya (Building Heights) Perbadanan (Department of Ministry of Federal Territories Putrajaya Ministry Aviation) of Federal Territories Special Reserves / Zones Control Special Economic Zone (E.G TRX Ministry of Finance Exchange) Multimedia Super Ministry of Finance AND Corridor Zones Multimedia Development Corporation Heritage Commission Malaysia AND/ Heritage Commission Malaysia AND/OR Private Developers/ National Heritage Act Heritage Zones OR Perbadanan Perbadanan Putrajaya Ministry of Federal Respective Ministry 2005 Putrajaya Ministry Territories of Federal Territories Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Jabatan Pengairan & Saliran Jabatan Pengairan (Departmetn & Saliran of Irrigation & (Departmetn Drainage) Jabatan Pengairan & Saliran of Irrigation & Jabatan Pengairan & Saliran Waters Act 1920 (Act Ministry of Natural (Departmetn of Irrigation & Drainage) Drainage) (Departmetn of Irrigation & Drainage) 418) River Reserve Resources & Ministry of Natural Resources & Ministry of Natural Ministry of Natural Resources & Earthworks (Perbadanan Environment Environment Resources & Environment Putrajaya) By-Laws 1996 OR Environment Perbadanan OR Putrajaya Ministry Private Developers of Federal Territories Forestry Department National Forestry Act Forest Reserve Ministry of Natural Resources & Environment 1984 (Amendment 1993) Protected Areas And Restricted Zones Ministry of Home Affairs Protected Places Act 1959 Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  29    Table 3-3: Institutional Map: Selangor Construction / Maintenance / 30 Annexes Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Jabatan Town And Country Jabatan Perancangan & Pembangunan Selangor State Jabatan Perancangan & Pembangunan Perancangan & Planning Act 1976 [Act Zoning & Land use Majlis Perbandaran AND/OR Government Majlis Perbandaran Pembangunan 172] Selangor State Government Majlis Perbandaran Amendments Road Network (includes Street Lighting) Act 231 Highway Lembaga Lebuhraya Lembaga Lebuhraya Private Authority Malaysia Private Highways Ministry of Works Private Concessionaire Malaysia Malaysia Concessionaire (Incorporation) Act 1980 Federal Highways / Jabatan Kerja Raya (Department of Public Works) Ministry of Works Federal Road Act 1959 Roads Ministry of Works Road Transport Act Jabatan 1987 Selangor State Jabatan Kejuruteraan Majlis Perbandaran AND/OR Perancangan & State Roads Street, Drainage and Government Majlis Perbandaran Selangor State Government Pembangunan Building Act 1974 Majlis Perbandaran (1994) Transport Network Public Car Parking Majlis Perbandaran By-Laws (MPSJ) 2007 Selangor State Municipal OR AND/OR Public Parking Majlis Perbandaran Transportation Order Government Private Developers Selangor State (Car Park Allocation Government Road) (MPAJ) 2007 Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Private Car Parks Licensing By-Laws (MBPJ) 2007 Private Car Park Licensing (MPAJ) (Amendment) 2007 Private Vehicles Parking Space Licensing By-Law Selangor State Municipal OR Private Developers Private Parking Majlis Perbandaran Private Developers (MPKJ) (Amendment) Government Private Developers 2007 Private Car Park Licensing (MPSepang) 2005 Private Car Park Licensing (MPS) 2005 Bylaw For Private Carpark License (MPK) 2005 Majlis Perbandaran Bus Network & AND/OR Suruhanjaya Pengangkutan Awam Darat Land Public Transport Suruhanjaya Pengangkutan Awam Darat (SPAD) Stations Selangor State (SPAD) Act 2010 Government Suruhanjaya KTMB (Keretapi Rail Network & Suruhanjaya Pengangkutan Awam Darat Federal owned Corporations Land Public Transport Pengangkutan Tanah Melayu Stations (SPAD) KTMB (Keretapi Tanah Melayu Berhad) Act 2010 Awam Darat (SPAD) Berhad) Land Public Transport Taxis & Taxi Stop Suruhanjaya Pengangkutan Awam Darat (SPAD) Act 2010 Other Land Public Land Public Transport Suruhanjaya Pengangkutan Awam Darat (SPAD) Transport Act 2010 Department of Civil Aviation Department of Civil Aviation Airports Malaysia Airports Holdings Berhad Civil Aviation Act 1969 Ministry of Transport Ministry of Transport Majlis Perbandaran Selangor State AND/OR Cycling Network Majlis Perbandaran Majlis Perbandaran Government Selangor State Government Majlis Perbandaran Selangor State AND/OR Pedestrian Network Majlis Perbandaran Majlis Perbandaran Government Selangor State Government Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  31    Table 3-3 Continued Construction / Maintenance / 32 Annexes Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Jabatan Pengairan & Saliran (Department of Irrigation & Drainage) Jabatan Pengairan & Saliran Jabatan Pengairan & Saliran Drainage & Irrigation Ministry of Natural Ministry of Natural (Department of Irrigation & Drainage) (Department of Irrigation & Drainage) Drainage Works Act (Flood Mitigation) - Resources & Resources & Ministry of Natural Resources & Ministry of Natural Resources & 1954 (1988) Non Privatised Environment Environment Environment Environment OR Majlis Perbandaran AND/OR Selangor State Government Street, Drainage and Building Act 1974 (1994) Drainage & Irrigation Ministry of Natural Local Government Act Municipal OR (Local Drainage Resources & Majlis Perbandaran (1976): (Peninsular) Private Developers Network) Environment Town and Country Planning Act 1976 EarthWorks By Law (MPSJ) 2007 Suruhanjaya Perkhidmatan Air Negara - Jabatan SPAN (National Suruhanjaya Perkhidmatan Water Services Sewerage Services Act Perkhidmatan Pembentungan Commission) 1993 (Act 508) Air Negara - (Sewerage Services AND Indah Water Sewerage Indah Water Konsortium (IWK) Act 654 Suruhanjaya SPAN (National Department) Jabatan Alam Konsortium (IWK) Perkhidmatan Air Water Services Ministry of Energy, Sekitar Negara Act 2006 Commission Green Technology & (Department of Water (KETTHA) Environment) Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Collection, Disposal And Clearance Of Trash By-Laws (MBPJ) 2007 Collection, Disposal And Clearance Of Trash By-Laws (MPSJ) 2007 Waste Collection And Disposal (MPAJ) 2007 Collection, Discard And Disposal Of Garbage By-Law (MPKJ) 2007 Solid Waste Selangor State Waste Collection And Majlis Perbandaran (Municipality) (Collection) Government Disposal (MPAJ) 2007 COLLECTION, DISCARD AND DISPOSAL OF GARBAGE BY-LAW (MBSA) 2007 COLLECTION, DISCARD AND DISPOSAL OF Garbage By-Law (MPS) 2007 Collecting,Expulsion and Disposal Bylaw (MPK) 2007 Jabatan Pengurusan Jabatan Alam Sisa Pepejal Negara Jabatan Pengurusan Sisa Pepejal Negara Sekitar (National Solid Act 672 - Solid Waste Ministry of Urban (National Solid Waste Management (Department of Solid Waste (Disposal Majlis Perbandaran Waste Management and Public Cleansing Wellbeing, Housing Department) Environment) - Public) (Municipality) Department) Management Act 2007 & Local Government Ministry of Urban Wellbeing, Housing & Ministry of Natural Ministry of Urban (effluent) Local Government Resources and Wellbeing, Housing Environment & Local Government Jabatan Pengurusan Jabatan Pengurusan Jabatan Alam Sisa Pepejal Negara Sisa Pepejal Negara Sekitar Act 672 - Solid Waste (National Solid (National Solid Ministry of Urban (Department of and Public Cleansing Solid Waste (Disposal Waste Management Waste Management Wellbeing, Housing Private Concessionaire Environment) Management Act 2007 - Private) Department) Department) & Local Government Ministry of Natural Local Government Ministry of Urban Ministry of Urban Resources and (Amendment) Act 2007 Wellbeing, Housing Wellbeing, Housing Environment & Local Government & Local Government Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  33    Table 3-3 Continued Construction / Maintenance / 34 Annexes Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Syarikat Bekalan Air Selangor Bhd (Syabas), Puncak Suruhanjaya Jabatan Bekalan Air Syarikat Bekalan Air Selangor Bhd Suruhanjaya Niaga Sdn Bhd Act 654 – Suruhanjaya Perkhidmatan (Sewerage Services (Syabas), Puncak Niaga Sdn Bhd (PNSB), Perkhidmatan (PNSB), Konsortium Perkhidmatan Air Air Negara - Department) Konsortium Abbas Sdn Bhd (Abbas) and Air Negara - Water Abbas Sdn Bhd Negara ACT 2006 SPAN (National Ministry of Energy, Syarikat Pengeluar Air Selangor Holdings SPAN (National (Abbas) and Act 655 - Water Service Water Services Green Technology & Bhd (Splash). Water Services Syarikat Pengeluar Industry Act 2006 Commission) Water (KETTHA) Commission) Air Selangor Holdings Bhd (Splash). Act 610 - Energy Tenaga Nasional Electricity Network Tenaga Nasional Tenaga Nasional Tenaga Nasional Commission Act 2001 Suruhanjaya Tenaga Berhad OR Private Suruhanjaya Tenaga (Distribution) Berhad Berhad Berhad Act 447 - Electricity Developer Supply Act 1990 Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 Telecommunications Malaysia Communications and Multimedia Malaysia Communications and Multimedia Private Telecommunications Companies Communications Network Commission Commission and Multimedia Commission Act (1998) Gas Malaysia Gas Supply Suruhanjaya Tenaga Gas Malaysia Berhad ( MMC Company) Suruhanjaya Tenaga Berhad (MMC Gas Supply Act 1993 Company) Public Buildings and Services Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Hawkers By-Laws (MPSJ) 2007 Markets By-Laws (MPSJ) 2007 Trade, Business and Industrial By-Laws (MBPJ) 2007 Markets (MPAJ) 2007 Municipal AND/OR Hawkers (MPAJ) 2007 Jabatan Alam HAWKERS BY-LAW Sekitar (MPKj) 2007 Public Markets & Majlis Perbandaran AND/OR (Department of Majlis Perbandaran Hawkers (MPSEPANG) Hawkers Selangor State Government Environment) 2007 Ministry of Natural Markets (MPSEPANG) Resources and 2007 Environment Hawkers By-Laws (MPS) 2007 Markets By-Laws (MPS) 2007 Hawker Bylaw (MPK) 2007 Market Bylaw (MPK) 2007 Park (MPAJ) (Amendment) 2007 PARKS BY-LAW (MPKj)( Amendments) 2007 Open Spaces & Public Majlis Perbandaran AND/OR Park (MPSEPANG) Majlis Perbandaran Parks Selangor State Government 2005 Park (MBSA) 2005 Park (MPS) 2005 Park Bylaw (MPK) 2005 Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  35    Table 3-3 Continued Construction / Maintenance / 36 Annexes Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Ministry of Home Affairs AND/OR Jabatan Perancang Bandar dan Desa Polis Diraja Malaysia Police Stations Ministry of Home Affairs Ministry of (Police Department) Ministry of Home Affairs Urban Wellbeing, Housing and Local Government Ministry of Urban Wellbeing, Fire Services Act 1988 Fire Stations Fire Department (BOMBA) Ministry of Urban Wellbeing, Housing and Local Government Housing and Local (Act 341) Government Ministry of Health AND/OR Jabatan Perancang Hospitals and Bandar dan Desa Bahagian Pembangunan Ministry of Health Ministry of Health Medical Care Ministry of Ministry of Health OR Private Hospital OR Private Hospital Urban Wellbeing, Housing and Local Government Schools Ministry of Education   Institute of Higher Ministry of Higher Education Learning Libraries Ministry of Information, Communication and Culture Art & Cultural Centers Ministry of Information, Communication and Culture Ministry of Tourism Hotels Private Developers Ministry of Tourism & Culture Innkeepers Act 1952 & Culture Welfare Department Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of Homes, Nurseries & Women, Family Women, Family Act 308 Child Care Private Business Owner Women, Family Kindergardens & Community & Community Centre Act 1984 & Community Development Development Development Community Centers (Including Majlis Perbandaran AND/OR Sports Facilities, Selangor State Government Multipurpose Halls, etc) Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Public Housing-PPR Jabatan Perumahan Negara Majlis Perbandaran (Funded Federal) Public Housing-PPR Lembaga Perumahan & Hartanah Selangor Majlis Perbandaran (State Funded) Advertisement By-Laws (MBPJ) 2007 Advertisement (MPAJ) 2007 ADVERTISEMENT Majlis Perbandaran Majlis Perbandaran BY-LAW (MPKj)2007 AND/OR AND/OR Advertisement Advertisements Private Companies Private Companies Selangor State Selangor State (MPSEPANG) 2007 Government Government Advertisement (MBSA) 2007 Advertisement (MPS) 2005 Advertisement Bylaw (MPK) 2007 Majlis Perbandaran Traffic Management/ (Local Municipal Majlis Perbandaran AND/OR Congestion Control ) AND/OR Police Selangor State Government and Monitoring Diraja Malaysia (PDRM) Land Valuations Local Government Act Valuation and Property Management Department (Municipal) (State Land) 171 Land Valuations Valuation and Property Services Department, Ministry of Finance (Federal Land) Building Control 1. Street, Drainage And Building Act 1974 2. Uniformed Building Ministry of Ministry of Bylaw (Selangor) 1986 Urban Wellbeing, Urban Wellbeing, 3. Building and Housing and Local Private Owners/ Housing and Local Common Property Commercial Private Developers Majlis Perbandaran Government AND JMB Government AND (Maintenance and Majlis Perbandaran Majlis Perbandaran Management) Act 2007 (Municipal) (Municipal) [Act 663] Road, Drain and Building (MPSEPANG) 2005 Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  37    Table 3-3 Continued Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation 38 Annexes 1. Street, Drainage And Building Act 1974 2. Uniformed Building Bylaw (Selangor) 1986 3.Housing Ministry of Ministry of Development (Control Urban Wellbeing, Urban Wellbeing, and Licensing) 1966 Housing and Local Private Owners/ Housing and Local [Act 118] Residential Private Developers Majlis Perbandaran Government AND JMB Government AND 4. Building and Majlis Perbandaran Majlis Perbandaran Common Property (Municipal) (Municipal) (Maintenance and Management) Act 2007 [Act 663] Road, Drain and Building (MPSEPANG) 2005 1. Street, Drainage And Ministry of Ministry of Building Act 1974 Urban Wellbeing, Urban Wellbeing, 2. Uniformed Building Housing and Local Housing and Local Public Buildings Respective Ministries Majlis Perbandaran Bylaw (Selangor) 1986 Government AND Government AND Road, Drain and Majlis Perbandaran Majlis Perbandaran Building (MPSEPANG) (Municipal) (Municipal) 2005 Heritage Commission Private Developers/ Heritage Commission Malaysia AND/OR National Heritage Act Heritage Buildings Malaysia AND/OR Respective Ministry Majlis Perbandaran (Municipal) 2005 Majlis Perbandaran (Municipal) Ministry of Transport Ministry of Ministry of Transport (Department No Fly Zones (Department of Transport Private Developers of Aviation) AND Majlis Perbandaran (Building Heights) Aviation) AND (Department of (Municipal) Majlis Perbandaran Aviation) (Municipal) Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Special Reserves / Zones Control Special Economic Zone (E.G TRX Ministry of Finance Exchange) Multimedia Super Ministry of Finance AND Corridor Zones Multimedia Development Corporation State Special Economic Zones State Government             (i.e Port Klang Free Zone) Heritage Commission Malaysia AND/OR Private Developers/ Heritage Commission Malaysia AND/OR National Heritage Act Heritage Zones Majlis Perbandaran Respective Ministry Majlis Perbandaran (Municipal) 2005 (Municipal) Jabatan Pengairan Jabatan Pengairan & Saliran & Saliran Waters Act 1920 (Act (Department (Department 418) of Irrigation & Jabatan Pengairan & Saliran of Irrigation & Jabatan Pengairan & Saliran Earthworks By-Laws Drainage) (Department of Irrigation & Drainage) Drainage) (Department of Irrigation & Drainage) (MPKj) 2007 River Reserve Ministry of Natural Ministry of Natural Resources & Ministry of Natural Ministry of Natural Resources & Earthworks By-Laws Resources & Environment Resources & Environment (Mbsa) 2007 Environment Environment Earthworks By-Laws OR OR (Mps) 2007 Majlis Perbandaran Private Developers (Municipal) National Forestry Act Forestry Department Forest Reserve 1984 (Amendment Ministry of Natural Resources & Environment 1993) Protected Areas And Restricted Zones Ministry of Home Affairs Protected Places Act 1959 Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  39    Table 3-4: Institutional Map: Penang State Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation 40 Annexes Local Government Act 1976 (Act 171) Town and Country Planning Act 1976 (Act 172) Town and Country Planning (Amendment) Jabatan Act 1995 (A 933) Jabatan Perancangan Pembangunan Penang State Jabatan Perancangan Pembangunan Perancangan Planning Control Zoning & Land use Majlis Perbandaran AND/OR Government Majlis Perbandaran Pembangunan (General) Rules 1990 Penang State Government Majlis Perbandaran Act 172 Rules for the preparation of Structure and Local Plan 1989 Street, Drainage and Building Act 1974 National Land Code 1965 Road Network (includes Street Lighting) Act 231 Highway Lembaga Lebuhraya Lembaga Lebuhraya Private Authority Malaysia Private Highways Ministry of Works Private Concessionaire Malaysia Malaysia Concessionaire (Incorporation) Act 1980 Federal Highways / Jabatan Kerja Raya (Department of Public Works) Ministry of Works Federal Road Act 1959 Roads Ministry of Works Jabatan Road Transport Act 1987 Penang State Jabatan Kejuruteraan Majlis Perbandaran AND/OR Perancangan & State Roads Street, Drainage and Government Majlis Perbandaran Penang State Government Pembangunan Building Act 1974 Majlis Perbandaran Transport Network Municipal Council of Penang Island Car Park Majlis Perbandaran (Ticket System) Order, Penang State Majlis Perbandaran OR AND/OR 1992 Public Parking Majlis Perbandaran Government Private Developers Penang State Municipal Council of Government Penang Island Car Park (Meter System) Order, 1992 Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Municipal Council of Penang State Municipal OR Private Developers Penang Island (Private Private Parking Majlis Perbandaran Private Developers Government Private Developers Car Parks) By-Laws, 1988 Majlis Perbandaran Bus Network & AND/OR Suruhanjaya Pengangkutan Awam Darat Land Public Transport Suruhanjaya Pengangkutan Awam Darat (SPAD) Stations Penang State (SPAD) Act 2010 Government Suruhanjaya KTMB (Keretapi Rail Network & Suruhanjaya Pengangkutan Awam Darat Federal owned Corporations Land Public Transport Pengangkutan Tanah Melayu Stations (SPAD) KTMB (Keretapi Tanah Melayu Berhad) Act 2010 Awam Darat (SPAD) Berhad) Land Public Transport Taxis & Taxi Stop Suruhanjaya Pengangkutan Awam Darat (SPAD) Act 2010 Other Land Public Land Public Transport Suruhanjaya Pengangkutan Awam Darat (SPAD) Transport Act 2010 Department of Civil Aviation Department of Civil Aviation Airports Malaysia Airports Holdings Berhad Civil Aviation Act 1969 Ministry of Transport Ministry of Transport Majlis Perbandaran Penang State AND/OR Cycling Network Majlis Perbandaran Majlis Perbandaran Government Penang State Government Majlis Perbandaran Penang State AND/OR Pedestrian Network Majlis Perbandaran Majlis Perbandaran Government Penang State Government Jabatan Pengairan & Saliran (Department of Irrigation & Drainage) Drainage & Jabatan Pengairan & Saliran Jabatan Pengairan & Saliran Ministry of Natural Ministry of Natural Irrigation (Flood (Department of Irrigation & Drainage) (Department of Irrigation & Drainage) Drainage Works Act Resources & Resources & Mitigation) - Non Ministry of Natural Resources & Ministry of Natural Resources & 1954 (1988) Environment Environment Privatised Environment Environment OR Majlis Perbandaran AND/OR Penang State Government Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  41    Table 3-4 Continued Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation 42 Annexes Street, Drainage and Building Act 1974 Local Government Act Drainage & Ministry of Natural Municipal OR (1976): (Peninsular) Irrigation (Local Resources & Majlis Perbandaran Private Developers Town and Country Drainage Network) Environment Planning Act 1976 Earthworks 1975 (by law) Suruhanjaya Perkhidmatan Sewerage Services Act Air Negara - 1993 (Act 508) Jabatan SPAN (National Act 654 Suruhanjaya Suruhanjaya Perkhidmatan Water Services Perkhidmatan Air Perkhidmatan Pembentungan Commission) Negara Act 2006 Air Negara - (Sewerage Services AND Indah Water Sewerage Indah Water Konsortium (IWK) Sewerage and Sanitary SPAN (National Department) Jabatan Alam Konsortium (IWK) Installation 1970 (by Water Services Ministry of Energy, Sekitar law) Commission Green Technology & (Department of Drainage, Sanitation & Water (KETTHA) Environment) Sanitary Plumbing 1976 Ministry of Natural (by law) Resources and Environment Solid Waste Penang State Majlis Perbandaran (Municipality) (Collection) Government Jabatan Pengurusan Jabatan Alam Sisa Pepejal Negara Jabatan Pengurusan Sisa Pepejal Negara Sekitar (National Solid Act 672 - Solid Waste Ministry of Urban (National Solid Waste Management (Department of Solid Waste Majlis Perbandaran Waste Management and Public Cleansing Wellbeing, Housing Department) Environment) (Disposal - Public) (Municipality) Department) Management Act 2007 & Local Government Ministry of Urban Wellbeing, Housing & Ministry of Natural Ministry of Urban (effluent) Local Government Resources and Wellbeing, Housing Environment & Local Government Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Jabatan Pengurusan Jabatan Pengurusan Jabatan Alam Sisa Pepejal Negara Sisa Pepejal Negara Sekitar Act 672 - Solid Waste (National Solid (National Solid Ministry of Urban (Department of and Public Cleansing Solid Waste Waste Management Waste Management Wellbeing, Housing Private Concessionaire Environment) Management Act 2007 (Disposal - Private) Department) Department) & Local Government Ministry of Natural Local Government Ministry of Urban Ministry of Urban Resources and (Amendment) Act 2007 Wellbeing, Housing Wellbeing, Housing Environment & Local Government & Local Government Suruhanjaya Jabatan Bekalan Air Suruhanjaya ACT 654 – Suruhanjaya Perkhidmatan (Sewerage Services Perkhidmatan Perbadanan Perkhidmatan Air Air Negara - Department) Perbadanan Bekalan Air Pulau Pinang Sdn Air Negara - Bekalan Air Pulau Water Negara ACT 2006 SPAN (National Ministry of Energy, Bhd (PBAPP) SPAN (National Pinang Sdn Bhd ACT 655 - Water Service Water Services Green Technology & Water Services (PBAPP) Industry ACT 2006 Commission) Water (KETTHA) Commission) Act 610 - Energy Tenaga Nasional Electricity Network Tenaga Nasional Tenaga Nasional Tenaga Nasional Commission Act 2001 Suruhanjaya Tenaga Berhad OR Private Suruhanjaya Tenaga (Distribution) Berhad Berhad Berhad Act 447 - Electricity Developer Supply Act 1990 Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 Telecommunications Malaysia Communications and Multimedia Malaysia Communications and Multimedia Private Telecommunications Companies Communications and Network Commission Commission Multimedia Commission Act (1998) Gas Malaysia Gas Supply Suruhanjaya Tenaga Gas Malaysia Berhad ( MMC Company) Suruhanjaya Tenaga Berhad ( MMC Gas Supply Act 1993 Company) Public Buildings and Services Municipal AND/OR Jabatan Alam Hawkers By-Laws, 1979; Sekitar Hawkers (Amendment) Public Markets & Majlis Perbandaran AND/OR (Department of Majlis Perbandaran By-Laws, 1987; Hawkers Hawkers Penang State Government Environment) (Amendment) By-Laws, Ministry of Natural 1991 Resources and Environment Municipal Council of Open Spaces & Majlis Perbandaran AND/OR Majlis Perbandaran Penang Island (Parks) Public Parks Penang State Government By-laws, 1993 Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  43    Table 3-4 Continued Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation 44 Annexes Ministry of Home Affairs AND/OR Jabatan Perancang Polis Diraja Malaysia Bandar dan Desa Police Stations (Police Department) Ministry of Home Affairs Ministry of Ministry of Home Affairs Urban Wellbeing, Housing and Local Government Ministry of Urban Wellbeing, Fire Department (BOMBA) Fire Services Act 1988 Fire Stations Housing and Local Ministry of Urban Wellbeing, Housing and Local Government (Act 341) Government Ministry of Health AND/OR Jabatan Perancang Hospitals and Bandar dan Desa Bahagian Pembangunan Ministry of Health Ministry of Health Medical Care Ministry of Ministry of Health OR Private Hospital OR Private Hospital Urban Wellbeing, Housing and Local Government Education Act 1961 Schools Ministry of Education and Schools (General) Regulations 1950 Institute of Higher Ministry of Higher Education Learning Libraries Ministry of Information, Communication and Culture. Art & Cultural Ministry of Information, Communication and Culture. Centers Ministry of Tourism Hotels Private Developers Ministry of Tourism & Culture Innkeepers Act 1952 & Culture Welfare Department Ministry of Ministry of Act 308 Child Care Ministry of Homes, Nurseries & Women, Family Women, Family Centre Act 1984 Private Business Owner Women, Family Kindergardens & Community & Community Nurseries Act 1984 & Community Development Development Nursing Home Act 1993 Development Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Community Centers (Including Majlis Perbandaran AND/OR Sports Facilities, Penang State Government Multipurpose Halls, etc) Public Housing-PPR Jabatan Perumahan Negara Majlis Perbandaran (Funded Federal) Public Housing-PPR             ( State Funded) Majlis Perbandaran Majlis Perbandaran AND/OR AND/OR Advertisements Private Companies Private Companies PeanangState Penang State Government Government Majlis Perbandaran Traffic Management/ (Local Municipal Majlis Perbandaran AND/OR Congestion Control ) AND/OR Police   Penang State Government and Monitoring Diraja Malaysia (PDRM) Land Valuations Local Government Act, Valuation and Property Management Department (Municipal) (State Land) 1976 (Act 171) Land Valuations Valuation and Property Services Department, Ministry of Finance   (Federal Land) Building Control Ministry of Ministry of Urban Wellbeing, Urban Wellbeing, 1. Street, Drainage And Housing and Local Housing and Local Building Act 1974 Commercial Private Developers Private Owners Majlis Perbandaran Government AND Government AND 2. Uniformed Building Majlis Perbandaran Majlis Perbandaran Bylaw 1986 (Municipal) (Municipal) Ministry of Ministry of Urban Wellbeing, Urban Wellbeing, 1. Street, Drainage And Housing and Local Housing and Local Building Act 1974 Residential Private Developers Private Owners Majlis Perbandaran Government AND Government AND 2. Uniformed Building Majlis Perbandaran Majlis Perbandaran Bylaw 1986 (Municipal) (Municipal) Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  45    Table 3-4 Continued Construction / Maintenance / 46 Annexes Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Ministry of Ministry of Urban Wellbeing, Urban Wellbeing, 1. Street, Drainage And Housing and Local Housing and Local Building Act 1974 Public Buildings Respective Ministries Majlis Perbandaran Government AND Government AND 2. Uniformed Building Majlis Perbandaran Majlis Perbandaran Bylaw 1986 (Municipal) (Municipal) Heritage Commission Private Developers/ Heritage Commission Malaysia AND/OR National Heritage Act Heritage Buildings Malaysia AND/OR Respective Ministry Majlis Perbandaran (Municipal) 2005 Majlis Perbandaran (Municipal) Ministry of Transport Ministry of Ministry of Transport (Department No Fly Zones (Department of Transport Private Developers of Aviation) AND Majlis Perbandaran   (Building Heights) Aviation) AND (Department of (Municipal) Majlis Perbandaran Aviation) (Municipal) Special Reserves / Zones Control State Special Economic Zones State Government             (i.e Port Klang Free Zone) National Heritage Act Heritage 2005 Commission Private Developers/ Heritage Commission Malaysia AND/OR Peraturan Untuk Heritage Zones Malaysia AND/OR Respective Ministry Majlis Perbandaran (Municipal) Kawasan Pemuliharaan Majlis Perbandaran & Bangunan-Bangunan (Municipal) Warisan 2009 Jabatan Pengairan Jabatan Pengairan & Saliran & Saliran (Department (Department of Irrigation & Jabatan Pengairan & Saliran of Irrigation & Jabatan Pengairan & Saliran Drainage) (Department of Irrigation & Drainage) Drainage) (Department of Irrigation & Drainage) Waters Act 1920 (Act River Reserve Ministry of Natural Ministry of Natural Resources & Ministry of Natural Ministry of Natural Resources & 418) Resources & Environment Resources & Environment Environment Environment OR OR Majlis Perbandaran Private Developers (Municipal) Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation National Forestry Act Forestry Department Forest Reserve 1984 (Amendment Ministry of Natural Resources & Environment 1993) Protected Areas And Restricted Zones Ministry of Home Affairs Protected Places Act 1959 Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  47    Table 3-5: Institutional Map: Iskandar Malaysia Region, Johor Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation 48 Annexes Jabatan Jabatan Town And Country Perancangan & Jabatan Johor State Perancangan & Planning Act 1976 [Act Pembangunan Perancangan & Government AND Jabatan Perancangan & Pembangunan Pembangunan 172] Majlis Perbandaran Pembangunan Zoning & Land use * Iskandar Regional Majlis Perbandaran AND Majlis Perbandaran Amendments AND/OR Majlis Perbandaran Development * IRDA AND/OR Iskandar Regional Johor State AND Authority (IRDA) Johor State Development Authority Government AND * IRDA Government Act 2007 (Act 664) * IRDA Road Network (includes Street Lighting) Act 231 Highway Lembaga Lebuhraya Lembaga Lebuhraya Private Authority Malaysia Private Highways Ministry of Works Private Concessionaire Malaysia Malaysia Concessionaire (Incorporation) Act 1980 Ministry of Works Jabatan Kerja Raya (Department of Public Works) Ministry of Works Federal Highways / AND AND Federal Road Act 1959 Roads * IRDA * IRDA Jabatan Johor State Road Transport Act Perancangan & Government Jabatan Kejuruteraan Majlis Perbandaran 1987 Majlis Perbandaran AND/OR Pembangunan Municipal Roads Majlis Perbandaran AND/OR Street, Drainage and Johor State Government Majlis Perbandaran AND/OR * IRDA Building Act 1974 AND * IRDA (1994) *IRDA Transport Network Johor State Majlis Perbandaran Municipal OR Government AND/ AND/OR Public Parking Private Developers OR Majlis Perbandaran OR Johor State * IRDA * IRDA Government Johor State Municipal OR Private Parking Majlis Perbandaran Private Developers Government Private Developers Private Developers Suruhanjaya Majlis Perbandaran Pengangkutan Suruhanjaya Pengangkutan Awam Darat Majlis Perbandaran Suruhanjaya Bus Network & AND/OR Awam Darat (SPAD) Land Public Transport (SPAD) AND/OR AND/OR Pengangkutan Stations Johor State AND/OR Act 2010 * IRDA * IRDA Awam Darat (SPAD) Government * IRDA AND/OR Municipal Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Suruhanjaya Suruhanjaya Pengangkutan Suruhanjaya KTMB (Keretapi Rail Network & Federal owned Corporations Land Public Transport Pengangkutan Awam Darat (SPAD) Pengangkutan Tanah Melayu Stations KTMB (Keretapi Tanah Melayu Berhad) Act 2010 Awam Darat (SPAD) AND Awam Darat (SPAD) Berhad) *IRDA Suruhanjaya Suruhanjaya Pengangkutan Land Public Transport Taxis & Taxi Stop Pengangkutan Awam Darat (SPAD) Suruhanjaya Pengangkutan Awam Darat (SPAD) Act 2010 Awam Darat (SPAD) AND *IRDA Suruhanjaya Suruhanjaya Pengangkutan Other Land Public Land Public Transport Pengangkutan Awam Darat (SPAD) Suruhanjaya Pengangkutan Awam Darat (SPAD) Transport Act 2010 Awam Darat (SPAD) AND *IRDA Department of Civil Aviation Department of Civil Aviation Airports Malaysia Airports Holdings Berhad Civil Aviation Act 1969 Ministry of Transport Ministry of Transport Majlis Perbandaran Johor State AND/OR Cycling Network Majlis Perbandaran Majlis Perbandaran Government Johor State Government Majlis Perbandaran Johor State AND/OR Pedestrian Network Majlis Perbandaran Majlis Perbandaran Government Johor State Government Jabatan Pengairan Jabatan Pengairan & Saliran & Saliran (Department Jabatan Pengairan (Department of Irrigation & Jabatan Pengairan & Saliran of Irrigation & Drainage) Jabatan Pengairan & Saliran (Department Drainage & Irrigation Ministry of Natural Drainage) Ministry of Natural & Saliran (Department of Irrigation & Drainage Works Act (Flood Mitigation) - Resources & Ministry of Natural Resources & (Department of Irrigation & Drainage) 1954 (1988) Non Privatised Environment Resources & Environment of Irrigation & Drainage) AND Ministry of Natural Environment OR Drainage) * IRDA Resources & OR Majlis Perbandaran Environment Private Developers AND/OR AND/OR * IRDA Johor State Government Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  49    Table 3-5 Continued Construction / Maintenance / 50 Annexes Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Municipal OR Drainage & Irrigation Ministry of Natural Majlis Perbandaran Private Developers Municipal OR (Local Drainage Resources & Majlis Perbandaran AND/OR AND Private Developers Network) Environment *IRDA * IRDA Suruhanjaya Perkhidmatan Air Negara - SPAN (National Suruhanjaya Water Services Perkhidmatan Jabatan Commission) Air Negara - Perkhidmatan AND Sewerage Services Act SPAN (National Pembentungan Badan Kawal 1993 (Act 508) Water Services (Sewerage Services Setia Negeri Johor Indah Water Sewerage Indah Water Konsortium (IWK) Act 654 Suruhanjaya Commission Department) (BAKAJ) Konsortium (IWK) Perkhidmatan Air AND Ministry of Energy, AND Negara Act 2006 Badan Kawal Green Technology & Jabatan Alam Setia Negeri Johor Water (KETTHA) Sekitar (BAKAJ) (Department of Environment) Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment Jabatan Pengurusan Jabatan Pengurusan Perbadanan Sisa Pepejal Negara Sisa Pepejal Negara Pengurusan (National Solid Perbadanan Pengurusan Sisa Pepejal dan (National Solid Sisa Pepejal dan Solid Waste Ministry of Urban Solid Waste Waste Management Pembersihan Awam (PPSPPA) Waste Management Pembersihan Awam Management and Public Wellbeing, Housing (Collection) Department) Ministry of Urban Wellbeing, Housing & Department) (PPSPPA) Cleansing Corporation & Local Government Ministry of Urban Local Government Ministry of Urban Ministry of Urban Act 2007 (Act 673) Wellbeing, Housing Wellbeing, Housing Wellbeing, Housing & Local Government & Local Government & Local Government Jabatan Pengurusan Sisa Pepejal Negara Jabatan Pengurusan Jabatan Pengurusan Jabatan Alam (National Solid Sisa Pepejal Negara Sisa Pepejal Negara Ministry of Urban Sekitar Waste Management (National Solid (National Solid Act 672 - Solid Waste Wellbeing, Housing (Department of Solid Waste Department) Waste Management Majlis Perbandaran Waste Management and Public Cleansing & Local Government Environment) (Disposal - Public) Ministry of Urban Department) (Municipality) Department) Management Act 2007 AND/OR Ministry of Natural Wellbeing, Housing Ministry of Urban Ministry of Urban (effluent) *IRDA Resources and & Local Government Wellbeing, Housing Wellbeing, Housing Environment AND/OR & Local Government & Local Government *IRDA Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Jabatan Pengurusan Sisa Pepejal Negara Jabatan Pengurusan Jabatan Alam (National Solid Sisa Pepejal Negara Sekitar Act 672 - Solid Waste Waste Management (National Solid Ministry of Urban (Department of and Public Cleansing Solid Waste Department) Waste Management Wellbeing, Housing Private Concessionaire Environment) Management Act 2007 (Disposal - Private) Ministry of Urban Department) & Local Government Ministry of Natural Local Government Wellbeing, Housing Ministry of Urban Resources and (Amendment) Act 2007 & Local Government Wellbeing, Housing Environment AND/OR & Local Government *IRDA Suruhanjaya Suruhanjaya Perkhidmatan Perkhidmatan Jabatan Bekalan Air Air Negara - Air Negara - Act 654 – Suruhanjaya (Sewerage Services SPAN (National SPAN (National Perkhidmatan Air Department) Syarikat Air Johor Water Water Services Syarikat Air Johor (SAJ) Holdings Water Services Negara Act 2006 Ministry of Energy, (SAJ) Holdings Commission) AND Commission) AND Act 655 - Water Service Green Technology & Badan Kawal Badan Kawal Industry Act 2006 Water (KETTHA) Setia Negeri Johor Setia Negeri Johor (BAKAJ) (BAKAJ) Act 610 - Energy Tenaga Nasional Electricity Network Tenaga Nasional Tenaga Nasional Tenaga Nasional Commission Act 2001 Suruhanjaya Tenaga Berhad OR Private Suruhanjaya Tenaga (Distribution) Berhad AND *IRDA Berhad Berhad Act 447 - Electricity Developer Supply Act 1990 Malaysia Communications and Malaysia Communications Multimedia Act 1998 Telecommunications Communications Malaysia Communications and Multimedia and Multimedia Private Telecommunications Companies Communications and Network and Multimedia Commission Commission AND Multimedia Commission Commission *IRDA Act (1998) Gas Malaysia Gas Supply Suruhanjaya Tenaga Gas Malaysia Berhad (MMC Company) Suruhanjaya Tenaga Berhad ( MMC Gas Supply Act 1993 Company) Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  51    Table 3-5 Continued Construction / Maintenance / 52 Annexes Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Public Buildings and Services Municipal AND/OR Jabatan Alam Sekitar Public Markets & Majlis Perbandaran AND/OR (Department of Majlis Perbandaran Hawkers Johor State Government Environment) Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment Open Spaces & Majlis Perbandaran AND/OR Majlis Perbandaran Public Parks Johor State Government Ministry of Home Jabatan Kerja Raya Jabatan Kerja Raya Affairs AND/OR (Public Works (Public Works Polis Diraja Jabatan Perancang Department) Department) Malaysia Police Stations & Bandar dan Desa AND Polis Diraja AND Polis Diraja (Police Department) Ministry of Home Affairs Services Ministry of Malaysia Malaysia Ministry of Home Urban Wellbeing, (Police Department) (Police Department) Affairs Housing and Local Ministry of Home Ministry of Home Government Affairs AND *IRDA Affairs Ministry of Fire Stations & Urban Wellbeing, Fire Department (BOMBA) Fire Services Act 1988 Services Housing and Local Ministry of Urban Wellbeing, Housing and Local Government (Act 341) Government Ministry of Health AND/OR Jabatan Perancang Jabatan Kerja Raya (Public Works Hospitals and Bandar dan Desa Ministry of Health Department) AND Bahagian Pembangunan Ministry of Health Medical Care Ministry of OR Private Hospital Ministry of Health OR Private Hospital Urban Wellbeing, Housing and Local Government Ministry of Jabatan Kerja Raya (Public Works Schools Ministry of Education Education Department) AND Ministry of Education Institute of Higher Ministry of Higher Private OR Public Education Institution AND Ministry of Higher Ministry of Higher Education Learning Education Education Libraries Ministry of Information, Communication and Culture Art & Cultural Ministry of Information, Communication and Culture Centers Ministry of Tourism Hotels Private Developers Ministry of Tourism & Culture Innkeepers Act 1952 & Culture Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Welfare Department Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of Homes, Nurseries & Women, Family Women, Family Act 308 Child Care Private Business Owner Women, Family Kindergartens & Community & Community Centre Act 1984 & Community Development Development Development Community Centers (Including Majlis Perbandaran AND/OR Sports Facilities, Johor State Government Multipurpose Halls, etc) Public Housing-PPR Jabatan Perumahan Negara Majlis Perbandaran (Funded Federal) Public Housing-PPR Bahagian Perumahan Syarikat Perumahan Bahagian Perumahan Majlis Perbandaran   (State) Setiausaha Kerajaan Johor Negara Berhad Setiausaha Kerajaan Johor Majlis Perbandaran Majlis Perbandaran AND/OR AND/OR Advertisements Private Companies Private Companies Johor State Johor State Government Government Majlis Perbandaran Traffic Management/ (Local Municipal Majlis Perbandaran AND/OR Congestion Control ) AND/OR Police Johor State Government and Monitoring Diraja Malaysia (PDRM) Land Valuations Local Government Act Valuation and Property Management Department (Municipal) (State Land) 171 Land Valuations Valuation and Property Services Department, Ministry of Finance (Federal Land) Building Control Ministry of Ministry of Urban Wellbeing, Urban Wellbeing, Housing and Local Private Owners/ Housing and Local 1. Street, Drainage And Commercial Private Developers Majlis Perbandaran Government AND JMB Government AND Building Act 1974 Majlis Perbandaran Majlis Perbandaran (Municipal) (Municipal) Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  53    Table 3-5 Continued Construction / Maintenance / 54 Annexes Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Ministry of Ministry of 1. Street, Drainage And Urban Wellbeing, Urban Wellbeing, Building Act 1974 Housing and Local Private Owners/ Housing and Local Residential Private Developers Majlis Perbandaran Government AND JMB Government AND 2.Housing Development Majlis Perbandaran Majlis Perbandaran (Control and Licensing) (Municipal) (Municipal) 1966 [Act 118] Ministry of Ministry of Urban Wellbeing, Urban Wellbeing, Housing and Local Housing and Local 1. Street, Drainage And Public Buildings Respective Ministries Majlis Perbandaran Government AND Government AND Building Act 1974 Majlis Perbandaran Majlis Perbandaran (Municipal) (Municipal) Heritage Commission Private Developers/ Heritage Commission Malaysia AND/OR National Heritage Act Heritage Buildings Malaysia AND/OR Respective Ministry Majlis Perbandaran (Municipal) 2005 Majlis Perbandaran (Municipal) Ministry of Transport Ministry of Ministry of Transport (Department No Fly Zones (Department of Transport Private Developers of Aviation) AND Majlis Perbandaran (Building Heights) Aviation) AND (Department of (Municipal) Majlis Perbandaran Aviation) (Municipal) Special Reserves / Zones Control Iskandar Regional Iskandar Malaysia Ministry of Finance AND IRDA Development Authority Act 2007 (Act 664) Heritage Commission Private Developers/ Heritage Commission Malaysia AND/OR National Heritage Act Heritage Zones Malaysia AND/OR Respective Ministry Majlis Perbandaran (Municipal) 2005 Majlis Perbandaran (Municipal) Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Jabatan Pengairan Jabatan Pengairan & Saliran & Saliran (Department (Department of Irrigation & Jabatan Pengairan & Saliran of Irrigation & Jabatan Pengairan & Saliran Drainage) (Department of Irrigation & Drainage) Drainage) (Department of Irrigation & Drainage) Waters Act 1920 (Act River Reserve Ministry of Natural Ministry of Natural Resources & Ministry of Natural Ministry of Natural Resources & 418) Resources & Environment Resources & Environment Environment Environment OR OR Majlis Perbandaran Private Developers (Municipal) National Forestry Act Forestry Department Forest Reserve 1984 (Amendment Ministry of Natural Resources & Environment 1993) Protected Areas And Restricted Zones Ministry of Home Affairs Protected Places Act 1959 Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  55    Table 3-6: Institutional Map: East Coast Economic Corridor area / Pahang Construction / Maintenance / 56 Annexes Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Town And Country Planning Act 1976 [Act Pahang State Jabatan Jabatan Jabatan 172] Amendments Government Perancangan Perancangan Jabatan Perancangan Pembangunan Perancanagan National Land Code AND East Coast Pembangunan Zoning & Land use Pembangunan Majlis Perbandaran AND ECERDC AND/OR Pembangunan 1965 (Act 56) Economic Region Majlis Perbandaran Majlis Perbandaran Pahang State Government Majlis Perbandaran East Coast Economic Development AND/OR Pahang AND ECERDC AND ECERDC Region Development Council (ECERDC) State Government Council Act 2008 (Act 688) Road Network Act 231 Highway Lembaga Lebuhraya Lembaga Lebuhraya Private Authority Malaysia Private Highways Ministry of Works Private Concessionaire Malaysia Malaysia Concessionaire (Incorporation) Act 1980 Federal Highways / Ministry of Works Jabatan Kerja Raya (Department of Public Works) Ministry of Works Federal Road Act 1959 Roads AND ECERDC AND ECERDC Road Transport Act 1987 Street, Drainage and Private Majlis Perbandaran Jabatan Building Act 1974 Concessionaire, Majlis Perbandaran AND/OR ECERDC Jabatan Kejuruteraan Majlis Perbandaran Perancangan (1994) Municipal Roads Majlis Perbandaran AND/OR Pahang AND Pahang State AND/OR ECERDC Pembangunan Street, Drainage AND/OR Pahang State Government Government Majlis Perbandaran and Building By-law State Government (Compounding Offenses) (MPK) 1983 Transport Network Majlis Perbandaran Majlis Perbandaran AND/OR Pahang State OR Jabatan Road Transport Order Pahang State Majlis Perbandaran Public Parking Government Perancangan (Allocation of Car Park) Government OR Private Developers Bandar dan Desa (MPK) 2005 Pahang Majlis Perbandaran Private Developers Pahang State Private Car Park By-law Private Parking OR Majlis Perbandaran Private Developers Government (MPK) 1985 Private Developers Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Majlis Perbandaran Bus Network & Suruhanjaya Pengangkutan Awam Darat (SPAD) Suruhanjaya Pengangkutan Awam Darat Land Public Transport AND/OR Pahang Stations AND/OR ECERDC (SPAD) Act 2010 State Government Publicly owned Suruhanjaya Suruhanjaya Suruhanjaya Corporations Rail Network & Pengangkutan Publicly owned Corporations Land Public Transport Pengangkutan Pengangkutan KTMB (Keretapi Stations Awam Darat (SPAD) KTMB (Keretapi Tanah Melayu Berhad) Act 2010 Awam Darat (SPAD) Awam Darat (SPAD) Tanah Melayu AND/OR ECERDC Berhad) Suruhanjaya Suruhanjaya Pengangkutan Land Public Transport Taxis Pengangkutan Suruhanjaya Pengangkutan Awam Darat (SPAD) Awam Darat (SPAD) Act 2010 Awam Darat (SPAD) AND ECERDC Other Land Public Land Public Transport Suruhanjaya Pengangkutan Awam Darat (SPAD) Transport Act 2010 Department of Civil Aviation Department of Civil Aviation Airports Malaysia Airports Holdings Berhad Civil Aviation Act 1969 Ministry of Transport Ministry of Transport Pahang State Pahang State Cycling Network Majlis Perbandaran Majlis Perbandaran Government Government Pahang State Pedestrian Network Majlis Perbandaran Government Jabatan Pengairan & Saliran Jabatan Pengairan (Department Jabatan Pengairan & Saliran of Irrigation & & Saliran (Department Drainage) (Department Jabatan Pengairan & Saliran Drainage & Ministry of Natural of Irrigation Ministry of Natural of Irrigation & (Department of Irrigation & Drainage) Drainage Works Act Irrigation (Flood Resources & & Drainage) Resources & Drainage) Ministry of Natural Resources & 1954 (1988) Mitigation) Environment Ministry of Natural Environment Ministry of Natural Environment Resources & OR Resources & Environment AND/ Majlis Perbandaran Environment OR ECERDC AND/OR Pahang State Government Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  57    Table 3-6 Continued Construction / Maintenance / 58 Annexes Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Street, Drainage and Building Act 1974 (1994) Street, Drainage and Building By-law (Compounding Offenses) (MPK) 1983 Drainage & Ministry of Natural Municipal OR Local Government Act Irrigation (Local Resources & Majlis Perbandaran Private Developers (1976): (Peninsular) Drainage Network) Environment Town and Country Planning Act 1976 Uniform Building (Pahang) By-Laws 1996 Uniform (Pahang) (Amendments) By-Laws 2000 Jabatan Suruhanjaya Perkhidmatan Suruhanjaya Sewerage Services Act Perkhidmatan Pembentungan Perkhidmatan 1993 (Act 508) Air Negara - (Sewerage Services Air Negara - Indah Water Sewerage Indah Water Konsortium (IWK) Act 654 Suruhanjaya SPAN (National Department) SPAN (National Konsortium (IWK) Perkhidmatan Air Water Services Ministry of Energy, Water Services Negara Act 2006 Commission Green Technology & Commission) Water (KETTHA) Jabatan Pengurusan Jabatan Pengurusan Perbadanan Sisa Pepejal Negara Sisa Pepejal Negara Pengurusan (National Solid Perbadanan Pengurusan Sisa Pepejal dan (National Solid Sisa Pepejal dan Solid Waste Ministry of Urban Solid Waste Waste Management Pembersihan Awam (PPSPPA) Waste Management Pembersihan Awam Management and Public Wellbeing, Housing (Collection) Department) Ministry of Urban Wellbeing, Housing & Department) (PPSPPA) Cleansing Corporation & Local Government Ministry of Urban Local Government Ministry of Urban Ministry of Urban Act 2007 (Act 673) Wellbeing, Housing Wellbeing, Housing Wellbeing, Housing & Local Government & Local Government & Local Government Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Act 672 - Solid Waste and Public Cleansing Management Act 2007 (effluent) Refuse Collection, Jabatan Pengurusan Jabatan Alam Removal and Disposal Sisa Pepejal Negara Jabatan Pengurusan Sisa Pepejal Negara Sekitar By-law MPK 1983 (National Solid Ministry of Urban (National Solid Waste Management (Department of Collection, Removal Solid Waste Waste Management Wellbeing, Housing Department) Majlis Perbandaran Environment) and Disposal of Solid (Disposal - Public) Department) & Local Government Ministry of Urban Wellbeing, Housing & Ministry of Natural Waste By-law (MPK) Ministry of Urban Local Government Resources and (amendment) 2007 Wellbeing, Housing Environment Guidelines and Policies & Local Government Regarding Solid Waste Storage System at MPK (approved by MPK Full Meeting No. 1/89 dated 2 February 1989) Jabatan Pengurusan Jabatan Pengurusan Jabatan Alam Sisa Pepejal Negara Sisa Pepejal Negara Sekitar Act 672 - Solid Waste (National Solid (National Solid Ministry of Urban (Department of and Public Cleansing Solid Waste Waste Management Waste Management Wellbeing, Housing Private Concessionaire Environment) Management Act 2007 (Disposal - Private) Department) Department) & Local Government Ministry of Natural Local Government Ministry of Urban Ministry of Urban Resources and (Amendment) Act 2007 Wellbeing, Housing Wellbeing, Housing Environment & Local Government & Local Government Suruhanjaya Jabatan Bekalan Air Suruhanjaya Act 654 – Suruhanjaya Perkhidmatan (Sewerage Services Perkhidmatan Pengurusan Air Perkhidmatan Air Air Negara - Department) Air Negara - Water Pengurusan Air Pahang Berhad (PAIP) Pahang Berhad Negara Act 2006 SPAN (National Ministry of Energy, SPAN (National (PAIP) Act 655 - Water Service Water Services Green Technology & Water Services Industry Act 2006 Commission) Water (KETTHA) Commission) Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  59    Table 3-6 Continued Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation 60 Annexes Act 610 - Energy Tenaga Nasional Electricity Network Tenaga Nasional Tenaga Nasional Tenaga Nasional Commission Act 2001 Suruhanjaya Tenaga Berhad OR Private Suruhanjaya Tenaga (Distribution) Berhad Berhad Berhad Act 447 - Electricity Developer Supply Act 1990 Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 Telecommunications Malaysia Communications and Multimedia Malaysia Communications and Multimedia Private Telecommunications Companies Communications and Network Commission Commission Multimedia Commission Act (1998) Gas Malaysia Gas Supply Suruhanjaya Tenaga Gas Malaysia Berhad ( MMC Company) Suruhanjaya Tenaga Berhad ( MMC Gas Supply Act 1993 Company) Public Buildings and Core Urban Services Wholesale Market Majlis Perbandaran By-law (MPK) 2007 AND/OR Jabatan Petty Traders By-law Alam Sekitar (MPK) 1993 Public Markets & (Department of Majlis Perbandaran Majlis Perbandaran Market By-law (MPK) Hawkers Environment) 1990 Ministry of Natural Control and Monitoring Resources and of Food Premise By-law Environment (MPK) 1983 Open Spaces & Majlis Perbandaran Park By-law (MPK) 2006 Public Parks Ministry of Home Affairs AND/OR Jabatan Perancang Polis Diraja Malaysia Police Stations Bandar dan Desa (Police Department) Ministry of Home Affairs Ministry of Ministry of Home Affairs Urban Wellbeing, Housing and Local Government Ministry of Urban Wellbeing, Fire Department (BOMBA) Fire Services Act 1988 Fire Stations Housing and Local Ministry of Urban Wellbeing, Housing and Local Government (Act 341) Government Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Ministry of Health AND/OR Jabatan Perancang Hospitals and Bandar dan Desa Bahagian Pembangunan Ministry of Health Ministry of Health Medical Care Ministry of Ministry of Health OR Private Hospital OR Private Hospital Urban Wellbeing, Housing and Local Government Ministry of Ministry of Education AND Jabatan Kerja Schools Ministry of Education Education Raya (Public Works Department) Institute of Higher Ministry of Higher Ministry of Higher Education AND Ministry of Higher Education Learning Education Private OR Public Education Institution Libraries Ministry of Information, Communication and Culture Art & Cultural Ministry of Information, Communication and Culture Centers Innkeepers Act 1952 Ministry of Tourism Boarding House Hotels Private Developers Ministry of Tourism & Culture & Culture Procedure (Amendment) (MPK) 1983 Welfare Department Welfare Department Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of Homes, Nurseries & Women, Family Women, Family Act 308 CHILD CARE Women, Family Private Business Owner Women, Family Kindergardens & Community & Community CENTRE ACT 1984 & Community & Community Development Development Development Development Community Centers (Including Sports Facilities, Majlis Perbandaran Multipurpose Halls, etc) Public Housing-PPR Jabatan Perumahan Negara Majlis Perbandaran (Funded Federal) Housing Division Housing Division Public Housing - Jabatan Perumahan SPNB AND/OR Pahang State JMB Pahang State PPR (State) Negara Private Developers Government Government Advertising By-law ( Advertisements Majlis Perbandaran Private Companies Majlis Perbandaran Private Companies MPK ) 1983 Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  61    Table 3-6 Continued Construction / Maintenance / 62 Annexes Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Majlis Perbandaran Traffic Management/ (Local Municipal) Majlis Perbandaran AND/OR Congestion Control AND/OR Police Pahang State Government and Monitoring Diraja Malaysia (PDRM) Land Valuations Local Government Act Valuation and Property Management Department (Municipal) (State Land) 171 Land Valuations Valuation and Property Services Department, Ministry of Finance (Federal Land) Building Control 1. Street, Drainage And Building Act 1974 2. Building and Common Ministry of Ministry of Property (Maintenance Urban Wellbeing, Urban Wellbeing, Private Owners/ and Management) Act Commercial Housing and Local Private Developers Housing and Local Majlis Perbandaran JMB 2007 [Act 663] Government AND Government AND 3.Building By-law Majlis Perbandaran Majlis Perbandaran (Pahang) 1996 (Amendment) 2000 (Amendment) 2007 1. Street, Drainage And Building Act 1974 2.Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Ministry of Ministry of 1966 [Act 118] Urban Wellbeing, Urban Wellbeing, 3. Building and Common Private Owners/ Residential Housing and Local Private Developers Housing and Local Majlis Perbandaran Property (Maintenance JMB Government AND Government AND and Management) Act Majlis Perbandaran Majlis Perbandaran 2007 [Act 663] 4.Building By-law (Pahang) 1996 (Amendment) 2000 (Amendment) 2007 1. Street, Drainage And Ministry of Ministry of Building Act 1974 Urban Wellbeing, Urban Wellbeing, 2. .Building By-law Public Buildings Housing and Local Respective Ministries Housing and Local Majlis Perbandaran (Pahang) 1996 Government AND Government AND (Amendment) 2000 Majlis Perbandaran Majlis Perbandaran (Amendment) 2007 Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Heritage Heritage Heritage Commission Private Developers/ Commission Commission National Heritage Act Heritage Buildings Malaysia AND/OR Respective Ministry Malaysia AND/OR Malaysia AND/OR 2005 Majlis Perbandaran Majlis Perbandaran Majlis Perbandaran Ministry of Ministry of Civil Aviation Act 1969 Transport No Fly Zones Transport Ministry of Transport (Department of Airport Standards (Department of Private Developers (Building Heights) (Department of Aviation) AND Majlis Perbandaran Directive 401 (Control Aviation) AND Aviation) And Denoting Obstacles) Majlis Perbandaran Special Reserves / Zones Control East Coast Economic Special Economic Region Development Ministry of Finance and ECERDC Zone (e.g. ECER SEZ) Council Act 2008 (Act 688) Heritage Heritage Heritage Commission Private Developers/ Commission Commission National Heritage Act Heritage Zones Malaysia AND/OR Respective Ministry Malaysia AND/OR Malaysia AND/OR 2005 Majlis Perbandaran Majlis Perbandaran Majlis Perbandaran Jabatan Pengairan Jabatan Pengairan & Saliran & Saliran (Department (Department Jabatan Pengairan & Saliran of Irrigation & of Irrigation & Jabatan Pengairan & Saliran Waters Act 1920 (Act (Department of Irrigation & Drainage) Drainage) Drainage) (Department of Irrigation & Drainage) 418) River Reserve Ministry of Natural Resources & Ministry of Natural Ministry of Natural Ministry of Natural Resources & Earthworks (MPK) Environment Resources & Resources & Environment By-Laws 1992 Environment Environment OR OR Private Developers Majlis Perbandaran National Forestry Act Forestry Department Forest Reserve 1984 (Amendment Ministry of Natural Resources & Environment 1993) Protected Areas And Restricted Zones Ministry of Home Affairs Protected Places Act 1959 Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  63    Table 3-7: Institutional Map: Kota Kinabalu, Sabah Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation 64 Annexes 1. Article 95D & 95E of the Malaysian Constitution (Sabah does not have Sabah State Sabah State Sabah State to adhere to policies Ministry of Local Ministry of Local Ministry of Local determined by the Government & Government & Government & National Council for Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Zoning & Land use Housing Housing Housing Local Government & Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu AND AND AND National Land Council) Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya 2. Local Government Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Ordinance 1961 (Sabah No. 11 of 1991) 3. Town and Country Planning Ordinance (Sabah Cap. 141) Road Network (includes Street Lighting) Akta 231, Lembaga Lebuhraya Private Private Lembaga Lebuhraya Private Akta Lembaga Private Highways Ministry of Works Malaysia Concessionaire Concessionaire Malaysia Concessionaire Lebuhraya Malaysia (Perbadanan) 1980 Jabatan Kerja Raya Jabatan Kerja Raya Jabatan Kerja Raya Jabatan Kerja Raya Sabah (Department Sabah (Department Sabah (Department Sabah (Department of Public Works) of Public Works) of Public Works) of Public Works) Jabatan Kerja Raya Sabah State Sabah State Sabah State Federal Highways / Sabah State Ministry Ministry of Works Sabah (Department Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of Federal Road Act 1959 Roads of Infrastructure of Public Works) Infrastructure Infrastructure Infrastructure Development Development Development Development Federal Ministry of Federal Ministry of Federal Ministry of Federal Ministry of Works Works Works Works Jabatan Kerja Raya Sabah State Sabah (Department Ministry of Local Jabatan Kerja Raya of Public Works) Jabatan Kerja Raya Jabatan Kerja Raya Government & Jabatan Kerja Raya Road Transport Act State / Municipal Sabah Sabah State Sabah (Department Sabah (Department Housing Sabah (Department 1987 Roads (Department of Ministry of of Public Works) of Public Works) AND of Public Works) Public Works) Infrastructure Dewan Bandaraya Development Kota Kinabalu Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Transport Network Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Public Parking Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Private Parking Kota Kinabalu OR Majlis Perbandaran Private Developers Kota Kinabalu Private Developers Private Developers Private Developers Sabah State Ministry of Infrastructure Sabah State Development Sabah Commercial Sabah Commercial Ministry of (Public Transport Vehicle Licensing Vehicle Licensing Bus Network & Infrastructure Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Division) AND Board (Prime Board (Prime Stations Development Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Sabah Commercial Minister’s Minister’s (Public Transport Vehicle Licensing Department) Department) Division) Board (Prime Minister’s Department) Sabah State Sabah State Ministry of Ministry of Jabatan Kerja Raya Jabatan Kerja Raya Jabatan Kerja Raya Jabatan Kerja Raya Rail Network & Infrastructure Infrastructure Sabah (Department Sabah (Department Sabah (Department Sabah (Department   Stations Development Development of Public Works) of Public Works) of Public Works) of Public Works) (Public Transport (Public Transport Division) Division) Sabah Commercial Sabah Commercial Sabah Commercial Sabah Commercial Vehicle Licensing Vehicle Licensing Vehicle Licensing Vehicle Licensing Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya LPKP Act 1987 Taxis & Taxi Stop Board (Prime Board (Prime Board (Prime Board (Prime Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu (Amendment 1998)  Minister’s Minister’s Minister’s Minister’s Department) Department) Department) Department) Sabah State Sabah State Sabah State Sabah State Sabah State Ministry Sabah State Ministry Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of of Infrastructure of Infrastructure Infrastructure Infrastructure Infrastructure Infrastructure Development (Public Development (Public Development Development Development Development Transport Division) Transport Division) (Public Transport (Public Transport (Public Transport (Public Transport Other Land Public AND AND Division) AND Division) AND Division) AND Division) AND Transport Sabah Commercial Sabah Commercial Sabah Commercial Sabah Commercial Sabah Commercial Sabah Commercial Vehicle Licensing Vehicle Licensing Vehicle Licensing Vehicle Licensing Vehicle Licensing Vehicle Licensing Board (Prime Board (Prime Board (Prime Board (Prime Board (Prime Board (Prime Minister’s Minister’s Minister’s Minister’s Minister’s Minister’s Department) Department) Department) Department) Department) Department) Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  65    Table 3-7 Continued Construction / Maintenance / 66 Annexes Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Department of Civil Department of Civil Department of Civil Department of Civil Aviation Aviation Malaysi Airports Malaysi Airports Aviation Aviation CIVIL AVIATION ACT Airports Ministry of Ministry of Holdings Berhad Holdings Berhad Ministry of Ministry of 1969 Transport Transport Transport Transport Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Cycling Network Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Pedestrian Network Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Jabatan Pengairan Jabatan Pengairan Jabatan Pengairan Jabatan Pengairan Jabatan Pengairan & Jabatan Pengairan & Drainage & & Saliran, Sabah & Saliran, Sabah & Saliran, Sabah & Saliran, Sabah Saliran, Sabah Saliran, Sabah Irrigation (Flood Sabah State Sabah State Sabah State Sabah State Sabah State Ministry Sabah State Ministry   Mitigation) - Non Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of of Agriculture & Food of Agriculture & Privatised Agriculture & Food Agriculture & Food Agriculture & Food Agriculture & Food Industry Food Industry Industry Industry Industry Industry 1. Kota Kinabalu City Hall (DBKK) Enactment Sabah State 1996 Ministry of Local 2. Local Government Drainage & Government & DBKK OR DBKK OR Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Ordinance 1961 Irrigation (Local Housing Private Developers Private Developers Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu (Sabah No. 11 of 1991) Drainage Network) AND 3.The State Dewan Bandaraya Conservation Kota Kinabalu of Environment Enactment (1996) Akta Perkhidmatan Pembetungan 1993 Dewan Bandaraya (AKTA 508) Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Kota Kinabalu Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Sewerage ACT 654 – Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu (Chief Ministers Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Suruhanjaya Department) Perkhidmatan Air Negara ACT 2006 Solid Waste Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya (Collection) Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Solid Waste Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya (Disposal - Public) Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Solid Waste Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Private Private Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya   (Disposal - Private) Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Concessionaire Concessionaire Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Water Supply Sabah State Water Sabah State Water Sabah State Water Sabah State Water Ordinance 1961 Sabah State Water Sabah State Water Department Department Department Department (Sabah No. 16 of Department Department Sabah State Sabah State Sabah State Sabah State 1961) Water Sabah State Ministry Sabah State Ministry Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of Sabah Water of Infrastructure of Infrastructure Infrastructure Infrastructure Infrastructure Infrastructure Resources Enactment Development Development Development Development Development Development 1998 (Sabah No. 6 of 1998) Electricity Board Ordinance 1956 Electricity Network Sabah Electricity Sabah Electricity Sabah Electricity Sabah Electricity (Sabah No. 27 of Suruhanjaya Tenaga Suruhanjaya Tenaga (Distribution) Sdn. Bhd. (SESB) Sdn. Bhd. (SESB) Sdn. Bhd. (SESB) Sdn. Bhd. (SESB) 1956) Electricity Ordinance (Sabah Cap. 40) Communications and Malaysia Malaysia Malaysia Malaysia Multimedia Act 1998 Private Private Telecommunications Communications Communications Communications Communications Communications Telecommunications Telecommunications Network and Multimedia and Multimedia and Multimedia and Multimedia and Multimedia Companies Companies Commission Commission Commission Commission Commission Act (1998) Gas Malaysia Gas Malaysia Gas Malaysia Berhad Gas Malaysia Berhad GAS SUPPLY ACT Gas Supply Suruhanjaya Tenaga Berhad ( MMC Suruhanjaya Tenaga Berhad ( MMC ( MMC Company) ( MMC Company) 1993 Company) Company) Public Buildings and Services Public Markets & Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Hawkers Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Open Spaces & Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Public Parks Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Jabatan Kerja Raya Jabatan Kerja Raya (Public Works (Public Works Department) Polis Diraja Malaysia Department) AND Police Stations & Ministry of Home AND Polis Diraja (Police Department) Ministry of Home Ministry of Home Polis Diraja Malaysia Services Affairs Malaysia Ministry of Home Affairs Affairs (Police Department) (Police Department) Affairs Ministry of Home Ministry of Home Affairs Affairs Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  67    Table 3-7 Continued Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation 68 Annexes Fire Department Fire Department Fire Department Fire Department Fire Department Ministry of (BOMBA) (BOMBA) (BOMBA) (BOMBA) (BOMBA) Fire Stations & Urban Wellbeing, Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of Fire Services Act 1988 Services Housing and Local Urban Wellbeing, Urban Wellbeing, Urban Wellbeing, Urban Wellbeing, Urban Wellbeing, (Act 341) Government Housing and Local Housing and Local Housing and Local Housing and Local Housing and Local Government Government Government Government Government Jabatan Kerja Raya Jabatan Kerja Raya Ministry of Health (Public Works (Public Works AND/OR Department) Department) Hospitals and Sabah State Ministry of Health AND Bahagian AND Bahagian Ministry of Health Ministry of Health Medical Care Ministry of Local OR Private Hospital Pembangunan Pembangunan Government & Ministry of Health Ministry of Health Housing OR Private Hospital OR Private Hospital Jabatan Kerja Raya Jabatan Kerja Raya (Public Works Ministry of (Public Works Ministry of Ministry of Schools Department) Education Department) AND Education Education AND Ministry of Ministry of Education Education Private OR Private OR Private OR Public Public Education Public Education Institute of Higher Ministry of Higher Education Institution Ministry of Higher Ministry of Higher Institution AND Institution AND Learning Education AND Ministry of Education Education Ministry of Higher Ministry of Higher Higher Education Education Education Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of Information, Information, Information, Information, Information, Information, Libraries Communication and Communication and Communication and Communication and Communication and Communication and Culture Culture Culture Culture Culture Culture Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of Art & Cultural Information, Information, Information, Information, Information, Ministry of Information, Communication and Centers Communication and Communication and Communication and Communication and Communication and Culture Culture Culture Culture Culture Culture Sabah Ministry of Sabah Ministry of Sabah Ministry of Tourism, Culture Tourism, Culture Tourism, Culture Hotels Private Developers Private Developers Private Developers and Environment and Environment and Environment Sabah Sabah Sabah Welfare Department Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of Homes, Nurseries & Women, Family Private Business Private Business Private Business Women, Family Act 308 CHILD CARE Women, Family Kindergardens & Community Owner Owner Owner & Community CENTRE ACT 1984 & Community Development Development Development Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Community Centers (Including Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Sports Facilities, Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Multipurpose Halls, etc) Public Housing-PPR Jabatan Perumahan Jabatan Perumahan Jabatan Perumahan Majlis Perbandaran Majlis Perbandaran Majlis Perbandaran   (Funded Federal) Negara Negara Negara Sabah State Sabah State Sabah State Sabah State Sabah State Ministry Sabah State Ministry Public Housing-PPR Ministry of Local Ministry of Local Ministry of Local Ministry of Local of Local Government of Local Government   ( State) Government & Government & Government & Government & & Housing & Housing Housing Housing Housing Housing  Kota Kinabalu City Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Advertisements Private Companies Private Companies Private Companies Private Companies Hall (Advertisement) Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu By-laws 1983 Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya Traffic Management/ Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu AND/ Kota Kinabalu AND/ Congestion Control AND/OR Police AND/OR Police AND/OR Police AND/OR Police OR Police Diraja OR Police Diraja and Monitoring Diraja Malaysia Diraja Malaysia Diraja Malaysia Diraja Malaysia Malaysia (PDRM) Malaysia (PDRM) (PDRM) (PDRM) (PDRM) (PDRM) Valuation Valuation Valuation Valuation Valuation Valuation and Property and Property and Property and Property and Property and Property Land Valuations Local Government Management Management Management Management Management Management (State Land) Act 171 Department Department Department Department Department Department (Municipal) (Municipal) (Municipal) (Municipal) (Municipal) (Municipal) Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  69    Table 3-7 Continued Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation 70 Annexes Building Control Sabah State Sabah State 2. Local Government Ministry of Local Ministry of Local Ordinance 1961 Government & Government & Dewan Bandaraya (Sabah No. 11 of 1991) Commercial Housing Private Developers Private Developers Private Owners/ JMB Housing Kota Kinabalu 3. Town and Country AND AND Planning Ordinance Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya (Sabah Cap. 141) Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Sabah State Sabah State 2. Local Government Ministry of Local Ministry of Local Ordinance 1961 Government & Government & Dewan Bandaraya (Sabah No. 11 of 1991) Residential Housing Private Developers Private Developers Private Owners/ JMB Housing Kota Kinabalu 3. Town and Country AND AND Planning Ordinance Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya (Sabah Cap. 141) Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Sabah State Sabah State 2. Local Government Ministry of Local Ministry of Local Ordinance 1961 Government & Government & Respective Respective Dewan Bandaraya (Sabah No. 11 of 1991) Public Buildings Housing Respective Ministries Housing Ministries Ministries Kota Kinabalu 3. Town and Country AND AND Planning Ordinance Dewan Bandaraya Dewan Bandaraya (Sabah Cap. 141) Kota Kinabalu Kota Kinabalu Heritage Heritage Heritage Commission Commission Commission Private Developers/ Private Developers/ Private Developers/ National Heritage Act Heritage Buildings Malaysia AND/OR Malaysia AND/OR Malaysia AND/OR Respective Ministry Respective Ministry Respective Ministry 2005 Majlis Perbandaran Majlis Perbandaran Majlis Perbandaran (Municipal) (Municipal) (Municipal) Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of Transport Ministry of Transport Transport No Fly Zones (Department of Transport (Department of (Department of Private Developers Private Developers (Building Heights) Aviation) AND (Department of Aviation) AND Aviation) AND Majlis Perbandaran Aviation) Majlis Perbandaran Majlis Perbandaran (Municipal) (Municipal) (Municipal) Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Special Reserves / Zones Control Ministry of Finance Ministry of Finance Ministry of Finance Ministry of Finance Ministry of Finance Ministry of Finance SEDIA AND SEDIA AND SEDIA AND SEDIA AND SEDIA AND SEDIA AND SEDIA Heritage Heritage Heritage Commission Commission Commission Private Developers/ Private Developers/ Private Developers/ National Heritage Act Heritage Zones Malaysia AND/OR Malaysia AND/OR Malaysia AND/OR Respective Ministry Respective Ministry Respective Ministry 2005 Majlis Perbandaran Majlis Perbandaran Majlis Perbandaran (Municipal) (Municipal) (Municipal) Jabatan Pengairan Jabatan Pengairan Jabatan Pengairan Jabatan Pengairan Jabatan Pengairan & Jabatan Pengairan & Conservation & Saliran, Sabah & Saliran, Sabah & Saliran, Sabah & Saliran, Sabah Saliran, Sabah Saliran, Sabah of Environment Sabah State Sabah State Sabah State Sabah State River Reserve Sabah State Ministry Sabah State Ministry Enactment 1996 Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of of Agriculture & Food of Agriculture & (Sabah No. 14 of Agriculture & Food Agriculture & Food Agriculture & Food Agriculture & Food Industry Food Industry 1996) Industry Industry Industry Industry Forest Enactment 1968 (Sabah No. 2 of Forestry Forestry Forestry Forestry 1968) Forestry Department Department Department Forestry Department Department Department Forest (Constitution Sabah Chief Forest Reserve Sabah Chief Sabah Chief Sabah Chief Minister Sabah Chief Sabah Chief of Forest Reserve Minister Minister Minister Department Minister Minister and Amendment) Department Department Department Department Department Enactment 1984 (Sabah No. 4 of 1984) Protected Areas and Ministry of Home Ministry of Home Ministry of Home Ministry of Home Ministry of Home Ministry of Home Restricted Zones Protected Affairs Affairs Affairs Affairs Affairs Affairs Places Act 1959 Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  71    Table 3-8: Institutional Map: Kuching, Sarawak Construction / Maintenance / 72 Annexes Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Article 95D & 95E of the Malaysian Constitution (Sarawak does not have to adhere to Sarawak Ministry of Sarawak Ministry of Sarawak Ministry of policies determined by Resource Planning Resource Planning Resource Planning the National Council Zoning & Land use and Environment Municipal Council Municipal Council Municipal Council and Environment and Environment for Local Government AND AND AND & National Land Municipal Council Municipal Council Municipal Council Council) Sarawak Land Code, 1958 Town and Country Planning Sarawak Cap 87 Road Network (includes Street Lighting) Malaysian Highway Highway Authority Authority (Lembaga Private Private Lembaga Lebuhraya Private Malaysia Private Highways Ministry of Works Lebuhraya Concessionaire Concessionaire Malaysia Concessionaire (Incorporation) Act Malaysia) 1980 Jabatan Kerja Jabatan Kerja Jabatan Kerja Jabatan Kerja Jabatan Kerja Raya (Department Raya (Department Raya (Department Raya (Department Federal Highways / Raya (Department of Public Works) of Public Works) of Public Works) of Public Works) Ministry of Works Federal Road Act 1959 Roads of Public Works) Sarawak Sarawak Sarawak Sarawak Sarawak Federal Ministry of Federal Ministry of Federal Ministry of Federal Ministry of Works Works Works Works Jabatan Kerja Raya (Department Ministry of of Public Works) Jabatan Kerja Public Works Public Works Infrastructure Jabatan Kerja Sarawak Raya (Department Department Sarawak Department Sarawak Development and Raya (Department State Roads Ordinance State Roads Sarawak Ministry of Public Works) AND/OR Private AND/OR Private Communications of Public Works) 1994 of Infrastructure Sarawak Concessionaires Concessionaires Sarawak AND Sarawak Development and Municipal Council Communications Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Transport Network Local Authorities Public Parking Municipal Council Municipal Council Municipal Council Municipal Council Municipal Council Municipal Council Ordinance 1996 Municipal Council Local Authorities Private Parking Municipal Council OR Private Developers Private Developers Municipal Council Private Developers Ordinance 1996 Private Developers Sarawak Ministry Sarawak Ministry of Infrastructure of Infrastructure Development and Development and Sarawak Sarawak Communications Sarawak Local Authorities Communications Commercial Vehicle Commercial Vehicle Sarawak AND Commercial Vehicle Ordinance 1996 Bus Network & Sarawak AND Licensing Board Licensing Board Sarawak Municipal Council Licensing Board Commercial Vehicles Stations Sarawak (Prime Minister’s (Prime Minister’s Commercial Vehicle (Prime Minister’s Licensing Board Act Commercial Vehicle Department) AND Department) AND Licensing Board Department) 1987 Licensing Board Municipal Council Municipal Council (Prime Minister’s (Prime Minister’s Department) AND Department) Municipal Council Sarawak Ministry Sarawak Ministry of Infrastructure of Infrastructure Rail Network & Development and N/A N/A N/A Development and N/A Stations Communications Communications Sarawak Sarawak Sarawak Ministry Sarawak Ministry of Infrastructure of Infrastructure Development and Development and Sarawak Sarawak Communications Sarawak Local Authorities Communications Commercial Vehicle Commercial Vehicle Sarawak AND Commercial Vehicle Ordinance 1996 Sarawak AND Licensing Board Licensing Board Taxis & Taxi Stop Sarawak Municipal Council Licensing Board Commercial Vehicles Sarawak (Prime Minister’s (Prime Minister’s Commercial Vehicle (Prime Minister’s Licensing Board Act Commercial Vehicle Department) AND Department) AND Licensing Board Department) 1987 Licensing Board Municipal Council Municipal Council (Prime Minister’s (Prime Minister’s Department) AND Department) Municipal Council Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  73    Table 3-8 Continued Construction / Maintenance / 74 Annexes Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Sarawak Ministry Sarawak Ministry Sarawak Ministry Sarawak Ministry Sarawak Ministry Sarawak Ministry of Infrastructure of Infrastructure of Infrastructure of Infrastructure of Infrastructure of Infrastructure Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Communications Communications Communications Local Authorities Communications Communications Communications Sarawak AND Sarawak AND Sarawak AND Ordinance 1996 Other Land Public Sarawak AND Sarawak AND Sarawak AND Sarawak Sarawak Sarawak Commercial Vehicles Transport Sarawak Sarawak Sarawak Commercial Vehicle Commercial Vehicle Commercial Vehicle Licensing Board Act Commercial Vehicle Commercial Vehicle Commercial Vehicle Licensing Board Licensing Board Licensing Board 1987 Licensing Board Licensing Board Licensing Board (Prime Minister’s (Prime Minister’s (Prime Minister’s (Prime Minister’s (Prime Minister’s (Prime Minister’s Department) AND Department) AND Department) AND Department) Department) Department) Municipal Council Municipal Council Municipal Council Department of Civil Department of Civil Department of Civil Department of Civil Aviation Aviation Malaysia Airports Malaysia Airports Aviation Aviation Airports Civil Aviation Act 1969 Ministry of Ministry of Holdings Berhad Holdings Berhad Ministry of Ministry of Transport Transport Transport Transport Cycling Network Municipal Council Municipal Council Municipal Council Municipal Council Municipal Council Municipal Council Pedestrian Network Municipal Council Municipal Council Municipal Council Municipal Council Municipal Council Municipal Council Jabatan Pengairan Jabatan Pengairan & Jabatan Pengairan & Jabatan Pengairan Jabatan Pengairan & Saliran Saliran Saliran & Saliran & Saliran Drainage & (Department (Department (Department (Department (Department Sarawak Ministry of Irrigation (Flood of Irrigation & of Irrigation & of Irrigation & of Irrigation & of Irrigation & Drainage Works Natural Resources Mitigation) - Non Drainage) Drainage) Drainage) Drainage) Drainage) Ordinance 1966 & Environment Privatised Sarawak Ministry of Ministry of Natural Ministry of Natural Ministry of Natural Ministry of Natural Natural Resources Resources & Resources & Resources & Resources & & Environment Environment Environment Environment Environment Local Authorities Drainage & Ministry of Natural Municipal Council Municipal Council Ordinance 1996 Irrigation (Local Resources & OR OR Municipal Council Municipal Council Municipal Council Drainage Works Drainage Network) Environment Private Developers Private Developers Ordinance Sarawak 1966 Sewerage Services Local Authorities Sewerage Services Sewerage Services Department Sarawak Sewerage Services Sewerage Services Ordinance 1996 Sewerage Services Sewerage Department Department AND/OR Department Department Sewerage Systems and Department Sarawak Sarawak Sarawak Private Management Sarawak Sarawak Services Ordinance, Agency 2005 Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Environmental Quality Act 1974 Municipal Council Municipal Council Natural Resources Local Authorities Natural Resources AND AND Solid Waste and Environment Ordinance 1996 and Environment Sarawak Wastes Sarawak Wastes Municipal Council Municipal Council (Collection) Board AND Natural Resources Board Management Sdn Management Sdn Municipal Council and Environment Bhd Bhd Ordinance (Amendment) 2001 Environmental Quality Act 1974 Municipal Council Municipal Council Natural Resources Local Authorities Natural Resources AND AND Solid Waste and Environment Ordinance 1996 and Environment Sarawak Wastes Sarawak Wastes Municipal Council Municipal Council (Disposal - Public) Board AND Natural Resources Board Management Sdn Management Sdn Municipal Council and Environment Bhd Bhd Ordinance (Amendment) 2001 Environmental Quality Act 1974 Municipal Council Municipal Council Natural Resources Local Authorities Natural Resources AND AND Solid Waste and Environment Ordinance 1996 and Environment Sarawak Wastes Sarawak Wastes Municipal Council Municipal Council (Disposal - Private) Board AND Natural Resources Board Management Sdn Management Sdn Municipal Council and Environment Bhd Bhd Ordinance (Amendment) 2001 Sarawak State Sarawak State Waters Act 1920 (Act Water Resources Water Resources Kuching Water Kuching Water Kuching Water 418) Water Council AND Kuching Water Board Council AND Board Board Board Sarawak Water Ministry of Public Ministry of Public Ordinance 1994 Utilities Utilities Electricity Ordinance, Electrical Electrical Chapter 50 (Revised Electricity Network Inspectorate Unit Sarawak Energy Sarawak Energy Sarawak Energy Inspectorate Unit Sarawak Energy 2003) (Distribution) Ministry of Public Berhad Berhad Berhad Ministry of Public Berhad Electricity Rules, 1999 Utilities Sarawak Utilities Sarawak Electricity (State Grid Code) Rules, 2003 Communications and Malaysia Malaysia Malaysia Malaysia Multimedia Act 1998 Private Private Telecommunications Communications Communications Communications Communications Communications Telecommunications Telecommunications Network and Multimedia and Multimedia and Multimedia and Multimedia and Multimedia Companies Companies Commission Commission Commission Commission Commission Act (1998) Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  75    Table 3-8 Continued Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation 76 Annexes Gas Supply Act 1993 Sarawak Gas Sarawak Gas Supply Ministry of Public Sarawak Energy Sarawak Energy Sarawak Energy Ministry of Public Gas Supply Distribution Sdn Services (Operating Utilities Berhad Berhad Berhad Utilities Bhd Company) Ordinance 1995 Public Buildings and Services Public Markets & Local Authorities Municipal Council Municipal Council Municipal Council Municipal Council Municipal Council Municipal Council Hawkers Ordinance 1996 Open Spaces & Local Authorities Municipal Council Municipal Council Municipal Council Municipal Council Municipal Council Municipal Council Public Parks Ordinance 1996 Jabatan Kerja Raya Jabatan Kerja Raya (Public Works (Public Works Polis Diraja Malaysia Department) AND Police Stations & Ministry of Home Department) (Police Department) Ministry of Home Ministry of Home Polis Diraja Malaysia Services Affairs Polis Diraja Ministry of Home Affairs Affairs (Police Department) Malaysia Affairs Ministry of Home (Police Department) Affairs Fire Services Fire Department Fire Department Fire Department Fire Department Department Ministry of (BOMBA) (BOMBA) (BOMBA) (BOMBA) (BOMBA) Fire Stations & Urban Wellbeing, Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of Fire Services Act 1988 Services Housing and Local Urban Wellbeing, Urban Wellbeing, Urban Wellbeing, Urban Wellbeing, Urban Wellbeing, Government Housing and Local Housing and Local Housing and Local Housing and Local Housing and Local Government Government Government Government Government Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Ministry of Health AND/OR Planning Division Jabatan Kerja Raya Jabatan Kerja Raya Ministry of Natural (Public Works (Public Works Resources & Department) AND Department) Hospitals and Ministry of Health Environment Bahagian AND Bahagian Ministry of Health Ministry of Health Medical Care OR Private Hospital Sarawak Pembangunan Pembangunan Ministry of Ministry of Health Ministry of Health Urban Wellbeing, OR Private Hospital OR Private Hospital Housing and Local Government Jabatan Kerja Raya Jabatan Kerja Raya (Public Works (Public Works Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of Schools Department) Department) Education Education Education Education AND Ministry of AND Ministry of Education Education Private OR Private OR Private OR Public Public Education Public Education Institute of Higher Ministry of Higher Education Institution Ministry of Higher Ministry of Higher Institution AND Institution AND Learning Education AND Ministry of Education Education Ministry of Higher Ministry of Higher Higher Education Education Education Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of Information, Information, Information, Information, Information, Information, Libraries Communication and Communication and Communication and Communication and Communication and Communication and Culture Culture Culture Culture Culture Culture Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of Art & Cultural Information, Information, Information, Information, Information, Information, Centers Communication and Communication and Communication and Communication and Communication and Communication and Culture Culture Culture Culture Culture Culture Ministry of Tourism Ministry of Tourism Ministry of Tourism Hotels Private Developers Private Developers Private Developers Sarawak Sarawak Sarawak Ministry of Welfare, Ministry of Welfare, Ministry of Welfare, Homes, Nurseries & Women and Family Private Business Private Business Private Business Women and Family Women and Family Kindergardens Development Owner Owner Owner Development Development Sarawak Sarawak Sarawak Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  77    Table 3-8 Continued Construction / Maintenance / 78 Annexes Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Community Centers (Including Sports Facilities, Municipal Council Municipal Council Municipal Council Municipal Council Municipal Council Municipal Council Multipurpose Halls, etc) Syarikat Perumahan Public Housing-PPR Jabatan Perumahan Jabatan Perumahan Negara Berhad Municipal Council Municipal Council Municipal Council (Funded Federal) Negara Negara (SPNB) Housing Public Housing-PPR Ministry of Housing Ministry of Housing Ministry of Housing Ministry of Housing Development Municipal Council ( State) Sarawak Sarawak Sarawak Sarawak Corporation (HDC) Ministry of Local Local Authorities Government Ordinance 1996 Advertisements and Community Private Companies Private Companies Private Companies Municipal Council Private Companies Local Authorities Development AND (Advertisements) Municipal Council By-Laws, 2012 Municipal Council Municipal Council Municipal Council Municipal Council Municipal Council Municipal Council Traffic Management/ AND/OR AND/OR AND/OR AND/OR AND/OR AND/OR Local Authorities Congestion Control Police Diraja Police Diraja Police Diraja Police Diraja Police Diraja Police Diraja Ordinance 1996 and Monitoring Malaysia (PDRM) Malaysia (PDRM) Malaysia (PDRM) Malaysia (PDRM) Malaysia (PDRM) Malaysia (PDRM) Valuation Valuation and Property and Property Valuation Valuation Valuation Valuation Management Management Sarawak Land Code, and Property and Property and Property and Property Land Valuations Department Department 1958 Management Management Management Management (State Land) (Municipal) AND (Municipal) AND Local Authority Department Department Department Department / OR Lands and / OR Lands and Ordinance 1996 (Municipal) (Municipal) (Municipal) (Municipal) Surveys Department Surveys Department Sarawak Sarawak Building Control Sarawak Ministry of Strata Titles Ordinance State Planning Private Owners/ Housing 1995 Commercial Authority AND Private Developers Private Developers Management State Planning Municipal Council Buildings Ordinance Municipal Council Corporation Authority 1994 Municipal Council Sarawak Land Code Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation Sarawak Ministry of Strata Titles Ordinance State Planning Private Owners/ Housing 1995 Residential Authority AND Private Developers Private Developers Management State Planning Municipal Council Buildings Ordinance Municipal Council Corporation Authority 1994 Municipal Council Sarawak Land Code Sarawak Ministry of Local Authorities Housing Ordinance 1996 Respective Respective Respective Public Buildings Municipal Council State Planning Municipal Council Buildings Ordinance Ministries Ministries Ministries Authority 1994 Municipal Council Sarawak Land Code Heritage Heritage Heritage Commission Private Developers/ Private Developers/ Private Developers/ Commission Commission National Heritage Act Heritage Buildings Malaysia AND/OR Respective Ministry Respective Ministry Respective Ministry Malaysia AND/OR Malaysia AND/OR 2005 Majlis Perbandaran Municipal Council Municipal Council (Municipal) Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of Ministry of Transport Transport Transport No Fly Zones Transport (Department of Private Developers Private Developers (Department of (Department of Civil Aviation Act 1969 (Building Heights) (Department of Aviation)AND Aviation) AND Aviation) AND Aviation) Municipal Council Municipal Council Municipal Council Special Reserves / Zones Control Ministry of Finance Ministry of Finance Ministry of Finance Ministry of Finance Ministry of Finance Ministry of Finance Regional Corridors Sarawak Corridor of AND AND AND AND AND AND Development Renewable Energy Regional Corridor Regional Corridor Regional Corridor Regional Corridor Regional Corridor Regional Corridor Authorities Ordinance (SCORE) Development Development Development Development Development Development of 2006 Authority (RECODA) Authority (RECODA) Authority (RECODA) Authority (RECODA) Authority (RECODA) Authority (RECODA) Heritage Heritage Heritage Commission Commission Commission Private Developers/ Private Developers/ Private Developers/ National Heritage Act Heritage Zones Malaysia AND/OR Malaysia AND/OR Malaysia AND/OR Respective Ministry Respective Ministry Respective Ministry 2005 Majlis Perbandaran Majlis Perbandaran Majlis Perbandaran (Municipal) (Municipal) (Municipal) Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  79    Table 3-8 Continued Construction / Maintenance / Layers of the City Policy Design Planning Implementation Service Delivery Regulator Data Depository Legislation 80 Annexes Jabatan Pengairan & Jabatan Pengairan & Saliran Jabatan Pengairan Jabatan Pengairan Saliran Jabatan Pengairan Jabatan Pengairan (Departmetn Sarawak River & Saliran & Saliran (Department & Saliran & Saliran of Irrigation & Ordinance 1993 (Department (Department of Irrigation & (Department (Department Drainage) Sarawak Rivers of Irrigation & of Irrigation & Drainage) of Irrigation & of Irrigation & River Reserve Ministry of Natural (Amendment) Drainage) Drainage) Ministry of Natural Drainage) Drainage) Resources & Ordinance 1997 Ministry of Natural Ministry of Natural Resources & Ministry of Natural Ministry of Natural Environment Sarawak Riverine Resources & Resources & Environment Resources & Resources & OR Transport Bill (1993) Environment Environment OR Environment Environment Majlis Perbandaran Private Developers (Municipal) Forest Ordinance Sarawak 1958 Sarawak Forestry Sarawak Forestry Sarawak Forestry Forestry Forestry Forestry Forestry Corporation Corporation Corporation Forest Reserve Department Department Department Department Forestry Department Forestry Department Ordinance, 1995 Sarawak Sarawak Sarawak Sarawak Sarawak Sarawak National Parks and Nature Reserves Ordinance 1998 Protected Areas and Ministry of Home Ministry of Home Ministry of Home Ministry of Home Ministry of Home Ministry of Home Restricted Zones Protected Places Act Affairs Affairs Affairs Affairs Affairs Affairs 1959 3.2 List of Meetings for Institutional Analysis Table 3-9: Meetings for Institutional Analysis Date Meeting Department of Statistics (DOSM) Town and Country Planning Department (JPBD) April 18, 2014 EPU Institute of Ethnic Studies (KITA), UKM JPBD National Solid Waste Management Department Department of Housing April 21 Department of Local Government Federation of Malaysian Manufacturers PEMANDU – Greater KL NKEA Ministry of Transport April 22 JPBD Research and Development Division (MURNInets) Kuala Lumpur City Hall (DBKL) Subang Jaya Municipal Council (MPSJ) UPEN Selangor Selangor State Investment Corporation JPBD Selangor April 23 Shah Alam City Council (MBSA) JPBD EPU – Distribution Section Public Works Department (JKR) United Nations Development Program (UNDP) Public Private Partnership Unit (UKAS) in the Prime Minister’s Department April 25 Kajang Municipal Council (MPKj) American Malaysia Chamber of Commerce (Amcham) UPEN Pulau Pinang Penang State Housing Section (Bahagian Perumahan Pejabat Setiausaha Kerajaan Negeri) June 11 Majlis Perbandaran Pulau Pinang Majlis Perbandaran Sungai Petani Northern Corridor Investment Authority Invest Penang June 12 Penang State Development Corporation Penang Institute Majlis Perbandaran Seberang Perai UPEN Johor Iskandar Regional Development Authority June 15 Majlis Bandaraya Johor Bahru Majlis Perbandaran Johor Bahru Tengah
 Majlis Perbandaran Pasir Gudang Majlis Daerah Kota Tinggi  June 17 Majlis Daerah Pontian   Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  81  Table 3-9 Continued Date Meeting Majlis Daerah Kemaman June 18 Majlis Daerah Dungun ECER Development Council UPEN Pahang June 19 Majlis Perbandaran Kuantan Majlis Daerah Pekan June 20 Malaysian Industry-Government Group for High Technology (MIGHT) UPEN Sabah SEDIA August 26 Dewan Bandaraya Kota Kinabalu Majlis Daerah Penampang Pejabat Daerah Putatan UPEN Sarawak Sarawak State Ministry of Local Government and Community Development Sarawak State Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment August 27 Sarawak State Land and Survey Department Dewan Bandaraya Kuching Utara Majlis Bandaraya Kuching Selatan August 28 Majlis Perbandaran Sepang August 29 Perbadanan Putrajaya 3.3 Institutional Analysis: Selected Global Case Studies 3.3.1 Case study one: Decentralization in Indonesia Case summary 18. Indonesia began the process of decentralization in 1999, and it became effective in 2001. The move towards decentralization was motivated by the desire to enhance public services, community empowerment, and local competitiveness. Political crisis and demand from local areas that were dissatisfied with the centralized system prompted this reform. Since decentralization, power sharing has been based on criteria including the incidence of externalities, accountability, and efficiency. The central government retains authority over foreign affairs, defense, security, judicial affairs, monetary and fiscal policy and religion. Decentralization has had some positive outcomes including increasing economic growth and enhancing public services such as education, health and general administrative process. Country profile 19. Indonesia is a populous lower middle income country, with nearly 250 million people and a GDP of USD 868 billion in 2013 (World Bank Data n.d.). Indonesia is the largest economy in Southeast Asia. The country’s gross national income per capita has steadily increased from US$4,010 in the year 2000 to US$9,260 in the year 2013(World Bank Data n.d.). Indonesia has managed to fulfill many of its fiscal targets, including a significant decrease in Debt-to-GDP ratio from 57 percent in 2004 to 28 percent in 2009 (World Bank Data n.d.).  82 Annexes 20. Geographically, the Indonesia archipelago stretches between Asia and Australia, with a total area of around 1.9 million sq km (CIA n.d.). Indonesia comprises many ethnic groups and religions, and has more than 300 local languages. Indonesia consists of 31 Provinces, one Autonomous Province, one Special Region and one National Capital District (CIA n.d.). Every province is made up of districts and municipalities. Motivations for decentralization 21. After the economic crisis began in 1997, the politics of Indonesia became unstable. Mass protests forced the Suharto government to undertake democratic reform and a succession of national leadership. Reforms were initiated in 1998 when Suharto relinquished the presidency, and Habibie, the former vice president, became president. 22. During the Habibie period, many local regions called for more autonomy. Some regions even called for secession, which was supported by local officials who want to gain greater control of resources. This pressure made Habibie adopt a decentralization policy that was expected to maintain national unity through the promotion of more democratic government and increased participation of the local people. The situation prior to decentralization 23. Prior to decentralization, administrative powers were held by the central government in a top-down system. Local governments did not have independence in policy making. Development planning and budget allocations were provisioned by the central government. All provincial and local expenditures were earmarked and were administered through line ministries’ offices at the provincial and district/municipality level (Sjahrir and Katos 2011). 24. The central government assigned local political leaders. Local public participation was weak because policies were created by elites in the central government and sometimes did not suit local needs and cultures. 25. The central government controlled most resources including funding, human resources, and natural resources. The perceived unfairness of natural resources allocations encouraged resource-rich regions to demand secession from Indonesia. The process of decentralization 26. Indonesia underwent political, fiscal and administrative decentralization. The central government led the process by issuing local governance and fiscal balance laws. These laws made districts and municipalities the key administrative units responsible for providing most government services. The districts and municipalities have no hierarchic relationship to the provincial level. The Provincial governors acted as the central government’s representatives in the region. The full autonomy given to the districts and municipalities limited the power of local regions that might otherwise have had separatist demands if the power had shifted to the provincial level. Politically, decentralization gave autonomy to the newly democratically elected local parliaments (DPRD) to choose the heads of local governments, who would be responsible to DPRD. 27. After three years, the central government reviewed these regulations and their implementation, and later revised them to refine and to clarify the relationship and sharing of responsibilities between the central government, provinces and district/municipalities. The revised law introduced local direct elections to strengthen local accountability, gave provinces supervisory powers instead of powers of coordination, and strengthened their role as representatives of the central government, particularly in the area of planning and budgeting.   Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  83  The current system 28. Power sharing between the central, provincial and district/municipality governments is based on the following principles1: a. The externality criterion is the approach of distributing governmental functions by considering the impacts/consequences that arise in the execution of those distributed functions. When impacts that arise are local in nature, then the governmental function in question comes under the authority of the regency/ city; when regional in nature, then under provincial authority; and when national in nature, then under authority of the central government. b. The accountability criterion is the approach of distributing governmental functions by considering that the level of government that handles a certain function is the level that is closest to the impact or conse- quence of that function. Accordingly, accountability for delivering those distributed governmental func- tions to the people will be better guaranteed. c. The efficiency criterion is the approach of distributing governmental functions by considering the avail- ability of resources (personnel, funds, and equipment) to obtain the accuracy, certainty and speed of results that need to be achieved in the execution of distributed functions 29. Based on the criteria above, the central government only retains six authorities and responsibilities: foreign affairs, defense, security, judicial affairs, monetary and fiscal policy and religion. However, local governments participate even in these functions. Leaders are elected locally, and local governments have full control of local policies, laws and budgets. 30. Fiscal decentralization has made local government fully independent in allocation of its budget and raising local government revenues. However, most revenues, [e.g. in 2004, 92 percent for districts/municipalities and 51 percent for provinces (Kajian Pengeluaran Publik Indonesia 2007)], are still from central government resources, which makes the decentralization more administrative than fiscal in nature. Since decentralization, local governments have full authority over most sectors, excluding the six central government responsibilities mentioned above. Most aspects of education2, health3 and infrastructure4 sectors became the responsibility of the local government (Sjahrir and Katos 2011). Consequently, local governments have increased spending responsibility without the additional locally controlled revenue base necessary to support extra spending. This creates a gap between revenues and expenditures at the local level. To fill this gap, the central government implements three instruments: (i) resources revenue sharing, (ii) general purpose grants (known as Dana Alokasi Umum - DAU), (iii) special purpose grants (known as Dana Alokasi Khusus - DAK). 31. Revenue sharing comprises tax and non-tax revenue. Local governments have total discretion over the use of allocated funds. 32. DAU is calculated based on the fiscal gap plus base allocation that is determined by local government officer wage. The fiscal gap is calculated from fiscal needs minus fiscal capacity. Fiscal needs are calculated based 1 Explanation of Law No. 32 Year 2004 2 Local governments are responsible for the first nine years of education, which include six years of primary and three years of junior secondary education 3 Local governments are responsible for the majority of primary healthcare services, their financing and human resources. For instance, the operation of health clinics (Puskesmas), which are the main providers of primary health services to the communities 4 Local governments are responsible for district road, transportation, water services and its local water supply utilities. 84 Annexes on indices, including population, area, local GDP per capita, construction price index, etc. Fiscal capacity encompasses local revenue and revenue sharing. 33. DAK is given by the central government for specific tasks, particularly for development expenditure such as education, health, agriculture, forestry and infrastructure. The implementation of DAK is based on the central government’s ministerial guidelines. DAK cannot be used for research, training, administration and official travel. The outcomes of the decentralization effort so far 34. Decentralization has promoted democracy and increased the ability of local regions to manage their own economic development, through bottom-up planning in keeping with local people’s aspirations. This has increased local public participation and fostered partnerships between stakeholders. Decentralization has increased economic growth significantly (Adi 2005), as well as development expenditure. Decentralization has also delivered more efficient and responsive public services such as education, health, infrastructure and general administrative services. After decentralization, local governments became responsible for the first nine years of education, and expenditures on primary and investments in secondary education became the first and second largest budgetary items for local governments (Sjahrir and Katos 2011). As a result, there has been an increase in literacy rates and years of schooling (Simatupang 2009). Decentralization improved health services, with one additional health clinic (Puskesmas) built per 10,000 of population on average (Sjahrir and Katos 2011). Mortality rates and life expectancy have also significantly improved (Simatupang 2009). Infrastructure development has also increased slightly (Sjahrir and Katos 2011). However, none of these achievements were caused by decentralization alone; they required well-functioning local political institutions, better informed citizens, transparent local government, and effective channels for political participation. 35. The greater amount of power at the district /municipality level encourages local elites to create new district/ municipalities. The central government tends to accommodate the interests of local elites in order to avoid ethnic conflicts spurred by local elites. Between 1999 and 2010, there were 7 new provinces, 164 new districts and 34 new cities (Imron 2011). The proliferation of new local administrative units in the region has had some negative impacts. For example in the forestry sector, decentralization allows a local government to make its own laws and regulations, such as those relating to issuing logging permits. This has caused a proliferation of permits, with little regard for the effect on forest resources. As a result, large forest areas have been destroyed and threatened with conversion to other uses for which local people are not the primary beneficiaries (Resosudarmo 2004). 3.3.2 Case study two: Decentralization in Mexico Case summary 36. Mexico started decentralization reform in 1983 in response to a debt crisis that left the federal government unable to provide adequate public services, and also to encourage development beyond Mexico City. Studies suggest that decentralization is more successful in areas where local regions have full control over budgeting and less central government funding. Decentralization provides better allocation of local services due to an information advantage through being closer to the recipient. In addition, decentralization also promotes good governance in rural local governments by increasing accountability and entrepreneurship.   Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  85  Country profile 37. Mexico is the second largest economy in Latin America and is a major oil producer and exporter. Even though production of oil has fallen in the last few years, about one-third of government revenue still comes from the oil industry. Mexico’s economy suffered during the financial crisis of 2008, but its economy has recovered since then through substantial foreign investment. Mexico’s population and GDP are respectively 122.3 million (2013) and USD 1.261 trillion (2013) (World Bank Data Bank n.d). 38. Mexico is a federal country with 32 states and nearly 2,500 municipalities. Local leaders are elected democratically for 3 years and cannot be re-elected. Between 1929 and 1997, the country had a single majority party. Since 1997, there have also been some opposition parties represented in the parliament. Motivation for decentralization 39. The President Miguel de la Madrid led decentralization reform in 1983, for two main reasons. First, the debt crisis meant the federal government was unable to provide adequate public services, and second, over-crowding of population in the Federal District placed considerable strain on urban infrastructure and the ecological environment. President de la Madrid’s administration hoped that sharing administrative functions and responsibilities with states and municipalities would allow the federal government to simultaneously increase administrative efficiency and decrease its own accountability by shedding bureaucratic responsibilities (Elias 1997). Situation prior to decentralization 40. Prior to the mid-1980s, although Mexico had a federal system of government, there was in fact no autonomy at the level of states and municipalities. This was because Mexico lacked a strong parliament that could balance the president, who dominated almost all aspects of the political process. The president could control all levels of government, including proposing candidates for the head of local government. In turn, these local leaders ensured the continued power of the incumbent government. The parliament was only able to pass laws that maintained the domination of the government. The process of decentralization 41. Decentralization reform in 1983 had 3 goals: (i) to decentralize all federal agencies, both administratively and geographically; (ii) to strengthen federalism by increasing the power of states and local government; and (iii) to promote regional economic development (Elias 1997). 42. The first goal was accomplished by the decentralization of all ministries. The process of decentralization was coordinated by the Ministry of Budget and Planning. The second goal was implemented by reforming the Mexican constitution to strengthen federalism. Lastly, the third goal was accomplished by promoting industrial investment in places outside of Mexico City and by providing municipalities the legal and financial capabilities to operate without interference from the federal government. 43. Decentralization granted the municipalities the responsibility for potable water, drainage, sewerage, public lighting, refuse collection, cemeteries, streets, public parks, public safety, and slaughter houses. In addition, the central government also shared revenues through an ‘unconditional fund’ for each state. In 1997 the central government significantly increased the budgets of states and municipalities through a conditional fund that could be used on specific sectors such as social infrastructure, public safety and financial obligations. 86 Annexes The current system 44. The states’ and the municipalities’ budget revenues consist of unconditional and conditional funds from the central government, local taxes, fees and surcharges, grants and loans. The share of the municipality’s revenue is, on average, 63 percent from unconditional funds from the central government (participaciones), 11 percent from local taxes, 10 percent from surcharges and 16 percent from unconditional funds and sale or lease of state owned property (World Bank 1991). 45. Unconditional funds are assigned through the General Participatory Fund (GPF). The central government allocates at least 20 percent to the states and each state allocates at least 20 percent to municipalities. Conditional funds consist of FISM (Fund for Social Infrastructure) and FORTAMUN (Fund for Strengthening Municipalities). FISM is allocated by a formula through the Secretary of Social Development and FORTAMUN is distributed on a discretionary basis. The outcomes of the decentralization effort so far 46. The overall impact of the 1983 reforms is mixed. Decentralization was more successful in those areas that did not require that the federal government to relinquish its hold on political power (Elias 1997). Consequently, local autonomy over resources was greater in areas that did not require large amounts of federal funding (Elias 1997). For instance, the decentralization of the Ministry of Education greatly improved the ability of the states to establish schools and provide teacher’s education by transferring material and financial resources from the federal to the state governments (Rodriguez 1987). Other research found that fiscal decentralization has been associated with changes in patterns of accountability and entrepreneurship, which tend to promote good governance in rural local governments (Moreno 2013). Conditional funds were found to be important in promoting both accountability and entrepreneurship, while unconditional funds had a negative effect on accountability and no effect on entrepreneurship. Being closer to local populations has allowed for more efficient allocation of resources in rural municipalities (Moreno 2013). 3.3.3 Case study three: Decentralization in Spain Case summary 47. Spain began decentralization after the death of the dictator Francisco Franco in 1975. The new democratic constitution that was enacted in 1978 offered Spanish provinces the right to to establish autonomous regions, and specified the division of competences between the central government and these autonomous regions. The degree of autonomy in each region is different but generally decentralization gives them full control of education and health. By bringing decision making closer to the people, decentralization has improved efficiency as well as equity. Country profile 48. Spain’s location between the Atlantic and Mediterranean Oceans and the European and African continents gives it a diverse history and culture. Spain’s total area is around 505,370 sq km, which consists of 17 autonomous communities and 2 autonomous cities (CIA n.d.). Its population and GDP are around 46.65 million (2013) and 1.4 trillion (2013) respectively (World Bank Data n.d.). The country’s GDP steadily increased until 2008, but after the global financial crisis it dropped 3.7 percent in 2009 and continued contracting through the middle of 2013(World Bank Data n.d.). The unemployment rate increased from 8 percent in 2007 to more than 25 percent in 2012 (World Bank Data n.d.).   Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  87  Motivation for decentralization 49. After the death of the dictator Francisco Franco in 1975, under King Juan Carlos as head of state, Spain made a transition from dictatorship to democracy. General elections took place in June 1976. During the campaign, all of the political parties included in their programs the elaboration of a new democratic constitution and the establishment of autonomy for the regions (Sanz n.d.). 50. Initially, the idea of decentralization was seen as a solution to the separatist demands of Basque and Catalan nationalities, including Galicia, but was also widely supported by the public. Eventually, the new democratic constitution converted Spain to a parliamentary monarchy in 1978. Situation prior to decentralization 51. Spain was under Franco’s rule for 36 years following his victory in the Spanish Civil War. During this period, government was highly centralized and the constitution gave the central government ultimate authority to pass all laws. As the chief of state and government, Franco not only appointed and dismissed ministers but his government appointed mayors as well. Local municipal councils were effectively appointed by the heads of families and heads of local corporations. The process of decentralization 52. The implementation of decentralization was driven by the approval of the new Spanish constitution in 1978. This constitution made Spain one of the most decentralized economies in Europe. It gave the right to Spanish provinces to establish autonomous regions, and specified the division of competencies between the central government and these autonomous regions. 53. The decentralization process in Spain was unique in its asymmetric nature. Every region approved their autonomy statutes and received local responsibilities separately. Regions that had common historic, cultural and economic characteristics, such as Catalonia, Basque, Galicia and Andalusia, received local autonomy immediately after their statutes were approved, while other regions had to wait up to 5 years after the approval of their statutes. 54. The decentralization process can be categorized into 4 phases (Sanz n.d.): a. First phase (1979-1982): The statutes for 17 autonomous regions issued and commencement of decen- tralization process b. Second phase (1983-1992): Some responsibilities such as university education transferred c. Third phase (1993-2002): Transfer of education and health; the central government budget allocation for education and health decreased significantly d. Fourth phase (2002-2008): Local autonomy reinforced; Basque proposal for new political statutes and the reform of Catalonia statutes The current system 55. Responsibilities have shifted from the central government to the Autonomous Communities (ACs), which vary in level of autonomy. Every AC has its own statute of autonomy law that outlines the responsibilities of that AC. For example, Catalonia, the Basque Country and Galicia have special status, with their own languages 88 Annexes and other rights. Andalusia, Navarre, Valencia and the Canaries have more extensive powers than some other regions. Asturias and Aragon have taken steps to acquire language rights. 56. Decentralization creates functional specialization between the central government and the autonomous regions, as follows (Sanz n.d.): a. Central Government: The functions performed by the central government are social security, transfers to the local regions, defense, foreign policy and justice b. Autonomous Communities: The functions performed by ACs are health and education c. Shared authority: The shared activities consist of 2 clusters. The first cluster, which accounts for roughly 13 percent of the central government's budget and 17 percent of the combined autonomous regions' budget, are “infrastructure”, “agriculture, fishing and nutrition”, “employment fostering” and “research, development and innovation”. The second cluster, accounting for roughly 5 percent of the central gov- ernment's budget and 8 percent of the combined autonomous regions' budget, are “housing”, “citizens´ safety”, “trade, tourism and small and medium enterprise”, “culture”, “industry and energy”, and “grants for transport”. The outcomes of the decentralization effort so far 57. Fiscal decentralization had a positive impact in the health sector. An empirical study found that decentralization was one of the factors that had an influence on the effectiveness of public policies on infant mortality and life expectancy (Cantarero and Pascual 2008). Based on data from 1992 to 2003, infant mortality has decreased and life expectancy has increased. The education sector has also had a positive impact from decentralization. Improvements in efficiency in education have been greater in Autonomous Communities with good fiscal discipline and high level of per capita public revenues (Pena 2009). Decentralization has increased the ‘survival rate’ in school (i.e. the proportion students enrolled in the last course of Obligatory Secondary Education who move on to post-secondary education). The study also found that cost efficiency in Spanish local government increased when the local government had more responsibilities devolved to it (Ballaguer-Coll 2006). This research also found that the decentralization gains improved over time5. 3.4 Metropolitan Management – Approaches and Implications6 3.4.1 Why metropolitan management matters for Malaysia 58. In Malaysia, as in most urbanized countries, many large cities have become more economically interdependent with their surrounding settlements. These areas are often referred to as a metropolitan (metro) area or region, constitute a single economy and labour market, and share a community with common interests. The economic links between the core and the periphery can become so close, that one part cannot succeed without the 5 The research compared the efficiency of municipalities based on the duration of their independency. 6 This annex is adapted from the paper “Metropolitan Management – Approaches and Implications” by Mats Andersson (2012). The paper was based on a module on metropolitan finance and governance in the World Bank Institute e-learning course “Municipal Finances: A Learning Program for Local Governments” the http://einstitute.worldbank.org/ei/course/municipal-finances-learning-program-local-governments All boxes are from the World Bank publication, Webster et al (2006) “Metropolitan Governance in China: Priorities for Action in the Context of Chinese Urban Dynamics and International Experience.”   Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  89  other. While political boundaries tend to be fairly stable, urban growth often changes the character of an area. Therefore, a metropolitan area usually includes a number of local government jurisdictions. 59. This mismatch between functional integration and political fragmentation creates a need for metropolitan- level management; to seize opportunities for collaboration, and prevent wasteful competition between local governments. Lack of any formal or informal governance arrangements at the metropolitan scale tends to create fragmentation of services (inefficiencies); “free ridership” by some jurisdictions (due to spillovers); environmental degradation; and underutilization of land with potentially higher value from a regional perspective. 60. Better metropolitan management would help make Malaysian cities more competitive. Currently, local governments are relatively weak, and unable to solve metropolitan-scale problems independently. Urban areas have been growing rapidly, but have struggled to keep up with citizen demand for services. At the same time, Malaysia has a complex, multi-tier system of government that makes it difficult for neighboring jurisdictions to coordinate to provide these services efficiently. 61. The six conurbations examined in this report are spread across multiple jurisdictions, indicating the need for a system of coordination at the metropolitan scale. The Greater Kuala Lumpur conurbation crosses 15 districts or federal territories and almost as many local authorities, the George Town/ Penang conurbation also crosses 15 districts and a few local authorities across three states, the Johor Bahru/ Iskandar conurbation crosses four districts and several local authorities, and Kuantan crosses three districts across two stastes. Each of these districts in turn is made up of multiple mukims. While there are no official conurbation boundaries for the remaining conurbations, looking at the spread of built-up areas suggests that the Kuching conurbation crosses at least two districts, while Kota Kinabalu crosses at least four. While these conurbations typically work as integrated units from the point of view of their economy, housing market, labor market, and mobility patterns, they are not recognized as such from an administrative point of view, as there is no administrative level between the individual districts and local authorities, and the states. Official conurbation boundaries indicate the general extent of a metropolitan area, but do not definitively enumerate which local authorities would need to be involved in metropolitan decision-making, as they do not align with district or mukim boundaries (e.g. see Figure 3-1). 62. A number of metropolitan areas around the world have tried to address similar problems, with varying degrees of success. This annex provides a typology of the main metropolitan-level governance approaches applied internationally, with their pros and cons, and related city examples. It concludes with a summary of lessons learned. 63. Malaysia’s jurisdictions, like Greater Kuala Lumpur in Figure 3-1, are highly multi-jurisdictional, and require collaboration between many local governments in order to function efficiently. Official conurbation boundaries do not clearly indicate which local authorities, or districts, fall within the conurbation. 90 Annexes Figure 3-1: Greater Kuala Lumpur jurisdictions 3.4.2 The need for metropolitan governance through political transformation 64. As metropolitan areas in Malaysia grow, there is an increasing need for coordination and joint decision- making by the area local governments, and management at a metropolitan scale of some functions and services. For example, while activities to retain businesses should normally be left to the lowest level of government, attracting new firms is usually best pursued at a regional level. Strong interdependencies also exist in tourism promotion and management. Solid waste disposal is a typical joint function for efficiency, while waste collection may be managed locally. Environmental impacts transcend jurisdictional boundaries, and inadequate maintenance of storm drains in one area can cause flooding in another (spillover effects). 65. International experience has shown that “there is not one size that fits all” due to local and national differences. (Slack 2007) Some institutional arrangements are established “bottom up”, i.e. through initiatives   Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  91  and agreements among the local governments in the area; some “top down”, i.e. by a provincial or national government. The arrangements often evolve, moving from one approach to another over time.7 66. While the system of local administration has a significant impact on the efficiency and equity of a regional economy, it also impacts the accessibility of residents to their local governments, the degree of public participation in decision-making, and the accountability and responsiveness of the governments. Efficiency, equity, and voice are essential for good metropolitan governance (Klink 2008). Slack concludes that the optimal design of government structure depends on which criteria are to be satisfied. Economies of scale, externalities, and equity lend themselves to large government units over an entire metropolitan area; the criteria of local responsiveness and accessibility and accountability point towards smaller government units. The challenge is to find the right balance between those criteria; this may be different in different metro areas.” (Slack 2007) Political factors often determine the choice of governance structure though. 67. Financial considerations are often prime incentives for creating special metropolitan arrangements. a. Pooling financial or human resources: When synergy will be achieved through joint efforts (area promo- tion, procurement, borrowing, etc.); b. Cost sharing: When scale economies will be gained by sharing costs for an investment (e.g. specialized equipment) or delivering a service;8 c. Management of Spillovers: When spillovers (externalities) across jurisdictions need to be addressed; e.g. air or water pollution (negative spillover); or if attractions are in one area while visitors stay and spend in another (positive spillover); d. Reducing Disparity: When significant income and/or service inequality exist between jurisdictions (e.g. different tax base). 3.4.3 Metropolitan governance models 68. The main institutional approaches applied internationally to address these needs are categorized, described, and exemplified in Table 3-10. They range from: (a) ad hoc cooperation, and joint (temporary or permanent) coordination initiatives or arrangements; through (b) metropolitan planning and/or service delivery authorities; (c) a metropolitan-level / regional government; to (d) a consolidated local government through amalgamation of jurisdictions or annexation of adjacent areas by a city. While a municipal government covering most of its metro area facilitates coordination, local offices or sector arrangements may still be needed for efficiency and resident accessibility; cooperation across the area is often still a challenge. 3.4.4 Global experiences 69. International experience demonstrates a great diversity of metropolitan models, particularly across North America (Dodge 1996) and Europe (OECD 2006). Although many megacities are in South Asia, few examples exist of well-established and functioning approaches. Many metropolitan development authorities exist, but 7 Metropolitan management can be viewed as teamwork among local governments, particularly when a bottom-up approach is applied. Effective teamwork requires: (a) a common objective; (b) trust; and (c) that differences among members are viewed as strength, not as a weakness. 8 Alternatively it may be provided by one of the local governments, charging the others a fee. 92 Annexes these tend to mostly be focused on investment planning and land development. In East Asia, China, Japan and South Korea have consolidated and comprehensive metropolitan governments for their megacities (Yang 2009), while in the Philippines, Manila has had various regional governments with strong local government representation and the chair appointed by the President (Laquian 2005). 70. Where institutional arrangements at local levels are lacking or weak, coordination tend to be exercised by national or provincial/state governments (e.g. Lagos State). In Australia public transportation and other local functions are managed by the provincial governments. (Abbott, 2011) While an inter-governmental transfer system can be a powerful tool by a national government to influence inter-municipal affairs, it can also have unintended consequences if not carefully designed. Policies in Mexico in the 1990s, for example, unintentionally exacerbated the level of fiscal disparity in the metro area of Mexico City due to indirect negative effects of transfers on local tax collection, causing further disparity of infrastructure. Mitigating efforts proved to be constrained by legal and political complexities. (Raich 2008) 71. Often local governments do not evolve or cooperate unless they are required to do so by a higher level government, for example to be eligible for certain funding. Many regional planning councils were created following the availability of EU regional economic development grants (OECD 2006). However, this does not always create lasting arrangements. In the United States, it was for many years a pre-requisite for obtaining certain grant funding from the US federal government that the local governments present their needs and solutions through a regional plan. When these requirements ended, the effectiveness of many regional bodies that had been created diminished. (Post 2004) Other incentives for local/regional coordination have been through inter-governmental systems (e.g. in India), enabling legal frameworks (e.g. in France, Poland and Italy), and through financial incentives and political influence (e.g. in the Netherlands).   Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  93  Table 3-10: Metropolitan governance models9 Approach Characteristics Pros (advantages) Cons (disadvantages) Examples 1. HORIZONTAL COOPERATION AMONG LOCAL GOVERNMENTS (i) Case-by-case joint When joint action puts Useful for areas Usually limited in scope. City candidates for an initiatives local governments in with limited inter- No commitment to international conference a stronger position to: dependencies (or with address needs on an or sports event tend to (i) achieve economies few local governments). on-going basis. apply on behalf of their of scale (e.g. bulk Can be an initial phase metro area. purchasing, contracting, to build trust for further, firefighting, road more permanent maintenance, tourism coordination. promotion); or (ii) to Useful if formal attract firms, events, or arrangements are tourists. constrained by politics or When significant costs prohibited legally. are involved, a cost sharing formula needs to be agreed upon. (ii) Contracting among A local government One government can Access by residents to a Common in California, Local Governments engaging another local specialize in a service, service provider may be USA. E.g. many smaller government for the for the benefit of others affected; accountability local governments are delivery of a service `that in the area. may be weakened or contracting Los Angeles they are responsible for. Useful when one local unclear. County for certain service government dominates in A contracting local provision. terms of capacity. government still needs to Cit of Amman, Jordan is monitor service quality collecting revenues on and coverage provided. behalf of other cities in the country. (iii) Committees, Temporary or permanent Flexible approaches. Usually advisory role Ruhr, Germany Associations, bodies for coordination. only. Turin and Milan, Italy Commissions, Working Often character of Paris, France groups, Partnerships, networks rather than Greater Toronto, Canada Consultative platforms, institutions (OECD, etc. 2006) 2. METROPOLITAN / REGIONAL AUTHORITY “Bottom-up”, voluntary Effectiveness tends to Particularly common in (Special Purpose District) Independent legal entity; organizations by local depend on the level of USA and France. voluntary association created by local governments governments. member commitment. to make better use of their public resources. (i)-(iv) are variations of the approach. (i) Metropolitan Council A forum for coordinated A forum to address Impact depends on: (a) Common in USA of Governments (COG) efforts by member local common / regional the financial and human Sao Paolo, Brazil governments. interests while resources mobilized or Montreal, Canada Decisions need maintaining local allocated to the COG; endorsement of the authority and identity. and (b) the degree of respective local Council Flexible, if allowing coherence on views on (to not undermine members to join/exit at metro issues among the accountability of any time, or participate member councils. the individual local on some subjects only. governments). 9 Privatization or public-private partnerships (PPP) are not specifically addressed in this paper. 94 Annexes Approach Characteristics Pros (advantages) Cons (disadvantages) Examples 2. METROPOLITAN / REGIONAL AUTHORITY (cont.) (ii) Planning Authority A formal entity similar Permanent focal point for Limited impact if only Regional Plan Association to COG to design regional planning. advisory role. for New York metro area regional strategies and/ Specialized analytical Enforcement may require (NGO with advisory role) or exercise planning resources (to highlight significant institutional Portland, USA, with and policy development spillovers, potential capacity to be effective. decision-making power authority. With broad for scale economies, (now an elected metro mandate or narrow inequalities, etc.) government). focus (such as for a river basin). They may or may not have authority to enforce or implement plans. (iii) Service Delivery A public service agency Useful to achieve Effectiveness depends on Greater Vancouver Authority (utility corporation or efficiencies for certain financial authority, e.g. Regional Service District cooperative) owned service(s). to levy user fees, collect (GVRSD), Canada, a by member local Local governments contributions from multi-service public governments. engaged as active owners member governments, corporation (some Responsible for delivery via representation on the apply precept powers, planning functions) of one or more services. council/board. have earmarked Bologna, Italy (Various single-service Can operate as transfers, or tax authorities in an area businesses with authority.10 may create another professional board Access by residents coordination need.) members. may be affected; Can usually levy user accountability may be fees, taxes, or collect weak or unclear. funds from the local governments. (iv) Planning & Service Combination of (ii) & Combination of (ii) & (iii) Combination of (ii) & (iii) Common in France.11 Delivery Authority (iii), i.e. planning and • Grand Lyon delivery of one or more • Communauté Urbaine services (e.g. a Regional of Marseille Transport or Water Authority). Centralization of Access by residents 3. METROPOLITAN-LEVEL / REGIONAL some functions while may be affected; GOVERNMENT preserving local accountability may be identities via first-level weakened or unclear.12 local governments.   Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  95  Table 3-10: Continued Approach Characteristics Pros (advantages) Cons (disadvantages) Examples (i) A Metropolitan-level A separate metro level A permanent government Effectiveness tends to Toronto, Canada 1954-98 Local Government local government, with a structure for certain depend on: (a) the degree Cape Town, RSA (to directly elected Council metro functions. of its authority over the 2000) or one appointed by the Specialized metropolitan- other local governments; Abidjan, Cote d’Ivoire (to area local governments. level resources. (b) funding; and (c) 2001) Responsible for if mainly planning Dar es Salaam, Tanzania coordination and functions or some service (no authority selective functions delivery functions as over other (3) local (may or may not include well. governments) service delivery). Budapest, Hungary It may or may not have (with limited authority) authority over the other London, UK (substantial local governments. authority over boroughs) (ii) A Regional A government A permanent government Risk of limited The Twin Cities, USA Government Established established by a structure (elected, or engagement by the local (appointed by the state) by Higher Level provincial or national appointed) for certain governments in the area. Portland, USA (elected) Government13 government for a metro metropolitan functions. Abidjan, Cote d’Ivoire area. Funding would Specialized resources. Madrid, Spain usually be part of the Funding would normally Stuttgart, Germany higher tier government not be an issue. (directly elected) budget. London, UK (with directly elected Mayor) Ile-de-France (Paris) Manila, The Philippines (strong local representation; chair appointed by President) 4. CONSOLIDATED LOCAL GOVERNMENT (through amalgamation or annexation) Jurisdiction covering a Facilitates coordination, Resident access to the Cape Town, South Africa large portion (or all) of redistribution / local government may Pittsburgh, USA the metropolitan area. equalization (one be affected, and local Toronto, Canada tax base) and scale responsiveness and Istanbul, Turkey economies. accountability weakened. Reduce competition and public choice. 10 11 12 13 10 If local governments are mostly funding the authority, they need to be adequately represented on its board or council to ensure the accountability of decisions. 11 The areas and average populations of French local governments are small by international standards. They therefore make extensive use of cooperative arrangements for their service provision. France has a particular legal framework for inter-municipal cooperation (‘syndicats intercommunaux’). The syndicates are similar to cooperatives or federations of local governments to carry out single or multiple functions. A local government may be involved in several syndicates. 12 Some argue that large-scale metropolitan governments lead to greatly reduced citizen participation, and weakened democratic accountability. (Oakerson, 2004). 13 The Ministry of Nairobi Metropolitan Development, Kenya can be considered a variation of this although with no direct authority over the area local governments. 96 Annexes 3.4.5 Metropolitan (regional) authority: city examples14 Variety of approaches for a metropolitan authority 72. Planning and service consolidation through a metropolitan authority can generate efficiency gains, particularly for smaller local governments in a metro area to remain independent yet efficient, signing service delivery contracts with the metro authority or utility company.15 Characteristics of a metro authority are reflected in Table 3-11, distinguishing options for each dimension. For example, some transport authorities are characterized by items in bold. Table 3-11: Characteristics of metropolitan authorities Dimension Option 1 Option 2 Function Planning Planning and Service Delivery Scope Single Sector/Function Multiple Sectors/Functions Degree of Authority Advising/guiding Managing Legal status Public Sector Agency Public Sector Corporation or Utility Company Operational Non-profit For profit Accountability of Council/ Appointed or elected by the local governments in Elected by the residents in the Area Board16 the Area Tax sharing agreements 73. Tax competition is sometimes tempting for local governments to attract business and high-income residents. However, reduction of tax rates sometimes becomes “a race to the bottom” and loss of revenues. 74. Communauté Urbaine of Marseille, France is a consortium of seventeen cities which uses a joint system for collection of a business tax with common tax rate, avoiding tax competition and achieving more cost-effective tax collection. It is governed by a body of the mayors and councilors of the municipalities, responsible for regional economic development, transport, land use and housing, crime prevention, waste disposal and environmental policies. Marseille transitioned from informal cooperation among a few local governments focused on a few roads and traffic projects, to a regional planning and service delivery authority. 75. The local governments (58) in the Grand Lyon, France area have a tax sharing arrangement whereby part of the local tax revenues are allocated to a common budget for metro level initiatives and expenditures. 76. The Twin Cities (Minneapolis-St.Paul), USA experienced significant mismatch between social needs and tax base (income and property tax) between two central cities and suburban areas. They established a Metro Council with access to part of the property taxes in the region to finance certain services and targeted transport subsidies. This council evolved into a Regional Government appointed by the Minnesota state government, and subsequently to a public sector corporation. 14 Basic data on city examples in the paper can be found on www.wikipedia.com 15 “The whole is greater than the sum of the parts” is a saying in this regard. However, if the parts cannot come together politically to add up to the whole, then they may be worse off. (McCarthy, 2011) 16 An additional option is when appointed by a provincial or national government.   Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  97  Flexible arrangements 77. The metro governance in Bologna, Italy was established on a voluntary basis in 1994 by forty-eight local governments and the province of Bologna. A metropolitan council is composed of all the mayors and presided over by the provincial president. Each local government is free to withdraw at any time and may participate in some or all activities of the council; a low-risk approach for the governments in the area. 78. A metropolitan authority needs to be properly funded. Greater Vancouver Regional Service District (GVRD), Canada finances its services through user charges, a share of property tax, and annual contributions from the member local governments, but has also been given authority to collect a road and gasoline tax in the metropolitan area. This metropolitan administration is now a public corporation with a Board composed of representatives of the eighteen member local governments; another flexible, demand-driven organization providing different services to its members through individual agreements. Since its establishment in 1965 numerous services have been added, including human resource management services on a contract basis. It does not have any strong land use planning powers though. GVRD was initially established by the provincial government, but has evolved to a corporation governed by the member municipalities. (See Box 3-1 to learn more about the GPVD’s history and approach). 3.4.6 Metropolitan-level planning through non-governmental organizations 79. Metropolitan-level planning is sometimes carried out by non-governmental organizations. 80. Regional Plan Association (RPA) serves the New York–New Jersey–Connecticut Metropolitan Region, which is comprised of 31 Counties. RPA is an independent metropolitan policy, research and advocacy group, which performs most of the regional planning functions, partly funded by the area Counties. (See Box 3-2 for more information on the RPA’s role in planning for the New York metro area.) 81. Although a new constitution in Brazil (1989) increased the autonomy of local governments and delegated responsibility for designing metropolitan structures to the state legislatures, relatively few examples of formal inter-municipal cooperation exist except in the São Paulo ABC Region17. This metro organization has had particularly active engagement of the civil society and the local private sector, and has played important roles in the economic development of the area (the City of São Paolo does not participate however). It was created to reinvent the region with a new economic vision after a period of very high unemployment. The name refers to three small cities bordering São Paulo, initially forming this cooperation. 17 98 Annexes Municipal development agencies 82. A separate agency for planning and development has been established for some cities; some with a mandate focused on land use and master planning (Delhi Development Authority in India, and Dhaka Capital Development Authority (RAJUK) in Bangladesh)18 (Siddiqui, 2004), others with broader city development mandates such as Lagos Mega-City Development Authority in Nigeria, and London Development Agency in the UK, recently incorporated into the Greater London Authority to which the Mayor of London reports. These regional authorities combine some governing authority with development and service functions. They often receive state or municipal land to develop and sell. 3.4.7 Metropolitan-level / regional government: city examples19 Metropolitan-level local governments: institutional evolutions Box 3-1 Greater Vancouver Regional District: An evolutionary approach to regional, district-based metropolitan planning & management The Greater Vancouver Regional Districts (GVRD) was established in 1965; it now encompasses 21 municipalities that make up the metropolitan area of Greater Vancouver, an area that is home to 2.1 million people (2005), forecast to reach 2.7 million by 2021. The GVRD was originally constituted to deliver services most efficiently accomplished at a regional level, namely sewerage, drinking water, health/hospitals, and industrial development services. It has added functions over the years, including recycling, affordable housing, regional parks, air quality control, labor relations, and emergency communications (911). GVRD’s mandate is to cost-effectively deliver utilitiy services at the regional scale, to plan and manage regional growth and development, and to protect and enhance the quality of life in the Region. The GVRD’s Board of Directors is the primary decision-making body and collective voice in regard to regional development issues. The Board of Directors is comprised of mayors and councilors from the member municipalities. Board meetings are held once a month and are usually open to the public. The GVRD stresses the involvement and participation of interested members of the general public. Under the umbrella of the GVRD, there are four separate legal entities: the GVRD/University of British Columbia (UBC) Joint Committee, the Greater Van- couver Water District (GVWD), the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District (GVS&DD), and the Greater Vancouver Housing Corporation (GVHC). In addition, the Greater Vancouver Transportation Authority (Trans Link) was formed in 1998 as a body associated with the GVRD to coordinate and implement transportation plans and services for the movement of people and goods in the Region. Trans Link also operates the Air Care program, which aims to improve air quality by reducing harmful emissions from automobiles. From 1992 to 2002, the program is credited with reducing air emissions in the urban area by thir- ty-five percent. Vancouver has received numerous international awards, and ranks amongst the most livable cities in the world, according to premier media, such as, The Economist. Maintaining this quality of life is a significant challenge particularly in the face of population pressures, changing demographics, and economic re-structuring, plus demands for housing and employment associated with rapid growth. In 1990, the GVRD Board produced Creating our Future: Steps to a More Livable Region to respond to challenges facing the region. It engaged more than 4,000 residents in a public consultation process. The over 200 issues identified in the process resulted in agreement to take 54 actions, incorporated in the Livable Region Strategic Plan introduced in 1996. Importantly, like most metropolitan agencies worldwide, the regional strategy advocates development of Regional Towns to minimize urban sprawl, commuting, and air pollution. Both established by the national governments. 18 Municipal governments which essentially cover their metro areas can also be viewed as “metropolitan local governments” (e.g. in China 19 and South Africa).   Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  99  Box 3-1 Continued Other agencies, the private sector, and residents use the plan to understand and contribute to Greater Vancouver’s vision for its future development. It helps all stakeholders “to face in the same direction”. To improve metropolitan governance, the GVRD set up the Sustainable Region Initiative Forum. Regular discussion and meetings such as sustainability community breakfasts and regional dialogues are organized. In addition, the Greater Vancouver Economic Council (GVEC) has been established as the catalyst to deepen high promise industrial clusters and thereby enhance the regional economy. An important mandate of the GVEC is to take the lead in attracting investment to the Region through marketing and branding. GVEC’s mission is to support development, positioning the Region as the West’s Gateway to Asia and Canada’s “Cre- ative City”. Much can be learned from the GVRD case. Of note is its evolutionary character. Although originally created to deliver “routine” functions such as sewerage, it has steadily added functions over the years as confidence in its role has increased. It does this in two ways: (i) internally, e.g., through agencies such as the GVHC, which operates within the GVRD’s institutional framework, and (ii) by spinning off entities such as the GVEC. Although it increasingly appears to be a regional government, it denies this role, being careful to allow constituent municipalities to maintain their autonomy. Important in this regard is the fact that municipali- ties can choose to opt out of any function or service provided by the GVRD. Much of GVRD’s success can be explained by its ability to mediate tensions between the British Columbia Provincial Government (Provincial governments are very powerful in Canada) and constituent municipal governments. Sources: GVRD 2006; Western Ecoomic Diversification Canada 2006; Webster et al 2006 83. International experience suggests that flexibility of governance arrangements over time is advisable as the local and regional circumstances change. The following examples have all had a local metropolitan government at some time, but have evolved between different models. (Slack, 2007) 84. Toronto, Canada operated under 13 independent municipalities until 1953, when a two-level system with an elected Metro Toronto and six additional independent local governments were established (each level with separate functions). In 1995 these seven entities were merged into one local government for the City of Toronto (still only representing about 50 percent of the population in the metropolitan area). The changes were made to increase effectiveness in service delivery and harmonize service levels across the area, and the provincial government played an important role in the institution's evolution. 85. London, UK was governed by a two-level structure from 1964 to 1986, the Greater London Council (GLC) and 32 local governments (each with its own mayor and council). In 1986, the GLC was abolished and governance of London became the responsibility of central government ministers, using ad hoc arrangements for regional planning. Since 2000, London again has a city-wide government with elected members of a Greater London Authority (GLA) and since 2002 also a directly elected mayor. GLA is a higher-level strategic authority to promote sustainable development and define strategy, particularly for transport, police, economic development planning, fire and emergency planning, land use planning, culture, environment, health, and coordination of London-wide events. GLA and local governments have little fiscal autonomy; more than 80 percent of their revenues come from central government grants. 86. Abidjan, Côte d’Ivoire. Reforms in 1978 restored “commune” status to the major cities in Côte d’Ivoire. Abidjan, the former capital and the largest city in the country, had ten local governments, each with elected mayor and council. At the same time, a metropolitan government, the City of Abidjan, was established for 100 Annexes Box 3-2 New York Metropolitan Region: A legitimized civil society approach to megapolitan planning: the pioneering role of the regional planning association The New York metropolitan region (NYMR) is the most populated urbanized area in the U.S. (2005 U.S. Census Bureau CSA pop. 21.9 million), and based on the UN urban agglomeration classification, the third largest in the world (after Tokyo and Mexico City). It covers 31 counties of the tri-state New York- New Jersey-Connecticut region encompassing 33,670 sq km. New York City, the core of the metropolitan region has a population of over 8.1 million with an area of 830 sq km, only 2.5% of the land area of the metropolis. A global city, New York is known for international finance, fashion, entertainment and culture. New York City itself has been a metropolitan municipality with a strong mayor-council government since its creation, the product of a consolidation of a number of autonomous local governments in 1898. The mayor is elected to a four-year term while 51 councilors are elected to two-year terms, strengthening the power of the mayor. There is no “official” regional planning organization for the NYMR, but the Regional Plan Association (RPA), as an independent, not-for-profit regional planning organization is highly influential in planning both the region and its component jurisdictions. It is the de facto Regional Planning agency for the NYMR, having more power and a more impressive track record than virtually any metropolitan planning organization in the United States. This civil society based approach to planning in the NYMR is not regarded as a stepping stone to legal formalization, but a more advanced approach to regional planning based on collaborative planning, currently in vogue in both governmental and academic circles. Collaborative planning involves bringing representatives of key interests to the table, governments being only one of the parties involved, although they are expected to legalize most outcomes of the process (some initiatives can be implemented purely through non-governmental means). The RPA’s de facto legitimacy and stellar reputation is the product of two factors, its long history, and the high quality of its work. It was established in 1922. RPA has played a key role in shaping the Region’s transportation systems, protecting open spaces, and promoting high quality urban development. The First Regional Plan completed in 1929 set the form for the Region’s growth over the next several decades, correctly identifying transportation and open space networks as the key levers to shape the Region. The Second Regional Plan in 1968 successfully targeted: (i) restoration of the Region’s deteriorated mass transit system, and (ii) revitalization and strength- ening of urban centers to make mass transportation more viable, preserve natural resources, and create areas of high urban intensity within the vast Region. The Third Plan, in 1996, A Region at Risk, addressed the Region’s extreme fiscal problems. In the post 9/11 period, RPA has been involved in the redevelopment of lower Manhattan, seriously damaged by the terrorist attacks, as well as strengthening disadvantaged communities such as East Harlem, through community based activities. As well as being a world-class regional research and planning organization, RPA has considerable strengths as an advocacy organization, an educational and awareness agency (working with local governments, communities, and the public), the lat- ter strengthened by partnerships such as with the Institute on Community Design at Princeton University. One of the greatest strengths of the RPA is its links with leading US professional groups such as the American Institute of Architects (AIA), the Amer- ican Institute of Planners (AIP), and the American Society for Public Administration (ASPA). Strong professional connections enable the RPA to access some of the best talent in city building, at affordable rates, or even on a voluntary basis. RPA always takes an interdisciplinary perspective that integrates economic development (competitiveness), human resources and the human condition, land use, transportation, and environmental and design expertise. To implement, RPA’s main strategy is to build an alliance of various stakeholders, including local governments, interest groups (e.g., environmental), professional groups, and the business community. Given the enormous power of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, RPA has long worked closely with them, using the Authority as a lever to shape the Region. Sources: Alfsen-Norodom 2004; Civic Alliance 2006; Regional Planning Association 2006; Webster et al 2006   Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  101  many local functions, with a council of the City mayor and four councilors from each local government. The mayor of the City was indirectly elected by the ten mayors. This system functioned for over 20 years, but the local governments were constrained by the national government in carrying out some functions, and the City had little influence over its finances. National government collected property taxes and remitted them to the local governments which then paid (often delayed) a portion to the City. (Stren, 2007) In 2001, the City of Abidjan was replaced by a Regional Government, or “District” of Abidjan. The post of City Mayor was replaced by a District Governor appointed by the President of the country. The original ten local governments were maintained and three suburban jurisdictions and some rural areas were added. 87. Johannesburg, South Africa, the largest city in South Africa by population, evolved from a segregated city with eleven councils, through a stage with one Metro Council plus four subordinated Local Councils, to the current one single-level city government covering the main part of the metropolitan area. It has been innovative in shaping its internal governance by issuing management contracts for water and sanitation services; corporatizing road and solid waste functions; and moving to private management of its real estate. Regional Government Established by a Provincial or National Government 88. Metropolitan governance reforms have rarely emerged purely from local government initiatives; rather, a national or provincial government has usually either imposed or encouraged it (OECD 2006). 89. Portland, Oregon, USA. Initially Portland had a COG/planning authority for primarily land use management. It took on additional functions, and eventually was elevated to a directly elected regional government established by the Oregon State Government. It may now levy property, sales, and income taxes, and issue Metro bonds for investments. 90. Verband Region Stuttgart, Germany was created by the Baden-Wurtenberg state government in 1993 as a directly elected higher-level metropolitan entity for an area with 179 local governments. Its main responsibility at present is serving as a public transport authority. For its broader purposes it has become fairly weak, in large part because it has no authority to levy taxes or user charges. Its funding is derived about equally from local government contributions and the state government. (OECD 2006) 91. Metro Nairobi, Kenya (a different approach). A Ministry of Nairobi Metropolitan Development was established in 2008 by presidential decree to facilitate implementation of a development strategy for this, extremely large (32,000 km2) area of fifteen local governments. However, participation of the main city, City of Nairobi, has been limited. 3.4.8 Consolidated local government: city examples 92. Annexation or amalgamation of jurisdictions may sometimes be the most effective approach to achieve needed scale and equity in public service provision. Yet, this tends to be the most politically controversial, usually requiring active involvement of a national or provincial government. Few amalgamations have achieved coverage of an entire metropolitan area. However, in those cases where local governments do indeed cover their economic region, coordination is less challenging in terms of institutional complexity. However, allocation of resources and services to the residents across the area still often presents challenges. 102 Annexes 93. Cape Town, South Africa boundaries were drawn by the Municipal Demarcation Board20 in 1998, and now include almost all people who live and work in the metro area (2,461 km2). 94. Istanbul, Turkey had its administrative boundaries expanded in 2004 to include provinces previously governed by the central government, increasing its area from 1,830 to 5,340 km2. (Turan 2011) 95. Shanghai Municipal Government, China (and similarly all larger municipalities in China) covers its entire metropolitan area (6,340 km2). 96. Chinese cities have a two-level local government structure; a municipal government with a number of subordinated district and county governments. Districts are the more urban ones, and counties the more rural ones. Coordination is often still challenging due to counties being quite independently governed; an example where political economy and legacy may influence how an area is functioning in practice. In this case, the municipal government tend to limit its involvement with how the county governments run their affairs in order not to interfere with how they meet their performance targets. 97. Additional examples where the local governments (with subordinated districts or wards) essentially cover their respective economic regions are Seoul, Tokyo, and Istanbul. (OECD, 2006). See Box 33 for information about the Seoul Metropolitan Government. 3.4.9 Large infrastructure projects: special situations 98. Managing and funding infrastructure projects that benefit various local jurisdictions needs special arrangements, sometimes a separate project entity to implement the project and possibly to also own, operate and maintain the assets. A higher tier government often has a key role to play, as exemplified below. 99. ARPEGIO is a public sector company in Madrid, Spain through which a directly elected regional government undertakes projects in coordination with local governments. ARPEGIO obtains public land from local governments for development, marketing and management. It allows agile planning and execution of projects that are not attractive for the private sector. 100. A Metrorail Project is under construction in the Greater Washington Area in United States, extending rapid transit service to an international airport and employment centers in the area. The project funding is from: (i) voluntary taxes on local businesses/landowners; (ii) toll road revenues; (iii) two local governments; (iv) one state government; and (v) grant funds from the US Federal Government (from gas tax revenues and economic stimulus funds). Similar consolidations were done across the country creating six large metropolitan municipalities. 20   Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  103  3.4.10 Lessons learned and policy implications 101. Lessons from international experience in metropolitan management for Malaysian policy makers include the following: »» When the population of one local government is dominant in a metro area, this tends to be an additional challenge for achieving joint actions (e.g. Nairobi, Sao Paolo, Paris). Care should be taken so that each of the jurisdictions is able to voice its needs. »» Few cities cover their entire metropolitan area. While having one local government covering most of its metro area may facilitate coordination, government accountability and accessibility by residents may suffer; and area-wide coordination may still be a challenge (South Africa, China). »» Evolution from one model to another is not uncommon as local and regional circumstances change and learning takes place (London, Minneapolis-St. Paul, Portland, Toronto). »» Active involvement of a higher level government is often required to ensure arrangements for reasonable coordination of public services and area-wide development (Abidjan, Manila, Stuttgart, Toronto). However, metropolitan arrangements created in a “top-down” manner by a provincial or national government will often be weak unless they are actively supported by the area local governments (Dar es Salaam, Stuttgart). »» Cost savings is often an argument for amalgamation or annexation. However, as the case of Toronto has shown, by unifying salaries and services across the earlier local government areas, the overall costs may go up. 102. The implications for policy and practice in a particular metropolitan area include: »» Determine where are the largest gains from joint or coordinated actions (“differences which would make a difference”). »» Engage stakeholders thoroughly. »» Find a balance between achieving efficiency and social equity, and ensuring voice and accountability. 103. Given the large number of agencies at various levels that already exist in the Malaysian context, creating new government bodies (e.g. London, Nairobi) may simply add to the complexity, making coordination even more difficult. Consolidation of local governments (e.g. Cape Town, Istanbul, Chinese cities) may work in the case of smaller conurbations. Systems by which local governments can coordinate on individual services (e.g. transportation planning in US metro areas) or metropolitan-scale investments (Madrid, Washington), or flexible, voluntary arrangements as in Bologna, Italy, could benefit Malaysian metro areas without the disruption of creating new agencies or consolidating jurisdictions. These could be encouraged by the national or state governments by linking metropolitan coordination with funding opportunities. Such arrangements could gradually formalize and take on more re sponsibilities over time, as in Greater Vancouver. Lastly, support for long-term strategic planning at the metropolitan scale, separate from day-to-day urban service delivery, provided by a non-governmental organization (e.g. RPA in New York) could help guide local governments act in a more coordinated manner. 104 Annexes Box 3-3 Seoul Metropolitan Government: Leadership from the metropolitan core The Seoul Metropolitan Area (SMA) constitutes the core of the Seoul Metropolitan Region (SMR), the latter a megapolitan area containing 48% of South Korea’s population (23 million). The SMR typifies extended urban regions in East Asia, it is nineteen times as large in area as the SMA, with an area of 11,773 square kilometers. Over time, an increasing proportion of the SMR’s population lives outside the SMA; in part because SMA’s area has been extended only slightly between 1963 and 2004 (from 595 to 605 sq. kms.), combined with the fact that the population of the SMA peaked in 1992 at 11 million, declining to 10.3 million by 2004 through suburbanization and peri-urbanization processes. Within the SMA, the city’s efficiency has been increased substantially through the establishment of public corporations, e.g., the Seoul Metro Corporation and the Seoul Metropolitan Rapid Transit Corporation, which are responsible for 9 subway lines, the Seoul Housing Corporation responsible for low income housing, and the Seoul Metropolitan Facilities Management Corporation, responsible for car-only roads and parking facilities. The SMG is now focused on quality of life, given that efficiency objectives have largely been achieved. This shift is described as a shift from a growth oriented (quantitative) model to a growth management (quality) model. The latter includes restoration of historic, cultural, and natural environments. Related to the latter, Seoul has attracted global attention by restoring Cheonggyechon Stream which runs through the heart of the city. This has involved removal of an expressway (that covered it) – a cost deemed acceptable, given the shifting values of increasingly wealthy SMA residents. Megapolitan governance is based on three tiers: the SMR, SMG and the Districts. Typical of extended urban regions such as Bang- kok and Toronto, the SMR has limited powers, especially in terms of service delivery. The national government takes the lead in economic, demographic, and spatial planning for the SMR, through the Capital Region Management Committee, chaired by the Prime Minister. At present, the second Capital Region Management Plan 1997-2011, based on the Capital Region Management Act of 1982, establishes basic parameters for the region, e.g., land use and urban form (promoting a multi-nuclei structure), industrial distribution, and national government capital investments. The twenty-five Autonomous Districts undertake their own locally derived projects under a certain scale (e.g., roads less than 20 meters wide, sewage pipes under 900 mm), plus those commissioned by the SMG. The mayor of each District is also elected. Cooperation between the SMG and surrounding jurisdictions has resulted in positive outcomes, e.g., the establishment of the Capital Region Transport Association, which co-ordinates 397 bus routes carrying 8.8 million riders daily in Seoul, Gyonggi and Inchon. Of particular note is the initiative to improve water quality in the Han River, which flows through Seoul. The Committee for the Management of the Han River Water Quality allocates zero costs to the two furthest upstream jurisdictions (Gangwon, Chungchung), whereas downstream communities share the vast majority of costs, aided by a matching grant from the Korea Water Resources Corporation. In effect, the downstream communities provide upstream jurisdictions with a subsidy for perform- ing environmental services. From 1998 to 2001, SMG implemented a series of reforms such as the citizen evaluation system, online procedures to handle civil service applications (the open system), and performance based budgeting. The reforms were implemented immediately after the East Asian financial crisis of 1997, when people were receptive to change. The citizen evaluation system (requiring quick internet response from the responsible official) and anti-corruption index were recognized as “the most valuable reform” by the Presiden- tial Commission on Governmental Innovation in Korea. Metropolitan Seoul indicates that even when the metropolitan area cannot be expanded to keep up with peripheral population expansion and movement of population to suburban and peri-urban areas, coordination of development can be successful. In the Seoul case this coordination was catalyzed by the national government. Sources: Kim 2004; Metropolis 2006; Soeul Metropolitan Government 2006; Webster et al 2006   Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  105  Table 3-12: Allocation of expenditure responsibilities for metropolitan-wide vs. local service provision Metro Local Central Function wide Govt Govt Rationale Strategic develop. planning X Externalities 1 Economic development X Externalities Tourism promotion & mgmt. X Externalities Regional land use planning X Externalities 2 Local land plans / allocation X Local access, responsiveness (some externalities) Titling / provision of tenure X No externalities (possibly scale economies) Social (low income) housing X Redistribution; scale; some externalities Community upgrading X Local responsiveness; limited externalities 3 Cultural facilities X X Economies of scale vs. local responsiveness Libraries X Local responsiveness Parks and recreation facilities X Local responsiveness Roads and bridges X X X Main (arterial) roads vs. local (street) roads 4 Public transit X Externalities; economies of scale Street lighting and cleaning X No (or limited) externalities Police protection/security X X Externalities; economies of scale Traffic management X Local responsiveness 5 Basic fire / rescue services X Local responsiveness Specialized services; training X Scale economies Ambulance service X Economies of scale; externalities Water supply system X Economies of scale Drainage/flood protection X Economies of scale; externalities 6 Piped sewerage system X Economies of scale Solid waste disposal X Economies of scale (e.g. landfill); externalities Solid waste collection X Less economies of scale and externalities Education X X Primary and secondary vs. higher education 7 Public health X X Externalities; redistribution; scale economies Welfare assistance X X Income redistribution; externalities Promotion of major events X Externalities 8 Business licensing X Local responsiveness 9 Power generation (electricity) X Source: Based on Slack (2004) 106 Annexes 3.5 Mayor’s Wedge Analysis for Greater KL/KV PBTs Kuala Lumpur City Hall (DBKL) and Ampang Jaya Municipal Council (MPAJ) Summary 104. Local authorities (PBTs)21, the unit of institutional analysis for city governments in Malaysia, appear to have a very limited direct role in impacting the competitiveness of their city. Cities worldwide have different degrees of influence in such economic development activities, which relate to both intergovernmental structures and the involvement of stakeholders at the city level. Throughout Malaysia, economic development initiatives are carried out by national agencies, state-level agencies and regional corridor authorities. In addition, in several city-level functions—such as infrastructure and land use and planning—operations and decision-making are spread across levels of government, with limited local government influence. Both Kuala Lumpur City Hall (DBKL) and Ampang Jaya Municipal Council (MPAJ) function as local authorities throughout the country, with DBKL under the Ministry of Federal Territories, and MPAJ under the Selangor state government. 105. The national government has led the targeting of proactive economic interventions in the Greater KL/KV metro area, identifying is as one of its National Key Economic Areas (NKEA) and as part of its Economic Transformation Programme (ETP). This has seen various government agencies tasked to carry out the entry point projects (EPPs) to fulfill the 2020 vision for Kuala Lumpur. DBKL and MPAJ’s roles in these initiatives are limited to areas outside of economic development. Investment attraction and talent formation and attraction are carried out by national agencies, while the city governments have a role for revitalizing the area along the Klang River, greening the city and developing a pedestrian network. 106. Cities worldwide provide different approaches and institutional typologies for tackling the most pressing policy issues of their city or metropolitan area. Seoul and Los Angeles led reforms to reduce automobile congestion and increase public transport use, and in Seoul’s case, revitalize urban areas. Manchester’s success has earned it more responsibilities from an otherwise very centralized U.K. central government. The Manchester Combined Authority also offers a successful example of government collaboration within a metropolitan area. 107. This institutional analysis of DBKL and MPAJ identifies the limited role of city government in economic development and service delivery overall, and it also presents the myriad of institutions at the national and state level that coordinate service delivery in cities. The complexity that arises from this arrangement is being addressed by the Malaysian government, which has done this by creating national agencies around certain government functions and to oversee performance.22 However, it may be the case that greater centralization only increases the current institutional complexity. Cities coordinate and carry out services for both national and state government bodies, and designated national level agencies such as SPAD, InvestKL, and Talent Corp. 3.5.1 The Mayor’s wedge framework: a standardized framework for city governments 108. As a starting point on implementation, the “mayor’s wedge” is defined as the “range of interventions that city leaders can influence, compared to those that are predetermined by higher levels of government” (Competitive Cities Knowledge Base Concept Note). The mayor’s wedge framework is being developed as standardized approach to measuring the role of city governments worldwide, with a particular emphasis on a city’s role in economic development. The city government role is framed through the city’s scope—government powers, Local governments, pihak berkuasa tempatan (PBT) in Malay, are commonly referred to as PBTs. 21 PEMANDU, the national delivery unit, is the most obvious example, but the creation of the Land Public Transport Commission (SPAD) for 22 all levels of government also attests to this.   Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  107  functions and funding—and capacity—the financial (systems and processes) and technical (staff expertise) ability to perform its functions. 109. The framework includes city scope components of institutional and economic development context, functional assignments, budget and staffing discretion and expenditures, revenue discretion and politics. A city’s capacity is further disaggregated in terms of human resource management; public financial management; controlling corruption; and building “growth coalitions”. While these are the standardized components, certain scope components such as the political system, and capacity components have not been applied here to the context of the Greater Kuala Lumpur/Klang Valley area governments. Figure 3-2 below is a visualization of the mayor’s wedge framework. Figure 3 2: The Mayor’s Wedge Framework (scope and capacity) 110. For the Greater Kuala Lumpur/Klang Valley (Greater KL/KV) metropolitan area, the objective is to identify the role of public sector institutions in creating an enabling environment for economic development, and distinguish which of those institutions are at the city or local level as compared to other levels of government. While the mayor’s wedge identifies the role of the city government in particular, it expands to include those public sector actors that carry out economic development if these functions are beyond the city’s administrative remit. Additionally, it is often city actors from the private sector or other stakeholder groups either working with, or in place of, the city government in leading proactive economic development initiatives. The following is the mayor’s wedge analysis of the Greater KL/KV metropolitan area local governments of Kuala Lumpur City Hall (Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur - DBKL) and Ampang Jaya Municipal Council (Majlis Perbandaran Ampang Jaya - MPAJ). 3.5.2 Overview: Greater Kuala Lumpur and Klang Valley PBTs 111. Greater Kuala Lumpur/Klang Valley is composed of 10 local governments, including three city councils and seven municipal councils—these are listed in the graphic below (along with their population) (Ministry of 108 Annexes Federal Territories).23 Greater KL/KV is within Selangor State; however the Kuala Lumpur and Putrajaya are autonomous federal territories, administered by the Ministry of Federal Territories. Federal territories are administered as local governments, and have almost all of the attributes of PBTs, but differ in that they report directly to the national government24, namely to the Ministry of Federal Territories. Figure 3-3: Greater Kuala Lumpur/Klang Valley PBTs25 112. While Greater KL/KV has no overarching governance structure for the entire metropolitan area, the territory’s inclusion as a National Key Economic Area (NKEA) outlines several metro area-wide priorities in investment attraction, mass public transportation, and urban regeneration and livability.26 The National Key Economic Areas are part of the national government’s “national transformation program” (NTP)—composed of a “government transformation program” (GTP) and “economic transformation program” (ETP). The Greater KL/ KV NKEA initiatives, as noted in the ETP Annual Report (2013), are led by the Ministry of Federal Territories and involve several government agencies and private sector firms. The report states that the NKEA “involves the efforts of more than 40 Government agencies and private sector firms to transform the Greater KL/Klang Valley region into a vibrant, world-class hub for residents and visitors alike to live, work and play (ETP Annual Report 2013: 42).”27 23 The metropolitan area has a total population of about 5.7 million (2010). 24 Federal territories are autonomous of their state. 25 Source: Official website of Greater Kuala Lumpur/Klang Valley, Ministry of Federal Territories 26 This references the entry point projects (EPPs) for Greater KL/KV according to the NKEA. 27 The ETP’s target is for Malaysia to become a high-income country by 2020, through achieving specific goals set out in each of its NKEAs.   Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  109  3.5.3 Malaysia’s intergovernmental environment 113. A review of Malaysia’s broad governance environment illustrates that while the country has a federal structure, it is highly centralized. The federal and state governments in Malaysia retain the majority of government resources and decision-making powers. Furthermore, local government bodies must seek the approval of their respective states28 to carry out several of the functions that they are assigned. Mayor’s wedge typologies – Malaysia, South Africa and Indonesia 114. Malaysian cities may have either of two types of government administration: city halls/councils for large urban centers and municipal councils for large towns. Cities fall in either of the two tiers depending on a combination of population, revenue and economic output criteria (CLGF 2013: 90-91). Other countries, such as South Africa and the Indonesia, also have several local government types—South Africa has metropolitan, district and local municipalities, and Indonesia has cities and districts (Smoke 2013: 61). South Africa follows a model of devolution, with city governments wielding more influence over policy levers and being answerable to their constituents as opposed to higher tiers of government (Smoke 2013: 60). Indonesia has moved from deconcentration to provinces to devolution to cities (Smoke 2013: 62). The chart below compares aspects of the mayor’s wedge for South Africa, Indonesia and Malaysia, discussing decentralization context, policy levers and revenue raising power. Essentially, the countries fall into three typologies, with South Africa having an enlarged mayor’s wedge, Malaysia a constrained mayor’s wedge, and Indonesia falling somewhere in the middle. Table 3-13: Comparing the mayor’s wedge of South Africa, Indonesia and Malaysia29 South Africa Indonesia Malaysia Devolution to cities since Deconcentration where city Metro municipalities are more 2001, yet recent reforms have governments implement Decentralization Context independent than provinces, increased role of higher-level functions and directives from metro powers have increased government higher-level government Cities provide local business development support, and Metros have responsibilities in Cities have no direct role some set up one stop shops economic promotion, tourism in economic development- to foster a good investment (economic), transport and related functions (all state or Policy Levers climate (economic). Most urban roads (transport), and federal government led), nor in other urban tasks are at the policing and civil protection policing and/or civil protection local level, apart from land (general administration) (general administration) management and higher education Cities collect several Metros much more fiscally Very little revenue is raised municipal taxes but cannot set independent than other local by cities (local governments). tax rates or create new taxes. governments, and have a Cities have access to local Revenue Raising Devolution has increased city several revenue sources (as property tax and user fees and spending autonomy, financed opposed to just property tax charges only (as own-source via fiscal transfers. Local taxes revenue) revenues) have slightly increased Federal territories report instead to the Ministry of Federal Territories. 28 Findings for countries from Smoke 2013, CLGF South Africa Country Profile, UCLG Indonesia Country Profile, CLGF Malaysia Country 29 Profile and UCLG Malaysia Country Profile. 110 Annexes City government spending, budgeting and staffing discretion 115. Proxies for decentralization to city governments include both the degree to which cities are involved in resource mobilization (this includes local taxation), on the revenue side, and the breadth and depth of their service delivery responsibilities, on the expenditure side (Frank 2014). At the aggregate level, local government spending in Malaysia is rather low as a percentage of total government spending—it stands at less than 5 percent (UCLG 2011: 87). The aggregate local government spending in South Africa stands at 17.4 percent, although metropolitan cities account for 57 percent of municipal spending (UCLG 2011: 336) (Smoke 2013: 66). Indonesia local government spending is 28 percent as a share of total government spending, and 80 percent of this spending comes from cities and districts (UCLG 2011: 87) (Smoke 2013: 66). 116. While Kuala Lumpur City Hall is able to prepare its own budget, it is not able to determine the overall allocations for either its development (capital) expenditures or its operational expenditures. The Economic Planning Unit sets DBKL’s development expenditures, while the Ministry of Finance determines its operational expenditures. DBKL’s budget is approved by the Ministry of Federal Territories. Likewise, MPAJ’s budget is approved by the Selangor State Government. Both DBKL and MPAJ are able to increase their budget spending by borrowing from the state and/or national government, pending higher-level government approval.30 In addition to DBKL and MPAJ having little influence over development expenditures, development expenditures are not adequately aligned with operational expenditures. Thus, PBTs often do not have the necessary increases in operational expenditure financing in order to account for development expenditures. 117. Malaysian cities have a two-tier civil service, with seconded staff from the federal civil service and local civil service staff. Federal civil service staff is paid for and controlled by the federal government, and the local staff is paid from the city budget—this applies to all Malaysian local authorities, thus to both DBKL and MPAJ. However, even for staff paid for from the city budget, staff numbers must be approved by the Public Service Commission (PSC), and also the relevant higher tier of government. For DBKL, appointments to the civil service and the creation of new positions must be approved by the PSC and then by the Ministry of Federal Territories. This is similar in the case of the MPAJ, except that, appointments and the creation of new positions must be approved by the PSC and then the Selangor State Government. The National Institute of Public Administration, an extension of the Public Service Commission, is responsible for the training of all local government staff in Malaysia. South African municipalities develop their own budgets, which are approved at the municipal council level. Budgets and hiring are subject to relevant laws and regulations (Smoke 2013: 76). In Indonesia, cities initially had more autonomy in both budgets and the civil service; however, recent legislation has increased higher-level government control over budgeting and decisions on the civil service (Smoke 2013: 76). Revenue discretion 118. Malaysian city governments have a limited role in resource mobilization, and similar to expenditure assignments, there is a dependency relationship of cities to higher tier governments. As shown in Table 312, Malaysia is relatively more constrained in its revenue discretion than both South Africa and Indonesia. Tax collection in the Kuala Lumpur jurisdiction is collected by DBKL and the Ministry of Federal territories— DBKL collects the property assessment tax, while the Ministry collects the quit rent property tax. No other taxes, besides the assessment property tax, are raised or administered by the city government, or any city government in Malaysia. MPAJ collects the property assessment in Ampang Jaya while the Selangor State Government collects rent. While city governments formally have the ability to request to set a new tax rate, in practice these requests are always rejected. Tax rates have not been reassessed in the country for decades. The inefficiencies of the property tax system ultimately constrain the own-source revenues of DBKL and MPAJ, which depend heavily on the collection of property taxes. DBKL must seek approval from the Ministry of Federal Territories, while MPAJ must receive Selangor State Government approval. 30   Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  111  119. Local government revenue, as a percentage of total government revenue, is very low in the country, at less than 1 percent (UCLG 2011: 87). This would suggest that most expenditure for cities do not go through the city government budget, but are financed by higher tiers of government. DBKL’s rather low revenue is made up of 90 percent own source revenues (of which 70 percent come from property taxes, and 20 percent from user fees), and 10 percent intergovernmental transfers. 3.5.4 Economic development strategy 120. The National Key Economic Area for Greater KL/KV is the only one with a geographic as opposed to an industry focus31, and this is due to the particular role that cities play in shaping and driving economic development (Economic Transformation Programme 2010: 125). The NKEA functions like the economic development strategy for the city, identifying economic dynamism and livability goals to be achieved by 2020. As aforementioned, these goals are implemented through the entry point projects (EPPs), of which there are nine for the Greater KL/KV NKEA. 121. Several national government agencies are responsible for economic policymaking32 on Greater KL/KV, and this includes the Economic Planning Unit (EPU), the Performance Management Delivery Unit (PEMANDU), the Ministry of International Trade and Industry (MITI), the Ministry of Finance (MOF), the Malaysian Investment Development Authority (MIDA) and InvestKL (which is under the purview of MITI, PEMANDU and the Ministry of Federal Territories). In terms of the implementation of the Greater KL/KV NKEA, responsibility is shared by InvestKL and TalentCorp on attracting investment and talent, while DBKL and other area local governments have roles in urban regeneration and beautification (ETP Annual Report 2013). Implementing economic development 122. Malaysia focuses on economic development through focusing on general business environment improvements, targeting specific sectors and prioritizing inventions. The Greater KL/KV NKEA targets the following priority economic sectors: financial services, business services, education, tourism and retail.33 InvestKL was established in 2011 with the mandate to attract 100 multinational corporations (MNCs)—in the priority sectors—to set up regional headquarters in Greater KL/KV by 2020. InvestKL works closely with Talentcorp, the main implementing body of the EPP on attracting external and internal talent, so that it can offer talent with specialized skills for targeted new services industries and for commodities-based industries. Talentcorp works to build a local ecosystem in order to create a large number of jobs, develop a talent attraction program, attracting skilled and qualified Malaysians living abroad, and retain foreign talent currently residing in Malaysia (ETP Annual Report 2013: 28-29). 123. A recent report by Brookings analyzed unemployment of youth and teen adults in the U.S.’s 100 largest metropolitan areas, recognized worsening job prospects from 2000 to 2011 (2014). This of course is an issue among cities worldwide, and one Kuala Lumpur is facing as it looks to build talent to support its labor market demand. Box 3-4 presents the main recommendations from the Brookings report. 31 Malaysia’s NKEAs include: Greater KL/KV, Oil, Gas and Energy, Financial Services, Wholesale and Retail, Palm Oil and Rubber, Tourism, Electrical and Electronics, Business Services, Communications Content and Infrastructure, Education, Agriculture, Healthcare (ETP Annual Report 2013). 32 This includes economic strategies and planning, investment promotions, investment incentives, and monitoring of economic strategies. 33 Combined, they contributed to 41% of Greater KL/KV’s GNI in 2009 112 Annexes 124. DBKL and the other local governments of Greater KL/KV appear to have a limited, or perhaps indirect, role in economic development. According to the NKEA, DBKL’s Physical Planning Department drives the planning and implementation of beautification works on the Klang-Gombak River (EPP 5). Additionally, DBKL’s Economic Planning and Development Coordination Department will make recommendations on the development of the land along the river corridor. Ampang Jaya Municipal Council (MPAJ) is tasked with and has reduced oil and grease levels along the portion of the river that falls under its jurisdiction. DBKL leads EPP 6 on a greener Kuala Lumpur, planting and maintaining trees and attempting to increase participation of public and private sector companies in the overall greening effort. DBKL also leads the efforts on identify iconic city attractions (EPP 7) as well as improving pedestrian connectivity (EPP 8) (ETP Annual Report 2013: 33-39).   Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  113  Box 3-4 Selected recommendations for teen and young adult unemployment in U.S. cities Enrich high school and college education with work-based learning opportunities and expand apprenticeships ›› Work-based learning provides a practical and applied setting for students to learn employability skills (e.g. problem-solving, communication), highlight the relevance of education, and provide students networks to employers and employment that they would otherwise not be able to access. ›› Examples: • The Christo Rey Network of high schools places students in “work-study” programs during their academic year. • U.S. States Wisconsin and Georgia have created youth apprenticeship programs for their high school students, linking together high schools, businesses and community colleges. Link high schools to post-secondary education ›› About two-thirds of 24 to 29 year olds do not have either two or four year post-secondary education credentials. Dual enroll- ment and early college programs allow students to take college classes in high school, and increase the likelihood that they will continue on to college. ›› Examples: • Launched in 2002, the Early College High School Initiative has created and modified 240 high schools nationwide to blend high school and college into one rigorous program. • North Carolina’s Career and College Promise program creates several alternatives for high school students to earn college credit, also including paths to transfer to four-year degree programs. Increase the emphasis on career and technical education, career counseling and job placement ›› This refers to better preparing and planning for high school students to directly start in the entry-level workforce, such as through attaining the necessary workplace skills in high school. ›› Examples: • Jobs for America’s Graduates (JAG) provides students at risk of dropping out with help to graduate from high school, enroll in post secondary education, and/or find a job. • Year Up, a program in 12 cities across the United States, provides training on information technology skills and college credits to young adults ages 18-24. Provide those who have dropped out opportunities to get a high school diploma and access to post-secondary education ›› Example: • Gateway to College programs are found at community colleges around the U.S. work with young adults ages 16-21, to help them earn a diploma and/or college credits, while providing a very supportive environment. Source: Brookings 2014 3.5.5 City service delivery 125. Service provision in Malaysia is largely held at the federal government level and this is exclusively the case on areas such as general administration (policing, criminal justice), education (pre-school to higher education), and health (primary care and hospitals) (CLGF 2013: 92). Service areas including urban transport and housing and urban planning have greater involvement of city administrations; economic planning (strategies, investment promotion, investment incentives and monitoring) falls entirely outside of the city government’s scope (CLGF 2013: 92). There are differences between DBKL and MPAJ, however, as DBKL shares its responsibilities with federal agencies—particularly the Ministry of Federal Territories—and MPAJ shares responsibilities both with federal and Selangor state government agencies. 126. The federal government united public transportation under one roof in 2010, by creating the Land Public Transport Commission (SPAD). SPAD comes directly under the purview of the Prime Minister and designs the policies, planning and regulating of all aspects of train, bus and taxi services, as well as road and rail-based 114 Annexes freight transport (SPAD).34 SPAD designs policy and planning for bus network and stations, rail network and stations, taxis and other land transport for the DBKL and MPAJ jurisdictions. It is also responsible for the NKEA priorities on a High Speed Rail to connect Kuala Lumpur to Singapore, and on coordinating with Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) Corp (created in 2011) in order to integrate existing rail networks and transit and develop a new MRT system for Greater KL/KV. 127. One of Kuala Lumpur’s transportation issues is the emphasis on automobile use as opposed to mass transit. Besides the implications this has on traffic congestion and the environment, this underutilizes the effects of agglomeration at the city level and the economic benefits created by dense urban networks. Box 3-5 describes the experiences of Los Angeles and Seoul in addressing the challenges caused by extensive car use, and increasing urban density. 128. While not applicable to Greater KL/KV, Malaysia has elsewhere in the country established Regional Corridor authorities, such as with the Iskandar Development Region (IRDA) authority. The box below discusses the Greater Manchester Combined Authority (GMCA), which has been successful in uniting several service delivery functions under one institution while streamlining as opposed to adding complexity to governance arrangements. The GMCA in many ways is moving towards the Greater London Authority in assuming more strategic functions for its metropolitan area (Wilcox et. al. 2014). Cities receiving more authority—if they can “prove their worth”— remains a novel concept for the United Kingdom, as the U.K. is considered “one of the most centralized OECD countries” (BBC 27 January 2014) (Wilcox et. al. 2014: 2)35. Indeed, Manchester ranks among the “least powerful” cities in the European Union index of city power, scoring low in several indicators similar to those included in this mayor’s wedge framework (European Union 2007: A5).36 34 Available at: http://www.spad.gov.my/about-us/what-we-do. 35 Available at: http://www.bbc.com/news/business-25909238 36 The European Union’s index of city power is a weighted index based on: city population (2001), administrative structure, expenditure per resident, local expenditure as a percentage of total expenditure, proportion of local income from local taxation and local government tax receipts as a percentage of member state receipts.   Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  115  Box 3-5 Polycentricity and public transport: Los Angeles and Seoul What do Los Angeles and Seoul have in common? Both cities are world leaders in population density, and density takes a polycentric form in the two cities—increasing the likelihood of driving and automobile dependency, as opposed to transit use. Residents are forced to visit multiple locations to run multiple errands, as opposed to accomplishing multiple errands at a single location (Rand 2008: xxxiii). Los Angeles was built around the car, offering a stark contrast to U.S. cities like New York and Chicago, which had much more concentrated urban density. However, while Los Angeles has an identity for sprawling development, it is quite densely populated at the regional level. The cities’ surrounding suburbs are much denser than those of other cities. Compounding this issue for Los Angeles, a 2007 study found that jobs in the region are decentralizing over time, with employment clusters increasing by 10-15% from 1980 and 2000, and jobs in downtown Los Angeles decreasing by 20% during the same time period (Rand 2008: 63). Figure 34 below presents the density of jobs versus parking spaces per job (among central business districts of major world cities), to reinforce the argument that “A big reason Angelenos drive everywhere is that they can park everywhere, generally free” (Rand 2008: 74). Figure 35 looks at the relationship between high-speed transit and population per square mile, suggesting a positive relationship between dense metropolitan regions and high-speed transit options and that Los Angeles may be lagging in this regard (Rand 2008: 70). Figure 3-4: Density compared to two transit factors (a) Density of Jobs versus Parking Spaces per Job (Central business districts of major world cities); (b) Population Density and High Speed Transit Density (Major U.S. Metro Areas) Tackling these issues requires that Los Angeles continue to employ a combination of strategies, which include land-use reforms related to zoning, density, parking supply and the mixing of uses, and major infrastructure investments to improve transit options (Rand 2008: xx). Los Angeles has employed significant capital investments in infrastructure in the last few years, pursuing devel- opment along new transit options. Metro Rapid, the city’s BRT line, has achieved success in ridership along its corridor, but is yet to attract major corridor development. The LA Metro Gold Line, however, has seen strong developer interest and is increasingly a destination for future housing and mixed-use development (TCRP 2004: 430-434). The city will need to continue to connect major employment clusters to the rapid transit network and improve intermodal connections between light rail, subway and bus, and at the same time re-zone areas around transit stops for increased development (CTOD 2010: 61) (TCRP 2004: 434). Source: Brookings 2014 116 Annexes Box 3-5 Continued Seoul experienced rapid economic growth and urbanization in the second half of the 20th century, going from a population of 1.6 million in 1955 to 10.6 million in 1990. The number of registered cars in the city also substantially increased, from 27,000 in 1967 to 2.9 million in 2008. Decentralization efforts from 1990 to 2005 sought to reduce the population increase, and relieve the city of its problems of overconcentration (Kim & Han 2011: 146-147). Korea adopted a national government act, the Capital Region Readjustment plan, which limited the establishment of new factories and new universities in the Capital Region and promoted the building of urban sub-centers (Kim & Han 2011: 147). In terms of the latter, 26 new towns were built in the Seoul Metropolitan Area in the last three decades, increasing the usage of cars and demand for highway infrastructure (World Bank 2013: 64). Seoul has a road network of 8093 km as of 2008, and its subway network coverers 64.4% of its territory (Kim & Han 2011: 147). Notwithstanding the extensive public transit network, job concentration in districts throughout the Seoul region, and excessive development around Seoul, led to long distance commuting and increased car usage, causing traffic congestion and pollution (Kim & Han 2011: 152). Mayor Myung-bak Lee, Seoul mayor from 2002-2006, sought to “make a city where people come first, not cars” (World Bank 2013: 66). His administration did this by removing highways in the city center, and regenerating the areas for public use. Seoul also encouraged households to settle in the central city and redevelopment districts, reversing the flow of residents to Seoul’s outskirts and beyond. The city offered transit options to offset the decreased roadway capacity, partly by extending subway lines and, more importantly, opening seven new lines for median-lane buses (as part of its BRT network) (World Bank 2013: 66-67). Bus operating speeds in the city have nearly doubled as a result, reaching 21 kilometers per hour. BRT buses have been more reliable than those on nonexclusive lanes (in terms of traffic time variation) and ridership on BRT buses increased 60% faster than that for non-BRT buses (from 2004 to 2005). Other significant transit transformations included introducing a semi-public transit organization to enforce rules and standards on bus routes, schedules and private operating practices. A smart fare card was introduced to allow for integrated bus-rail fares and efficient distance-based pricing (World Bank 2013: 68). Land markets responded to the BRT investments, intensifying land uses along BRT corridors and mainly converting single-family residences to multi-family units and mixed-use projects. Land price premiums were observed within 300 meters of BRT stops and prices as well as development increased along high-amenity corridors. The concentration of high-value-added industries, employ- ing a “creative class”, increased in the converted areas and the “freeway-to-greenway” initiatives reflected indirect environment benefits (World Bank 2013: 68-69). 129. Neither DBKL nor MPAJ is responsible for designing their economic strategies, investment promotion, offering investment incentives and or monitoring their economic strategies. »» For DBKL: • The Economic Planning Unit (EPU) carries out economic strategies and planning, • MITI, MIDA and InvestKL lead Investment promotion, • MOF and MIDA offer investment incentives, and, • PEMANDU monitors economic strategies.37 »» For MPAJ, economic development is under the purview of both federal and Selangor state agencies. • The Economic Planning Unit (EPU) as well as the State Economic Planning Unit (UPEN) carry out economic strategies and planning, • MITI, MIDA, InvestKL as well as the Selangor State Investment Corporation lead Investment promotion, • MOF, MIDA and the Selangor State Government offer investment incentives, and • PEMANDU as well as the State Government monitor economic strategies. 37 All of these are federal agencies.   Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  117  Box 3-6 Greater Manchester Combined Authority Manchester is emerging as a viable alternative to London in the areas of services, culture and arts (European Union 2007: 65). The city is famously known as one of the main trade centers of the Industrial Revolution, becoming home to a thriving textile economy and then one based on heavy industry in the 1970s. The city faced decline in both textiles and heavy industry, but experienced resurgence thanks to significant public and private investment, council leadership and, importantly, the close collab- oration of the metropolitan area’s ten local authorities. This collaboration has undergone several iterations, first as a city region and most recently as a combined authority. While it has endured and been relatively successful, regional coordination has had a number of difficulties including appearing overly complex (and difficult to engage with) to the public, and political disagreements between different local authority councils stalling joint decisions and initiatives (World Bank 2008). The Greater Manchester Combined Authority (GMCA) was established in 2011 to cover ten local authorities (see the figure below on Greater Manchester). The GMCA works with its constituent authorities in a set of powers and responsibilities in eco- nomic development and transport. This includes for example developing a Greater Manchester Strategy, an economic strategy, and establishing Transport for Greater Manchester (TfGM) as GMCA’s executive body with respect to transport functions (Smith July 2012). The GMCA, TfGM and other Greater Manchester institutions have clearly defined roles that are based on agreements between the area local authorities. Notable achievements for GMCA include: major refurbishment of the Bolton and Rochdale railway stations as part a city region transport investment program; raising an annual “Revolving Infrastructure Fund” worth £30 million and permission for the building of up to 7,000 new homes by 2017. It is also a testament to the GMCA’s success that London-style powers are now being recommended to Manchester, as the first U.K. city to follow London’s regional government model (Wilcox et. al. 2014: 11). Figure 3-5: Greater Manchester Regional authority typologies for local service provision in the UK The United Kingdom has recently instituted two programs of regional coordination, uniting local governments in regions around certain service delivery functions. There are 39 Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs) that cover all English local authorities. LEPs are meant to provide strategic leadership in local economic priorities. Figure 3-6 shows the geography of the 39 LEPs. As a more formal alternative, Combined Authorities are legal bodies that can be set up by two or more contiguous local authorities. The box below presents the two institutional alternatives. 118 Annexes Box 3-7 Regional arrangements for local authorities in the UK Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs) were created in Figure 3-6: LEPs in the UK 2010, in order to “provide the strategic leadership in their areas to set out local economic priorities” and “create the right environment for business and growth” (Bolton June 2012). LEPs are informal structures governed by a board of volunteers, which includes a private sector chair and members from local authorities, business based in the LEP area, public bodies including universities and third sector representatives. LEPs now receive grant funding by the central government in order to identify and carry out their objectives. Figure 3-6, to the right, represents the 39 local enterprise partnerships (Bolton June 2012). Combined authorities are formal regional bodies encom- passing two or more local authorities (and usually coincid- ing with a natural economic area) that wish to collaborate closely on economic development and transport-related initiatives. Combined authorities are assigned functions by their constituent local authorities, in the areas of eco- nomic development, regeneration and integrated public transport. Among the intended benefits of such structures are: improved alignment, coordination and delivery of economic development and transport-related initiatives, as well as a means of steering significant streams of work (Smith July 2012). According to the Centre for Cities, the combined authorities are an effective route to implemented economic development policies at a spatial scale that matches cities’ economic footprints—as this spatial scale often covers more than one local authority (Smith 2012). 3.5.6 Business regulations and licensing 130. Malaysia ranks among the top countries in the World Bank Group’s Doing Business survey, showcasing its continued emphasis on maintaining a superior general business environment. Malaysia’s regional comparator economies also perform very well. At 18th worldwide in ease of doing business, Malaysia is behind Singapore which ranks first, Hong Kong which ranks third and Korea which ranks fifth (World Bank 2014: 8). Starting a business is done through the Companies Commission of Malaysia one-stop shop, a national agency under the Ministry of Domestic Trade, Cooperatives and Consumerism (World Bank 2014: 20). Development approval, or obtaining a construction permit, is carried out through an application at a One Stop Center (OSC)—every local government in Malaysia should have its own OSC. The OSC refers approval submissions to all necessary government departments, including the Planning Department, Building Department, Engineering Department, Fire and Rescue Department, Sewerage Agency and Water Agency. Kuala Lumpur City Hall’s One Stop Center manages this process in Malaysia’s capital (World Bank 2014: 27-30). 131. DBKL, MPAJ, as well as all Malaysia local governments, have responsibility over zoning and land use regulations. However, land titles are granted by land offices at higher tiers of government—the Ministry of Federal Territories for DBKL and Selangor State Government for MPAJ. Kuala Lumpur has also been able to perform rather well in terms of urban regeneration, through its repurposing of land throughout the city. Most notably this has included redeveloping the city center and revitalizing the area along the Klang River, with the latter efforts aimed at creating a waterfront of high economic value.   Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  119  3.6 Examples of Formulae for Intergovernmental Fiscal Transfers 3.6.1 Formulae for Intergovernmental Fiscal Transfers in Australia Background: Federal-State Financial Relations 132. Australia is notable for the centralization of revenue-raising and a comprehensive system of intergovernmental fiscal transfers. To address both vertical and horizontal fiscal imbalances, the federal government makes a large amount of intergovernmental transfers. The bulk of transfers are from the federal government to state governments. Local government, the third tier of government, is a state responsibility and has the service delivery and revenue raising powers given to it by the states38. The federal government collects 81 percent of all government revenue but is responsible for only 61 percent of outlays, while states collect 17 percent of revenue and incur 33 percent of outlays (CGC 2008). 133. Fiscal transfers are administered by Australia’s Commonwealth Grants Commission (CGC), an independent statutory advisory body established in 1933. CGC members are appointed by the federal government. The Commission makes recommendations in consultation with the federal government and the states. It aims to ensure that each state has the fiscal capacity to provide the same standard quality of public services39. Three equalization pillars are used to achieve equalization: reflect what States collectively do, be policy neutral and be practical (Morris and others 2004). The Commission reviews the methodology for transfers and make adjustments every five years. 134. The major reform of Australian federal fiscal relations happened in 2000. With the introduction of the goods and services tax (GST) and a new intergovernmental agreement (IGA 2000), certain state taxes were abolished. All revenue from the GST would be shared among the states on the basis of horizontal fiscal equalization. GST became the main source of general revenue assistance from the federal government to the states (CGC 2008). 135. Fiscal transfers take two main forms (Commonwealth of Australia 2015): A. General Revenue Assistance: untied monthly funding that the states may use as they see fit. Over 98% of general revenue assistance is the allocation of GST revenue, which is based on a comprehensive formula. Other general revenue assistance includes payments to the Australian Capital Territory, and royalty pay- ments to Western Australia and Northern Territory. B. Specific Payments: including specific purpose payments (SPPs) and national partnership payments (NPPs) sourced from the national budget to achieve national aims or provide funds for particular purposes. The SPPs mainly support services of workforce development, health and housing. They are distributed amongst the states in accordance with population shares of that year and the growth in services provision activity such as hospital and school services in that jurisdiction. The NPPs facilitate reforms or specified projects, where payments are aligned with project achievements. 136. In 2015-2016, the federal government is providing the states with A$107.7 billion in total payments, accounting for around 5.8% of GDP and 45% of state revenues (Commonwealth of Australia 2015). The total payments include specific payments of $50 billion and general revenue assistance of $57.7 billion. 38 Local governments are responsible for services such as local roads, building standards and waste disposal. They raise revenue through rates on property in their jurisdiction and various fees and fines. Transfers from the federal government to municipal governments are channeled through the states (Searle 2002: p17-18). 39 The transfers aim to equalize State fiscal capacities, not the actual fiscal outcomes because States choose to provide different levels of service, impose different tax rates or acquire different levels of assets. (CCG 2015) 120 Annexes Formulae Used for Transfers 137. Fiscal equalization in Australia aims to achieve a situation where, after distributing the GST, each state has the fiscal capacity to provide the same services, charge the same taxes and achieve the same per capita budget result (CGC 2014a). Since states differ in fiscal circumstances such as size of the tax base and the unit cost of providing services, the actual GST entitlement of each state varies. 138. According to the Commonwealth of Australia’s Update Report (2014b), a state’s GST allocation is calculated as: assessed GST requirementi= assessed expensesi + assessed investmenti + assessed lendingi - assessed revenuei - other paymentsi »» assessed expenses: the expenses state i would incur to provide average services. It is the sum of 11 categories of expenses that the Commission defines that all states incur to provide general services. Each category assessed expenses is estimated by multiplying the national average expense per capita by its category disability factor and its population. The disability factor is calculated by relating its position to the average position40. »» assessed investment: the investment state i would make to have the infrastructure required to provide average services. It is calculated by subtracting the assessed level of infrastructure required at the start of the year from the assessed level of infrastructure required at the end of the year and multiplying the result by the state’s unit cost disability41. »» assessed net lending: the net lending state i would make to finish the year with the average per capita net financial assets. It is calculated by subtracting the state’s population share of the total net financial worth at the start of the year from its population share of total net financial worth at the end of the year. »» assessed revenue: the revenue state i would raise if it made the average revenue raising effort. It is the sum of assessed revenue for seven categories that the Commission determines as revenue sources in the estimation42. For each category, it is calculated by multiplying the national average tax rate and the state’s tax base. »» other payments: revenue from Commonwealth payments including SPPs and NPPs. 139. The calculation is compiled using data from the annual operating statements of the states’ general government sectors sourced from the ABS Government Finance Statistics. 40 For service delivery expenses component, if the proportion of a state’s population aged 15 to 64 is 10% above the average, it is assumed the state’s per capita expenses on vocational education would be 10% above average. The disability factor for a category is estimated combining each component. Factors are added if they are independent and multiplied if they interact (CGC 2014b). 41 The disability here is estimated in a similar way with expense disability factor, by relating its position to the national average position. 42 The categories for revenue include payroll tax, land tax, stamp duty on conveyances, insurance tax, motor taxes, mining revenue and other revenue (CGC 2014b).   Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  121  3.6.2 Formulae for Intergovernmental Fiscal Transfers in Indonesia 140. Intergovernmental fiscal transfers in Indonesia consist of three main components: Dana Alokasi Umum (DAU), Dana Alokasi Khusus (DAK) and Dana Bagi Hasil (DBH). DAU and DBH are unconditional grants, while DAK finances subnational projects based on national priorities. DAU and DAK are formula-based transfers; DBH is based on fixed percentage shares. Transfers from the central government are still the largest source of revenues for subnational governments in Indonesia. Dana Alokasi Umum (DAU) 141. DAU aims to balance the fiscal capacities of subnational governments. It is transferred directly to subnational governments on a monthly basis, and subnationals have complete discretion over the use of DAU received. 142. According to Law 33 (2004), DAU should be provided in a “proportionate, democratic, fair and transparent manner” by taking into account “local potential (fiscal capacity and conditions and local needs)” (Shah and others 2012). The grant allocation is calculated as the sum of a basic allocation (PWBA) and a fiscal gap allocation (FG). DAUi = Basic Allocationi + Fiscal Gap Allocationi »» Basic Allocation (PWBA): funds a portion of the subnational government’s civil servant wage bill43. It is allocated by the relative percentage share of each local government or provincial government in the total actual bill. Mathematically it is calculated as: PWBAi = (Wage Billi / Total Wage Bill) * (Total DAU PWBA) »» Fiscal Gap Allocation (FG): the estimated difference between a subnational government’s fiscal needs and its fiscal capacity: Fiscal Gap Allocationi = Fiscal needsi — Fiscal Capacityi »» Fiscal needs (EN) is calculated by multiplying a composite index by the average aggregate spending. The index is developed based on relative population, relative area, relative construction price index, inverse of human development index, and inverse of relative nominal per capita GRDP (gross regional domestic product). The weights for the above mentioned factors are assigned to achieve a given numerical value for the Williamson’s Index44, as shown in Table 1 (Shah and others 2012). Fiscal Needsi = average fiscal needs * composite indexi »» Fiscal capacity (FC) is the sum of weighted own-source revenues, non-resource tax sharing as well as resource and mining tax sharing45. The weights for individual revenue sources are assigned to achieve a given numerical value for the Williamson’s Index for each year. Table 1 provides the index values for the year 2011 (Shah and others 2012). Fiscal Capacityi = ∑ ( Rij * Ij) The wage bill variable in the equation uses the actual wage bill from the previous year. 43 Williamson’s Index is a regional inequality index developed by JG Williamson (1965). It is an aggregate measure of the dispersion 44 of regional levels of per capita income about the national mean. Each regional observation is weighted by its share in the national population. 45 Rij is jurisdiction i’s amount of revenue from source j. Ij is the composite index for source of revenue j. 122 Annexes R_i^j is jurisdiction i’s amount of revenue from so Table 3-14: DAU Variable Weights, 2011 Province Cities/Districts DAU (2011) variable weight Fiscal Need Variables Population 30.00% 30.00% Area 15.00% 13.50% Construction price index 30.00% 30.00% Inverse of human development index 10.00% 10.00% Index of Inverse per capita GRDP 15.00% 16.50% Fiscal Capacity Variables Own-source revenue 50.00% 93.00% Tax revenue 80.00% 80.00% Resource sharing 95.00% 63.00% Source: Ministry of Finance, Government of Indonesia, cited in Shah et al. 2012 Dana Alokasi Khusus (DAK) 143. DAK is a capital grant sourced from the national budget (Anggaran Pendapatan dan Belanja Negara, APBN) and finances subnational projects that the central government deems are of national priority. DAK funds capital spending and cannot be used for research, training, administration, or official travel. DAK accounts for around 5% of the national budget and funds activities across 22 sectors. Funds are transferred each year in three tranches. The first tranche depends on a subnational government’s submission of its budget to the central government, and the latter two tranches depend on the depletion of funds from the previous tranche. (World Bank 2012) 144. The allocation of DAK is a two-fold process. First, there is a system for determining a subnational government’s eligibility to receive DAK, based on fiscal capacity, regional characteristics and special criteria such as regional autonomy and disadvantaged regions, as shown in Figure 1. 145. Second, once eligibility for DAK is established, the atual allocation is based on a comprehensive formula. The total DAK allocation that subnational government i receives from the central government is the sum of DAK allocated for each sector (e.g. education, health, agriculture, etc.) for that subnational government. The DAK that subnational government i receives for sector j is calculated by multiplying its weighted share by the total DAK allocated to the sector. Mathematically the process is presented as below (Ministry of Finance 2015): DAK allocationi = DAKieducation + DAKihealth + DAKiagriculture + ⋯ + DAKitrade Weightingij DAK allocation = � i j � * Total DAK for sector j ∑Weightingj Weightingij = (0.8 * technical indicatorij + 0.2 * fiscal & regional indexij ) * construction cost indexij = (0.8 * ITij + 0.2 * IFWij ) * IKKij   Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  123  ource j. I^j is the composite index for source of revenue j. »» Weighting: is determined by subnational government i’s technical indicator, fiscal and regional index and construction cost index. ∑Weightingj is the total weighting of all eligible subnational governments in sector j. »» Technical indicator (IT): reflects the condition of infrastructure in sector j in subnational government i. It is determined by summing up individual weighted component scores that are determined by the relevant national government line ministry46. »» Fiscal and Regional index (IFW): the combination of fiscal capacity index (IFN) and regional index (IKW). »» Fiscal capacity index (IFN) is the ratio of a subnational government’s fiscal capacity to the national average fiscal capacity. A subnational government’s fiscal capacity is calculated by subtracting its wage bill for civil servants from the sum of its own-source revenue and all other transfers received from the central government. »» The regional index (IKW) is a composite of indices that take account the status of certain subnational governments that are “lagging’, in border areas, or remote islands. IFW = 0.5IFN-1 + 0.5IKW fiscal capacityi IFNi = fiscal capacityi/ (� ) Number of eligible regions fiscal capacityi = own – source revenuei + DAUi + DBHi – wage billi »» Construction cost index (IKK): reflects varying levels of the costs of construction across the country. The index for each jurisdiction is determined by the Ministry of Public Works based on recent actual data of the value of construction contracts for civil works across all provinces. Dana Bagi Hasil (DBH) 146. DBH is the mechanism for revenue sharing. The central government raises revenue and returns part of this revenue by allocating a predefined share of revenues to the originating jurisdiction. Distributions are by provincial point of origin; producing districts within provinces receive larger portions than non-producing districts. Subnational governments have total discretion over the use of allocated funds (World Bank 2012). These transfers accounted for 25 percent of total central transfers in 2010 and financed 20 percent of subnational expenditures (Shah and others 2012). 147. DBH includes both shared tax and non-tax revenues. Shared tax revenue comes from property tax, taxes on the transfer of property titles and personal income tax. Non-tax revenue sharing is based on revenues from natural resources, including oil, natural gas and geothermal energy, mining, forestry and fisheries. For each type of revenue, the central government and subnational government share in accordance to predefined percentages. For instance, DBH from general mining is shared between central, provincial, and local governments at 20 percent, 16 percent, and 64 percent, respectively (Dyah 2012). For example, IT for education sector is determined by components such as classroom conditions, school toilet conditions, etc. Each 46 component is scored by the relevant national line ministry. 124 Annexes Figure 3-7: Allocation Process for DAK (General Criteria) Yes Fiscal Capacity IFN Ineligible for this sector No (Special Criteria) PAPUA Special Yes No Ineligible Technical Indicator IT>0 Autonomy & Construction Disadvantaged Regions Cost Index IKK Yes Regional Technical Weighting Weighting (Special Criteria) Yes IFW*IKK IT*IKK Fiscal and Regional Index IFW <1 * 0.8 * 0.2 Fiscal and Regional DAK Weighting No Index BDij = IKK (0.8*IFW+0.2*IT) Ineligible Fiscal Capacity Regional DAK for sector j Index IFN Index DAKij = (BDij / ∑j BDij ) * Total DAK Source: Ministry of Finance 2015; SMERU Research Institute 2008 3.7 Annex 3 References Abbott, J. 2011. “Regions of cities: Metropolitan governance and planning in Australia”, in Xu, J., Yeh A., editors, Gover- nance and Planning of Mega-City Regions – An international comparative perspective. Routledge, New York, p 172-190 Adi, P.H. 2005. “The Impact of Fiscal Decentralization on Economics Growth”. Journal of Interdisciplines. Satya Wacana Christian University. Volume XVII Number 2-3. August. (National Accredited). Alfsen-Norodom, C. 2004. “Managing the Megacity for Global Sustainability: The New York Metropolitan Region as an Urban Biosphere Reserve.” Annals of the New York Academy of Science, vol. 1023, pp. 125-141. Andersson, M. 2012. “Metropolitan Management – Approaches and Implications”. Available at: http://siteresources. worldbank.org/INTURBANDEVELOPMENT/Resources/336387-1369969101352/Andersson.pdf Ballaguer-Coll, T., Prior, D., Tortosa-Ausina, E. 2006. “Decentralization and Efficiency in Spanish Local Government”. (Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Economicas 2006) BBC. UK. n.d. “One of most centralized OECD countries”. 27 January 2014. Available at: http://www.bbc.com/news/busi- ness-25909238 (Retrieved October 2014).   Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  125  Bird, Richard M., and Michael Smart. 2002. “Intergovernmental fiscal transfers: International lessons for developing countries.” World Development 30 (6): 899-912. Bolton, T. 2011. “Local Enterprise Partnerships: A Great LEP forward?” Centre for Cities. June 2012. Brinkhoff, T. 2011. “The Principal Agglomerations of the World”. Available at: www.citypopulation.de Cantarero, D. and Pascual, M. 2008. “Analysing the impact of fiscal decentralization on health outcomes: empirical evi- dence from Spain” (Applied Economics Letter 2008) Central Intelligence Agency. N.d. “The World Factbook”. Available at: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the- world-factbook/geos/id.html Center for Transit-Oriented Development. 2010.”Creating Successful Transit-Oriented Districts in Los Angeles: A Citywide Toolkit for Achieving Regional Goals”. February 2010. Civic Alliance. 2006. “About Civic Alliance, Regional Planning Association”. Available at: www.civicalliance.org Commonwealth of Australia. 2015. Budget Paper No. 3 - Federal Financial Relations 2015-2016. Canberra. Commonwealth Grants Commission. 2008.The Last 25 Years. Canberra. Commonwealth Grants Commission. 2014a. Report on GST Revenue Sharing Relatives 2014 Update. Canberra. Commonwealth Grants Commission. 2014b.The GST Distribution Model – A Mathematical Presentation. Canberra: Com- monwealth Grants Commission Commonwealth Grants Commission. 2015. Report on state revenue sharing relativities: 2015 Review (Draft). Supporting information. Canberra. Commonwealth Local Government Forum. 2013. “Country Profile: Malaysia”. Available at: http://www.clgf.org.uk/malay- sia/ (retrieved October 2014). Commonwealth Local Government Forum. 2013 “Country Profile: South Africa”. Available at: http://www.clgf.org.uk/ south-africa/ (retrieved October 2014). Dodge, W.R. 1996. “Regional Excellence – Governing Together to Compete Globally and Flourish Locally”. National League of Cities, Washington, DC Dyah, S. M. 2012. The impacts of fiscal decentralization on income inequality in Indonesia. Elias, E.E. 1997. “Fiscal Decen- tralization and Municipal Governance in Mexico The case of Chihuahua”. European Commission. 2007. “State of European Cities Report: Adding value to the European Urban Audit”. Frank, J. 2014. “Governance and Inclusive Institutions Directorate Briefing Notes”. Governance Across Levels of Govern- ment. The World Bank, Washington, DC Greater Vancouver Regional District. 2006. “About GVRD”. Available at: http://www.gvrd.bc.ca 126 Annexes Imron, A. 2011. “Regional Autonomy Proliferation of Region and Pseudo Local Government in Indonesia”. (Aug 2011) Intergovernmental Agreement on a National Water Initiative. (2009). Intergovernmental Agreement on Federal Financial Relations. Schedule D: Payment Arrangements. Kajian Pengeluaran Publik Indonesia. 2007. “Review of Indonesian Public Expenditure 2007”. Avilable at: http://sitere- sources.worldbank.org/INTINDONESIA/Resources/226271-1168333550999/PERHBAB7DesentralisasiFiskalKesenjan- ganDaerah.pdf Kim, B-J. 2004. “An Assessment of Seoul Metropolitan Government Reform Strategies”. International Review of Public Administration, vol.8, no.2, pp.77-89 Kim, H.M. and Sun, S. H. 2011. “City profile: Seoul”. Cities. 13 July 2011. Klink, J. 2007. “Recent Perspectives on Metropolitan Organization, Functions, and Governance”, in Rojas, E., Cuadra- do-Roura J.R., Güell, J.M.F., editors. Governing the Metropolis - Principles and Cases, Inter-American Development Bank, Washington, DC. p. 77-134 Land Public Transport Commission. N.d. “About SPAD”. Available at: http://www.spad.gov.my/about-us/what-we-do (retrieved October 2014). Laquian, A. 2005. “Beyond Metropolis – The Planning and Governance of Asia’s Mega-Urban Regions”. Woodrow Wilson Center Press, Washington, DC and The John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore. Ma, Jun. 1997. Intergovernmental Fiscal Transfer: A Comparison of Nine Countries:(cases of the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia, Germany, Japan, Korea, India, and Indonesia). World bank, 1997. McCarthy, L. 2011. “Mega-city regional cooperation in the United States and Western Europe - A comparative perspec- tive”, in Xu, J., Yeh A., editors, Governance and Planning of Mega-City Regions – An international comparative perspective. Routledge, New York. p 148-171 Metropolis. 2006. “Seoul Metropolitan Region Profile”. Available at: http://www.metropolis.org/index.asp Ministry of Federal Territories. N.d. “Official Website of Greater Kuala Lumpur/Klang Valley”. Available at: http://app. kwpkb.gov.my/greaterklkv (retrieved October 2014). Ministry of Finance. 2015. Modul Pengalokasian Dana Alokasi Khusus (DAK) Tahun 2015. Jakarta: Subdirektorat Dana Alo- kasi Khusus, Direktorat Dana Perimbangan, Direktorat Jenderal Perimbangan Keuangan, Kementerian Keuangan Republik Indonesia. Moreno, F. 2013. “Fiscal Decentralization in Rural Local Governments in Mexico: Changes in Accountability and Entrepre- neurship in the Local Government Structures” Morris, A. G., Wiltshire, K. W., Rolfe, H. A., Early, L. J., Williams, R. A., & Nicholas, M. A. 2004. Report on state revenue sharing relativities: 2004 Review. Supporting information. Oakerson, R.J. 2004. “The Study of Metropolitan Governance”, in Feiock, R.C., editor, Metropolitan Governance – Conflict, Competition, and Cooperation. Georgetown University Press, Washington, DC. p 17-45   Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  127  Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). 2006. “The Governance of Metro-Regions”, in Com- petitive Cities in the Global Economy, OECD Publishing, Paris (and related OECD Territorial Reviews) Pena, P. 2009. “Evaluation of the Effect Decentralization on Educational Outcomes in Spain”. Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona. Performance Management and Delivery Unit (PEMANDU). 2014. “Economic Transformation Programme”. Annual Report 2013. Performance Management and Delivery Unit, Manila. Performance Management and Delivery Unit (PEMANDU). 2010. “Economic Transformation Programme. A Roadmap for Malaysia”. Performance Management and Delivery Unit, Manila. Post, S.S. 2004. “Metropolitan Area Governance and Institutional Collective Action”, in Feiock, R.C., editor, Metropolitan Governance – Conflict, Competition, and Cooperation, Georgetown University Press, Washington, DC. p.67-92 Raich, U. 2008. “Unequal Development–Decentralization and Metropolitan Finance in Mexico City”. VDM Verlag Dr. Muller Aktiengesellschaft & Co. KG, Germany Regional Planning Association. 2006. “About RPA”. Available at: www.rpa.org Rodriguez, V. 1987. “The Politics of Decentralization in Mexico: Divergent Outcomes of Policy Implementation”. Resosudarmo, I.A.P. 2004. “Closer to People and Trees: Will Decentralization Work for the People and the Forest of Indo- nesia?” European Journal of Development Research. Spring 2004. Rojas, E., Cuadrado-Roura J.R., Güell, J.M.F., editors. 2007. “Governing the Metropolis - Principles and Cases”. Inter-Amer- ican Development Bank, Washington, DC Sansom, G. 2009. “Commonwealth of Australia”, in Steytler, N., Kinkaid, J., editors, Local Government and Metropolitan Regions in Federal Systems, McGill & Queens’s University Press, Montreal & Kingston, Canada. p 8-36 Sanz, I.A.. N.d. “Spanish Decentralization and the current autonomous state: a budgetary view”. Available at: http://www. asip.org.ar/en/content/spanish-decentralization-and-current-autonomous-state-budgetary-view Searle, B. 2002. Federal fiscal relations in Australia-2001. International centre for economic research. Seoul Metropolitan Government. 2006. “City Government”. Available at: http://english.seoul.go.kr/gover/main/gover_ main.htm Shah, Anwar. Qibthiyyah, Riatu. Dita, Astrid. 2012. General Purpose Central-Provincial-Local Transfer (DAU) in Indonesia. From Gap Filling to Ensuring Fair Access to Essential Public Services for All. Jakarta: World Bank, Poverty Reduction and Economic Management Unit. Siddiqui K. 2004. Megacity Governance in South Asia – A Comparative Study. The University Press Limited, Dhaka.0 128 Annexes Simatupang, R.R. 2009. “Evaluation of Decentralization Outcomes in Indonesia: Analysis of Health and Education Sec- tors”. (PhD Dissertation Georgia State University Dec 2009) Sjahrir and Katos. 2011. “Does local governments’ responsiveness increase with decentralization and democratization? Evidence from sub-national budget allocation in Indonesia”. University of Freiburg, Freiburg. (May 2011) Slack, E. 2007. “Managing the Coordination of Service Delivery in Metropolitan Cities – The Role of Metropolitan Gover- nance”. Policy Research Working Paper. World Bank, Washington, DC. SMERU Research Institute. 2008. The Specific Allocation Fund (DAK): Mechanisms and Uses. Smith, R. 2012. “Combined Authorities: Stronger together?” Centre for Cities. July 2012. Smoke, P. 2013. “Metropolitan Cities in the National Fiscal and Institutional Structure” in Bahl, Linn and Wetzel, editors. Financing Metropolitan Governments in Developing Countries. Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, Cambridge, MA. Stren, R. 2007. “Urban governance in developing countries: Experiences and challenges”, in Hambleton, R., Gross J., editors, Governing Cities in a Global Era – Urban Innovation, Competition, and Democratic Reform, Palgrave Macmillan, New York. p 57-70 Suzuki, H, Cervero, R. and Iuchi, K. 2013. “Transforming Cities within Transit: Transit and Land-Use Integration for Sus- tainable Urban Development”. Urban Development Series. The World Bank, Washington, DC. The Brookings Institute. 2014. “The Plummeting Labor Market Fortunes of Teens and Young Adults”. Metropolitan Policy Program. March 2014. The Rand Corporation. 2008. “Transportation, Space, and Technology”. Moving Los Angeles: Short-term Policy Options for Improving Transportation. The World Bank. 2008. “City Regions: Emerging Lessons from England”. Directions in Urban Development. The World Bank, Washington, DC. The World Bank. 2015. “Economy Profile 2015: Malaysia.” Doing Business 2015: Going Beyond Efficiency. The World Bank, Washington, DC. The World Bank. Unpublished. “Draft Concept Note for a Competitive Cities Knowledge Base”. December 2013. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies. 2004. “Transit-Oriented Development in the United States: Experiences, Challenges, and Prospects”. TCRP Report 102. Turan, N. 2011. “Towards an Ecological Urbanism for Istanbul”, in Sorensen, A., Okata, J., editors, Megacities–Urban Form, Governance and Sustainability. Springer, Germany. p 245-287. United Cities Local Government (UCLG) and the World Bank. 2009. “Decentralization and Local Democracy in the World: First Global Report from United Cities Local Government”. The World Bank, Washington, DC. United Cities Local Government (UCLG) and the World Bank. 2011. “Local Government Finance: The Challenges of the 21st Century”. Second Global Report from United Cities Local Government. The World Bank, Washington, DC.   Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  129  United Cities Local Government (UCLG). 2008. “UCLG Country Profiles: Indonesia”. Available at: http://www.cities-local- governments.org/gold/Upload/country_profile/Indonesia.pdf (retrieved October 2014). United Cities Local Government (UCLG). 2008. “UCLG Country Profiles: Malaysia”. Available at: http://www.cities-local- governments.org/gold/Upload/country_profile/Malaysia.pdf (retrieved October 2014). Webster, D., Cai, J., and Maneepong, C. 2006. “Metropolitan Governance in China: Priorities for Action in the Context of Chinese Urban Dynamics and International Experience.” Available at: http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/ en/2006/09/7690452/metropolitan-governance-china-priorities-action-context-chinese-urban-dynamics-internation- al-experience Western Economic Diversification Canada .2006. “The Livable City”. (Vancouver Working Group Discussion Paper). Gov- ernment of Canada, Ottawa. Wilcox, Z., Nohrova, N. and Williams. 2014. “Breaking Boundaries: empowering city growth through cross-border collab- oration”. Centre for Cities. March 2014. Williamson, J.G. 1965. Regional inequality and the process of national development: a description of the patterns. Eco- nomic development and cultural change, 1-84. World Bank, n.d. World Bank Database. Available at: http://data.worldbank.org/ World Bank. 1991. “Mexico: Decentralization and Urban Management Urban Sector Study”. World Bank, Washington, DC. p. 38 World Bank. 2010. “World Development Report 2009 Reshaping Economic Geography”. World Bank, Washington, DC. World Bank. 2012. Indonesia Subnational Public Expenditure Review. Optimizing Subnational Performance for Better Services and Faster Growth. Yang, J. 2009. “Spatial Planning in Asia – Planning and Developing Megacities and Megaregions”, in Ross, C.L., editor, Megaregions: Planning for Global Competitiveness. Island Press, Washington, DC. p. 35-52 130 Annexes 4. SOCIAL EXCLUSION (ANNEXES FOR CHAPTER 5) 4.1 Field Work Implementation Details 4.1.1 Calendar of events for qualitative field work Table 4-1: Calendar of events for quantitative field work Type of No Dates Time Place Discussion Attendance Remarks Activities Completed Meeting Helene & the local WB Project Briefing on the project 1 18 Sept (Thurs) 2.30pm – 4.30pm 5 Team Preparation dynamics The real disadvantaged target 2 19 Sept (Fri) 2.00pm – 6.00pm MySkills Foundation, KL FGD 1 29 group. All Indians All Malays under a NH activity 3 20 Sept(Sat) 1.30pm – 5.30pm Sri Pantai Flats, KL FGD 2 11 centre 4 21 Sept(Sun) 6.00pm – 8.00pm Telok Indah,Prai, Penang FGD 3 23 An urban poor NH. All Indians Good representation from 5 22 Sept (Mon) 9.30am-11.30am Penang RTD 1 16++ Agencies & CSOs All urban poor youths, Mixed 6 22 Sept (Mon) 2.30pm-5.30pm Pusat Latihan Yakin Kejayaan FGD 4 29 ethnic group 7 22 Sept(Mon) 9.00pm-11.00pm Sungai Pinang, Penang FGD 5 15 An urban poor NH. All Malays 8 25 Sept (Thurs) 8.00pm-11.00pm Sri Sarawak flats, KL FGD 6 8 Urban Poor Malays Centre for Indigenous People 9 27 Sept 2014 2.00pm-6.00pm Jireh Centre FGD 7 17 Group, Tuaran, Near KK Malays & Indigenous People 10 28 Sept (Sun) 11.00am-1.00pm Seri Maju Flats, KK FGD 8 11 Group People living on water, 11 28 Sept (Sun) 3.00pm-6.00pm Tanjung Aru FGD 9 5 Naturalised Malays (ABIM) 12 29 Sept (Mon) Morning KBS Office, Kota Kinabalu RTD 2 10++ Agency Representatives Malays & Indigenous People 13 29 Sept (Sun) 2.00pm-5.00pm Grace & Mercy Centre KK FGD 10 12 Group, near KK (Penampang) 14 2 Oct (Thurs) 2.30pm-5.30pm Jab. Belia dan Sukan, KL RTD 3 10++ Critical Agency Representatives   Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  131  Table 4-1: Continued Type of No Dates Time Place Discussion Attendance Remarks Activities Completed 15 10 Oct (Fri) Night Arriving at JB Preparation 16 11 Oct (Sat) 3.00pm-6.00pm FGD organised by JEWEL FGD 11 16 Multi-ethnic group 17 11 Oct (Sat) 9.00pm-10.00pm PPR Seri Kempas FGD 12 10 Malays from the neighbourhood 18 12 Oct (Sun) 3.00pm-6.00pm FGD organised by MIBA FGD 13 14 Indians PPR Flats Larkin organised by 19 12 Oct (Sun) 9.00pm-12.00pm FGD 14 17 Malays KRT 20 13 Oct (Mon) 9.30am-12.30pm RTD in Johor RTD 4 10++ Agency Representatives FGD organised by Calvary Mixed Group of Indians & 21 13 Oct (Mon) 2.30pm-5.00pm FGD 15 21 Centre Chinese 23 17 Oct (Fri) Night Arriving at Kuantan Preparation FGD at Tmn Alor Akar Low cost housing area, RP Alor 24 18 Oct (Sat) 2.30pm-5.30pm FGD 16 22 organised by JPNIN Akar, Kuantan FGD among the OAs in the city 25 18 Oct (Sat) 8.30pm-10.00pm FGD 17 6 OA young people by an NGO 26 19 Oct (Sun) 11.00am-1.30pm FGD organised by a CSO FGD 18 6 Street Kids, Malays #Indians. This FGD is treated FGD organised at Semambu by 27 19 Oct (Sun) 9.00pm-11.00pm FGD 19 4 as Key informant interview. JPNIN None are high risk youths 28 20 Oct (Mon) 9.30am-12.30pm RTD, Kuantan RTD 5 10++ Agency Representatives KL Street community. Many 29 28 Oct (Tues) 2.30pm-5.00pm FGD with KL Street people FGD 20 4 came but only 4 of the target ge group 30 30 Oct (Thurs) Will be confirmed Leaving for Kuching Preparation 31 31 Oct (Fri) 2.30pm-5.00pm RTD, Kuching RTD 6 10++ Agency Representatives FGD in Kuching at Kota #Organised by Mr Nicholas, 32 1 Nov (Sat) 11.00am-1.00pm sentosa, Pasar Batu 7, near FGD NA NGO. Key Informant Interview Public Bank 132 Annexes Table 4-1: Continued Type of No Dates Time Place Discussion Attendance Remarks Activities Completed FGD at 1AZAM STC, UNACO 1 AZAM Dayak participants 33 1 Nov (Sat) After 3.30pm FGD 21 28 Supermarket organised by Datu Ose. FGD at RT Taman Sri Makmur, 34 2 Nov (Mon) 11.00am-1.00pm FGD 22 64 Organised by JPNIN Kuching Putrajaya RTD on Data RTD 7 on Project Stakeholders & EPU 35 Meeting with EPU 2.30pm 15++ clarifications Data Officials 4.1.2 Summary of participants in focus group discussions Table 4-2: City by city gender participation Gender No Cities Male Female Total 1 Kuala Lumpur 39 13 52 2 Penang 52 15 67 3 Kota Kinabalu 30 15 45 4 Johor 44 34 78 5 Kuantan 31 3 34 6 Kuching 44 48 92 GRAND TOTAL 240 128 368 Figure 4-1: City by city participants in focus group discussions 25% 25% 21% 20% 18% 15% 14% 12% 10% 9% 5% 0% Penang Kota Johor Kuantan Kuala Kuching Kinabalu Lumpur   Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  133  Table 4-3: City by city ethnicity breakdown of participants Cities Malays Chinese Indians Indigenous Others Total Kuala Lumpur 20 0 29 1 2 52 Penang 22 0 45 0 0 67 Kota Kinabalu 4 1 0 28 12 45 Johor 35 12 31 0 0 78 Kuantan 27 0 0 7 0 34 Kuching 35 4 0 53 0 92 GRAND TOTAL 143 17 105 101 2 368 Percentage 38.9% 4.6% 28.5% 27.5% 0.5% 100% Table 4-4: Educational attainment among focus group participants Cities None < UPSR < PMR < SPM STPM TOTAL Kuala Lumpur 1 17 11 22 1 52 Penang 2 9 14 41 1 67 Kota Kinabalu 0 1 21 23 0 45 Johor 5 15 36 22 0 78 Kuantan 1 2 9 22 0 34 Kuching 1 9 45 37 0 92 GRAND TOTAL 10 53 136 167 2 368 Percentage 2.7% 14.4% 37.0% 45.4% 0.5% 100% Figure 4-2: Proportion of focus group discussants working Working 164 (45%) Not working 204 (55%) 4.1.3   Focus group discussion questionnaire 148. The study team was guided by a page long simple questionnaire, which helped them gather the basic information. Guidance was also developed to help navigate the focus group discussions. Activity based discussions were used as an ice-breaker and helped put young people at ease. As the participants worked in small groups of about five people, they answered key questions, which they then presented using the papers and colors given to them. During these presentations the research team also asked questions and clarifications. The sessions were informal as well as lively and lasted for about two hours. There was good participation among the young people. In a number of groups multiple languages were used. 134 Annexes Table 4-5: Structured questionnaire for the study on social inclusion STRUCTURED QUESTIONNAIRE FOR THE STUDY ON SOCIAL INCLUSION CODE NO. Where your answer is “yes” tick (✓) and where your answer is “no” mark it with (X) A1. Pet Name A2. Gender ❑ Male ❑ Female A3. Age A4. Date of birth A5. House address A7. Type of house ❑ 1. Long house ❑ 2. Low cost flats ❑ 3. Low cost house ❑ 4. Others A8. If others, explain A9. No. family members A10. Contact HP A11. E-mail address ❑ 1. Islam ❑ 2. Buddhism ❑ 3. Hinduism ❑ 4. Christianity A12. Region ❑ 5. Others write in column _________________________________________________________________________ ❑ 1. UPSR ❑ 2. PMR A13. Education ❑ 2. BPM ❑ 4. None ❑ Primary school ❑ Lower secondary school A14. Educational institutions ❑ Higher secondary ❑ Others ____________________________________________________________________________________________ ❑ Skills training A17. Participation in youth clubs A18. If yes, give details and if No, why? and activitiesactivities ❑ Yes _________________________________________________________________________________________________ ❑ No _________________________________________________________________________________________________ A19. Any involvement of you in ❑ Drugs ❑ Crime ❑ Prison ❑ Court ❑ No involvement A20. Any family member has been ❑ Drug centre in ❑ Arrested for questioning ❑ In police lock up ❑ In prison A21. Any close friend has been in ❑ Drug centre ❑ Arrested for questioning ❑ In police lock up ❑ In prison A22. Any friend found it difficult to ❑ Yes A23. Any friend found it ❑ Yes study? ❑ No difficult to get a job? ❑ No Name and signature of the Enumerator Contact No. Date/Time   Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  135  4.1.4 Guidelines for focus group discussions 149. Target group: At risk youth (between 15-30 years old) in six urban centers: a. Youth who have been detained at juvenile or correction centers or prisons b. Living in high rise flat or low cost public housing or squatters c. Dropped out of school or educational underachievers within the school system d. At high risk groups to drugs, alcohol, abuse & gangs e. Homeless youth and living on the streets f. Youth who are drug addicts and those in drug rehabilitation centers g. Youth on motor cycle racing gangs h. Youth out of prison, juvenile centers or detention or rehabilitation centers i. Youth in informal groups or gangs in the low income neighborhoods 150. Overall objective of the work on social exclusion as part of the broader study on competitive cities: To better understand the nature and mechanisms of the challenges faced by the socially excluded (focusing on at risk youth) in urban areas in Malaysia, as it relates to Competitive Cities. 151. Overall objective of the Focus Group Discussions: By listening to the voices of at risk youth, identify the key issues they face and the factors contributing to their social exclusion and vulnerability, as it relates to Competitive Cities. 152. Areas of inquiry: The following areas of inquiry related to social exclusion should be explored through the FGDs: »» Economic aspects: such as limited access to labor markets, financial resources and basic services (including Government programs). Are they able to access: Jobs, education, social services, financial services, training, and government services? Why/why not? What are the main challenges in accessing them? »» Political aspects: such as limited opportunities to participate in decision-making, make their voices heard. What are the obstacles they face in making their voices heard? »» Socio-cultural aspects: such as the isolation of specific groups through education, language and ethnic practices. »» Spatial aspect: How does your housing impact your situation (positively or negatively) location, mobility (access to jobs, education not in your neighborhood), physical housing, neighborhood set up/ accessibility, social dynamics (eg. gangs, crime, peer pressure), opportunities to engage in criminal, anti- social activities, and other public safety concerns »» General Perceptions about inclusion/exclusion: Do they perceive themselves as included or excluded from society/culture/government systems; Do they feel the government is addressing your needs? How do you feel about your future prospects in life?   136 Annexes 4.1.5 General Structure of the Focus Group Discussion A. Start with an introduction: a. Of the team b. Of the objective of the FGDs: including explaining why we want to hear their voices c. Of the agenda – stress that all the information provided is confidential B. Exercise and group work a. Explain the exercise b. Break into small groups and assist the small groups as needed to re-explain the exercise c. Report back from the small groups C. Open discussion based on the exercise and group work a. Facilitation of open discussion b. Key questions to be systematically captured in all FGDs during the open discussion: i) Why are they in the center (for focus groups with participants from centers/ programs / support groups etc.); why did they decide to join the center? Alternatively for FGD with participants not belonging to a center/ support group) Why are they not participating in a center / program / support group? ii) What would they be doing if they were not in the center / support group? iii) What more can the Government / city authorities do to help them feel more included in society? D. Filling out the questionnaire a. Ensure the questionnaire is available in the language of the group b. Help the participants fill out the form as needed c. Check each form to make sure it is accurately filled-out E. Wrap-up and thank you a. In the write-up of the FGDs, ensure that the composition, context and location specifics of each FGD location are clearly explained. b. Prior to starting the FGDs, each facilitator is properly briefed on the focus and general objectives. c. It is important to encourage both boys and girls to speak up, to ensure that their perspectives are captured.   Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  137  4.1.6 List of agencies in round table discussions Table 4-6: Agencies in round table discussions Kota Kuala Agency Penang Kinabalu Lumpur Johor Kuantan Kuching Total KBS 1 3 2 1 3 2 12 JKM 1 1 1 1 1 0 5 PDRM 2 1 0 1 0 2 6 Jab. Penjara 0 1 0 1 0 0 2 AADK 1 0 3 1 1 2 8 Sek. Tunas Bakti 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 JPNIN 1 1 1 2 1 0 6 Pendidikan 0 0 1 1 1 1 4 CSO 8 3 1 0 0 0 12 World Bank 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 Research Team 4 4 2 4 4 4 22 Total 20 15 12 13 12 12 84   4.1.7 Agenda: Agency Meeting: EPU November 3rd, 2014 Malaysia: Achieving a system of competitive cities: Focus Group Discussion on Social Inclusion Venue: Level 6, B6 Economic Planning Unit A. Introduction - Puan Azizah bt. Hamzah, Director, K-Economy B. Overview of World Bank Study on Competitive Cities - Justina Chen, World Bank C. Overview of Social Inclusion Component: Scope of Work and Methodology - Dr Denison Jayasooria, KITA-UKM D. Presentation of Youth Data and Policies by Agencies: - a. Department of Social Welfare b. Ministry of Women, Family and Community Development c. Prison Department d. Police e. State Education Departments E. Closing Remarks - Dr. Ramli Nordin, K-Economy 138 Annexes 4.1.8 List of Civil Society Organizations in Malaysia working with youth at risk Table 4-7: CSOs in Malaysia working with youth at risk Type of assistance / social protection Economic / Social Cash Transfers Education / Social access support and Organisation transfers in kind Subsidy Training to services care Location Target Group Summary of Programs Selangor, Sports activities including community Kuala Lumpur sports; School for music and arts; Malaysia Indian N.Sembilan, Counselling; Youth development and       ✓ ✓ ✓ Indian youth Youth Council Malacca, Penang, leadership workshops, Community Perak, Pahang, Care Circles (3C); Skills program in Kedah India and Malaysia Youth related work includes providing Youth and young Yayasan Aman       ✓     Nationwide leadership training programs for youth adults and young adults in rural areas. Sri Murugan KL, Selangor, Free classes to prepare Indian students       ✓     Indian youth Centre Penang, Johor for national exams Regular relapse prevention programme Children at risk for young offenders in juvenile i.e. refugees, prison facilities; Training officers marginalised, working among trafficked victims, SUKA Society         ✓ ✓ Selangor trafficked victims, young offenders and detainees; detainees, young Leadership and personal development offenders programmes; Follow-up programs to care for vulnerable refugee children Marginalised groups i.e. Sets up various homes/ centres ranging drug addicts, Global Street KL, Selangor, from drug rehabilitation centres           ✓ prostitutes, Mission Kedah and orphanages to homes for skills delinquents, development. alcoholics, destitute Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  139    Table 4-7: Continued Type of assistance / social protection Economic / Social 140 Annexes Cash Transfers Education / Social access support and Organisation transfers in kind Subsidy Training to services care Location Target Group Summary of Programs Angkatan Belia Islam Malaysia Women’s protection centre; Leadership (The Muslim       ✓   ✓ Nationwide Muslim youth and motivational programs; Islamic Youth Movement education of Malaysia) (ABIM) Majlis Belia All youth-related Malaysia Umbrella body for all youth-related             Nationwide organisations in (Malaysia Youth organisations in Malaysia Malaysia Council) Trainings on rape awareness, anti- sexual harassment policy, gender sensitisation, women’s leadership and All Women’s political participation which target Action Society       ✓   ✓ KL,Selangor Women teenagers and school-going children (AWAM) among others; Counselling and support services for victims of domestic violence Provides homes for boys and girls aged Youth aged 13-18 13-18 often street children or who Shelter Home for from difficult           ✓ KL come from backgrounds of abuse and Children backgrounds; neglect; Provides care and education to Refugee children refugee children aged below 18 Trinity Home Children aged 5-17; Home for children from single mother/           ✓ Selangor Selangor mainly Indian impoverished / needy families Yayasan Home for children who are orphaned/           ✓ Sabah Children aged 8-17 Kebajikan Suria poor Two-year residential programme which teaches living skills and is tailored to instill discipline, guidance, spiritual formation, soft skills and leadership Montfort Youth       ✓ ✓ ✓ Sabah   skill. Programme includes both General Training Centre Studies and Technical Skills (Motor Vehicle skills, Furniture Making, Refigeration and Air-conditioning mechanics) Food and transport for school children Agathiar Charity Children of school- ✓         ✓ Selangor around the Dengkil area; Financial Organisation going age assistance for poor children Type of assistance / social protection Economic / Social Cash Transfers Education / Social access support and Organisation transfers in kind Subsidy Training to services care Location Target Group Summary of Programs Children and youth Yayasan aged 1-22 (Chinese, Home for underprivileged children;           ✓ Selangor, Malacca Sunbeams Home Indian and Orang Community Learning Centre Asli) Teenage girls Pusat Kebajikan and boys from           ✓ Johor Home and rehabilitation centre Kalvary challenging backgrounds Teenage Centre offers the following programs for teenage girls: full residential program; Weekend residential program; Preventive outreach programs. Teenage girls Pusat Kebajikan       ✓ ✓ ✓ Selangor, Sabah (Selangor), Youth Youth Prep Centre offers the following Good Shepherd (Sabah) to youth in Sabah: A ‘point of reference’ for those leaving home for the first time, counselling services;help for job seekers through partnership with employers; on-going skills development Free tuition classes in English, Secondary school Rakan Muda             Nationwide Mathematics, Drawing and Painting, students Theatre, Music Runs a teen and youth centre which Adolescents and offers teens and youth who are youth with alternatives to risk behavior Yayasan Chow       ✓   ✓ KL vulnerable and that may expose them to gangs, Kit at risk in KL city violence, crime, substance abuse and centre the risk of HIV infection - focuses on skills development Underprivileged Multi-disciplinary arts academy for StART             Selangor children underprivileged children Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  141    Table 4-7: Continued Type of assistance / social protection Economic / Social 142 Annexes Cash Transfers Education / Social access support and Organisation transfers in kind Subsidy Training to services care Location Target Group Summary of Programs Shelter home for girls from poor or single parent families; Training centre Rumah Kasih       ✓   ✓ Selangor Girls aged 7-18 for girls that provides bridal make-up and sewing classes Counselling and Care; Cyber Generasi Teenagers and           ✓ Selangor wellness classes; Sex and Sensibility Gemilang young adults Programme; Counselling services; Training; Career Ozanam Service         ✓ ✓ Selangor, KL Youth guidance; Provide tertiary educational Centre opportunity or trade/skills programme 4.2 List of Federal Government Programs for Youth Table 4-8: Federal government programs for youth Type of assistance / social protection Economic / Social Ministry / Agency / Cash Transfers in Education / Social access support Organisation transfers kind Subsidy Training to services and care Target Group Policy Summary ✓           Youth in need RM200/month apprenticeship allowance Children: programmes for 1. orphans or children 1. RM100-RM450/month, 2. RM250- ✓           without proper parenting; RM500/month 2. children in foster care ✓           Underprivileged groups RM2700 one off grant to launch a new business Institutional protection: Children Homes, Rumah Children in need of           ✓ Tunas Harapan, Special Protection Centre, Ehsan assistance shelters (Street Children)… Ministry of Women, Family and Children in need of Institutional rehabilitation: School Tunas Bakti,           ✓ Community assistance Remand, Probation Hostels Development External protection: Foster parents, Child Children in need of           ✓ Protection Team, Kids Activity Centre, Witness assistance Service Programme Children in need of External rehabilitation program: Child Welfare           ✓ assistance Committee, Unrestrained children External development services: Sports Tournament for Children Institutions; Bands Children in need of Tournament for Children Institutions; Childhood           ✓ assistance Education; Human Capital Development; Vocational Skills Training; Community childcare centre Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  143    Table 4-8: Continued Type of assistance / social protection Economic / Social 144 Annexes Ministry / Agency / Cash Transfers in Education / Social access support Organisation transfers kind Subsidy Training to services and care Target Group Policy Summary 1. Grant Per Capita (pre-school, primary and secondary school) ✓           All students in gov. schools 2.School Co-curriculum 3. Schooling Assistance (primary and secondary school) - RM100 one-off Poor students in residential From RM700/year in Form 1 to RM450/year in ✓           schools Form 5 Secondary school students ✓           RM70/month who excel in sports RM300/year (secondary school) + monthly Poor students: Trust Fund assistance ✓           (KWAPM) RM25-RM60 (depending on primary/secondary school and poverty level) Students in rural/remote ✓           areas and those living on RM60 one-off safety jacket assistance the islands Ministry of Education ✓           All students Text books and transport assistance MOE pre-school and   ✓         Food assistance boarding school students   ✓         Students that use uniforms Uniform assistance Poor students with low Tuition Aid Scheme (TAS) - provision of extra   ✓         academic achievement classes free of charge All students in government Textbook Loan Scheme (TBLS) - provision of   ✓         and government assisted textbooks free of charge schools Orang Asli and Penan         ✓   Adult literacy class Parents 1Asrama hostels where children enjoy a more Children from low income         ✓   conducive learning environment and learning households support Type of assistance / social protection Economic / Social Ministry / Agency / Cash Transfers in Education / Social access support Organisation transfers kind Subsidy Training to services and care Target Group Policy Summary Universities: tuition fees (max RM5k/year) and Students with disabilities pocket money (RM300/month); Community ✓           in universities, community colleges and polytechnics: RM3,360-RM3,660/ colleges and polytechnics semester Community college ✓           RM250/month Education Loan Fund students in need Bumiputera students in financial need or who Different levels of assistance through different Ministry of Higher ✓           have suffered an accident/ schemes (SPC, SPT, SPIN, SDEP, SAA, SBP Education disaster (MARA Foundation schemes) Programmes) Students in financial need: Education Funding by Financial assistance depending on the ✓           National Higher Education institution Fund Corporation Form 6 and college   ✓         RM250 one-off BB1M book vouchers students 1. Low income households BR1M 1. RM500 and 2. RM250, both one-off Ministry of Finance ✓           and 2. single parents transfers Prime Minister’s ✓           Master and PhD students Various sponsorship programmes Department Tabung Ekonomi Small bumiputera Up to RM50k financing for working capital Kumpulan Usaha         ✓   entrepreneurs (TEKUN Financing Scheme) Niaga (TEKUN) Perbadanan Access to working capital (PROSPER Usahawan Young bumiputera Usahawan Nasional         ✓   Muda scheme) - Up to RM50k financing entrepreneurs Berhad (PUNB) (individual) or RM100k (partnership) 1Malaysia Training Scheme Programme (SL1M) -       ✓     Unemployed graduates soft skills training for graduates Ministry of Human SAY1M programme for student dropouts, which Resources offers courses to secure employment, including       ✓     School drop-outs internships in Government Linked Companies and the private sector. Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  145    Table 4-8: Continued Type of assistance / social protection Economic / Social 146 Annexes Ministry / Agency / Cash Transfers in Education / Social access support Organisation transfers kind Subsidy Training to services and care Target Group Policy Summary Skills Development Trainees undertaking Loans for trainees undertaking the Malaysia Skill Fund Corporation         ✓   Malaysia Skills Certificate Certificate Level One to Five. (PTPK) Malaysia Communications Low-income youth between     ✓       RM200 smartphone rebate and Multimedia ages 21-30 Commission Various: Ministry of Youth and Sports; Indian youth aged 15 to 45 Youth Skills Training Programme provided by Ministry of Higher     ✓ ✓     who are school drop-outs or various institutions with fully subsidised fees and Education and seek to learn new skills costs Ministry of Human Resources 4.3 Case Study: England supports affordable housing through land planning and policy 153. Land planning and policies are the primary tools used in England to facilitate the construction of affordable housing. England has a number of policies that are designed to contribute towards the provision of affordable housing and social inclusion. The most prominent are the Planning and Policy Statement 3 (PPS3) (DCLG 2011) which deals with Housing, and Section 106 (S106) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990,(GoUK c.1990) which provides guidance to local authorities regarding development of affordable housing. The combination of these enables local authorities – the bodies which review, negotiate and approve development proposals – to ensure affordable housing is built in compliance with national guidance on mixed housing. 154. Given the PPS3s objective to provide “sustainable, inclusive, mixed communities in all areas, both urban and rural” (DCLG 2011), the main focus of S106 planning achievements has been to facilitate tenure mix in new developments. By 2008 S106 had been successful in securing more than half of all affordable housing built in England (Monk 2010). Case studies show that successful S106 developments hold a range of tenure types and are home to a social mix of tenants. One example - Imperial Warf development in London – designed a development that would include 1,065 residential units, 515 of which were affordable housing. Subsequent revisions to the plan that reduced the number of affordable units were rejected by the planning authority, and the 515 affordable unites were eventually built and finalized before any of the market rate units were allowed to be rented or sold. Among these 515 homes, the units were designed to have: 275 units for social rent, an additional 50 units for social rent to the ‘frail elderly’ (i.e. specially adapted units), 75 shared-ownership units, 40 student accommodation units, 50 key worker47 units for rent, and 25 key worker unites for sale. Adhering to the principles of mixed use, this same building included 8,000 square meters of office floor space, 6,600 square meters of retail and restaurant floor space, 2,000 square meters for non-residential institution (the medical facility), a 175 bedroom hotel, 3,000 square meters for a health and fitness club. In addition, planning permission was contingent of the development of a park, and a riverside walk, transport access and a parking strategy (Monk 2010). 155. Evidence, such as the above, suggests that S106 has been successful in facilitating the creation of mixed communities as well as meeting affordable housing needs (Monk 2010). One study asked “how far does the provision of ‘on-site’ affordable housing contribute to the government’s objectives of creating mixed communities?” and concluded that it did a reasonable job in achieving this. It found that many of the affordable housing sites were in more expensive areas that had not traditionally been associated with affordable housing. It was highlighted that the most successful buildings in terms of harmonious communities and market sales were those in which one couldn’t tell which units were social housing and which were market housing. This is important as perceptions of social housing are rather negative and respondents fear the potential knock-on effects that low-income residents may bring, such as antisocial behavior, that could affect the market rates of their property. The study was unable to conclude whether mixed tenure has had a positive effect on the social outcomes of social housing beneficiaries.48 156. It is often argued that simply mixing tenure and ethnicity will not necessarily lead to most positive social outcomes for the disadvantaged. One researcher argues that creating mixed neighborhoods treats a symptom of inequality, not its causes. One study of mixed tenure in urban Scotland found no consistent pattern in health outcomes according to tenure type, but in areas with a large number of social housing tenants, some specific health issues had worse outcomes than in areas with a lower concentration of social housing (Lawder et al 2014). On employment, another, longitudinal study (Feng et al 2013), examined the neighborhood effects of ethnic inequality on economic activity. The study found that, overall, ethnic minorities were, more likely to become unemployed and less likely to become employed. It also concluded that living in a deprived neighborhood was 47 Key workers are defined as public sector employee who is considered to provide an essential service. The term is used in reference to essential workers who may find it difficult to buy property in the area where they work. 48 Both cases from Monk 2010   Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities  147  associated (positively) with transitions to unemployment and (negatively) with transitions to employment, especially among men. Ethnic diversity was negatively associated with job loss among employed women, but also for homemaking women and their chances of finding employment. 4.4 Annex 4 References Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG). 2011. “Policy Planning Statement 3 (PPS3): Housing”. DCLG, London. Feng, X., Flowerdew, R. and Feng, Z. 2013. “Does neighbourhood influence ethnic inequalities in economic activity? Find- ings from the ONS Longitudinal Study”. Journal of Economic Geography pp. 1–26. Government of the United Kingdom (GoUK), c.1990. “Town and Country Planning Act. Website” Available at: http://www. legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/8/section/106. (Accessed 6 June, 2014). Lawder, R., Walsh, D., Kearns, A. and Livingston, M. 2014. “Healthy Mixing? Investigating the Associations between Neigh- bourhood Housing Tenure Mix and Health Outcomes for Urban Residents”. Urban Studies. 51(2) 264–283, February 2014. Monk, S. 2010. “England: Affordable Housing Through the Planning System: The Role of Section 106”. In Inclusionary Housing in International Perspective: Affordable Housing, Social Inclusion and Land Value Recapture. N. Calavita and A. Mal- lach, editors. Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, Cambridge, MA. 148 Annexes Malaysia’s cities are dynamic centers of innovation and have much potential to play an increasingly important role as drivers of economic growth for the country. Yet, cities can grow in different ways that will affect their competitiveness and livability, requiring policies that create opportunities, foster productivity, minimize environmental degradation and ensure social equity. This study focuses on understanding three key aspects of city competitiveness: economic growth, urban governance, and social inclusion, through extensive analysis and field work in six urban centers of Malaysia. Based on the analysis, the study lays out a set of policy recommendations that aim to address existing challenges and create opportunities for achieving a system of competitive cities.