Posts Tagged ‘kampung’


13 Jun 2013

Hak atas Kota: Hak untuk Bermukim di Pusat Kota !

 

 

 

“During my mission I have heard several times that there is no room for the poor in the city because of the high cost of land & housing. The right to adequate housing is a universal and does not belong only to the rich. Rather, it is the state obligation to prioritize vulnerable and marginalized groups. It is clear that the kampongs and the low income laborers, the street vendors and the fish market workers have been there for decades and centuries before the sky scrappers and shopping malls. So when I hear that the “poor should know their place” – I say yes, they should, – and their place is in the city center! State land should be allocated as a priority to low income housing, including in the city centers”. – Raquel Rolnik (Special Rapporteur on Adequate Housing)

 

Kunjungan Pelapor Khusus PBB untuk Perumahan yang Layak selama 13 hari (30 Mei – 11 Juni 2013) di Indonesia telah selesai. Di akhir kunjungannya, Raquel Rolnik melaporkan temuan awal nya kepada publik. Pada akhir tahun ini, laporan final akan selesai dituliskan dan akan dibacakan di sidang Dewan HAM PBB pada Maret 2014.

Selama kunjungan dan pemantauan Pelapor Khusus, saya berkesempatan untuk menemani kawan-kawan organisasi rakyat miskin kota di Jakarta, Surabaya dan Makassar dalam menerima kunjungannya.

Kedatangan Pelapor Khusus merupakan kunjungan formal. Seorang pelapor khusus dapat melakukan pemantauan terhadap pemenuhan hak atas perumahan yang layak di suatu negara, hanya apabila diundang resmi oleh negara yang bersangkutan.

Tulisan ini berupaya merangkum apa yang saya saksikan dan coba pahami terkait pemenuhan hak atas perumahan yang layak di ketiga kota di atas. Dalam pertemuan dengan komunitas, agenda pertemuan hampir serupa, yaitu kesaksian warga tentang pemenuhan hak atas perumahan yang layak dari pemerintah. Kesaksian tidak hanya berisikan pengaduan tetapi juga prakarsa warga di tiap kota terkait permukiman yang layak.

Dalam melakukan pemantauan dan menyusun laporannya, pelapor khusus bertemu dan berdiskusi dengan perwakilan banyak pihak seperti pemerintah (Kementrian Luar Negeri, Kementrian Perumahan Rakyat, Kementrian Pekerjaan Umum, Badan Pertanahan Nasional, PERUMNAS, Ombudsman, dan Pemerintah Kota), akademisi, kelompok ahli, NGO dan pastinya melihat langsung di lapangan tentang praktek pemenuhan hak atas perumahan yang layak.

 

Raquel Rolnik_foto oleh M. Nawir

Raquel Rolnik_foto oleh M. Nawir

 

Kampung Jakarta: adaptasi rakyat miskin dalam perebutan ruang

Pertemuan pertama Pelapor Khusus dengan komunitas bertempat di pinggir Waduk Pluit, Jakarta pada 2 Juni 2013. Kenapa Waduk Pluit? Maksud dari kunjungan tersebut adalah menjadikan kasus Waduk Pluit sebagai gambaran di lapangan terkait pemenuhan hak atas pemukiman yang layak. Jaringan Rakyat Miskin Kota (JRMK) dan Urban Poor Consortium (UPC) menjadi tuan rumah dalam kunjungan tersebut.

Pada kunjungan di Waduk Pluit, ada dua warga dari wilayah Muara Baru dan Kebun Tebu yang memberikan kesaksian untuk Jakarta. Ada Mak Een yang sudah mengalami lima kali penggusuran sejak dia merantau ke Jakarta di awal tahun 1970. Mulai dari penggusuran untuk kepentingan umum, hingga penggusuran untuk bangunan-bangunan privat seperti mall, apartemen, dll.  Setelah itu,  Nenek Dela yang tinggal di pinggiran Waduk Pluit menuturkan bahwa kampung di pinggir Waduk Pluit sudah terbentuk sejak tahun 1970-an. Lamanya pemukiman membentuk ikatan sosial yang kuat antar warga. Lokasi yang strategis juga menjadi dasar untuk warga menyandarkan sumber pendapatan nya pada pusat-pusat ekonomi yang tersebar sepanjang 1-2 km dari wilayah Muara Baru seperti Tempat Pelelangan Ikan (TPI), Mega Mall Pluit, RS Atmaja, RS Pluit, Pabrik-pabrik yang tersebar di Muara Baru dan Perumahan Pantai Mutiara.

Nenek Dela dalam kesaksiannya mempertanyakan mengapa hanya warga Waduk Pluit saja yang “diharuskan” pergi untuk membuat Waduk berfungsi kembali. Kalau memang ingin mengatasi banjir, menurutnya, tidak hanya pinggiran waduk yang harus dikembalikan lagi fungsi nya tetapi juga fungsi Ruang Terbuka Hijau (RTH) di wilayah Pluit yang saat ini sudah berganti menjadi Mega Mall Pluit. Lalu dia mempertanyakan juga keberadaan Apartemen Laguna yang bertengger manis di dekat Waduk Pluit tetapi sama sekali tidak mendapatkan teguran dari pemerintah.

Saat ini, warga yang teroganisir dalam JRMK, bekerjasama dengan Arsitek Komunitas (ARKOM), Rujak Center for Urban Studies (RCUS) dan Arsitektur UI mencoba menawarkan konsep alternatif pembangunan rusunawa (dalam radius 500 m – 1 km) yang memfasilitasi kebutuhan dan keinginan warga. Proses konsultasi masih berlangsung dengan Pemerintah DKI Jakarta yang pada prinsip nya menyetujui tawaran konsep alternatif.

Selain warga Muara Baru dan Waduk Pluit, perwakilan warga dari Teluk Lampung dan Tulang Bawang, Lampung juga hadir dan memberikan kesaksian tentang pemenuhan hak atas perumahan yang layak di Lampung. Untuk warga Teluk Lampung, kesaksian mereka terkait dengan proyek reklamasi pesisir Lampung yang nantinya akan men-zonasikan wilayah pesisir Lampung menjadi wilayah pelabuhan, apartemen, pusat bisnis, Rekreasi/Hiburan dan Rusunawa. Warga yang puluhan tahun menetap di sana pun terancam digusur dan direlokasi ke Rusunawa.

Sedangkan untuk warga Tulang Bawang, persoalan perumahan layak terkait dengan konflik tanah antara warga (petambak plasma) dengan pengusaha yang mengklaim memiliki lahan yang ditempati warga saat ini. Perseteruan antara warga dengan pihak perusahaan kerap melibatkan kekerasan oleh negara, dalam hal ini pelibatan aparat militer. Di bulan April 2013, Ketua Forum Silaturahmi (FORSIL) Petambak Bratasena, Edi Prayitno, mengalami proses kriminalisasi oleh aparat Kepolisian.

 

Makassar : Konflik Tanah dan Pemenuhan Hak atas Perumahan yang Layak

Kunjungan Pelapor Khusus di Makassar berlangsung pada 6 Juni 2013. Untuk agenda di Makassar, selain bertemu dengan komunitas, Pelapor Khusus juga bertemu dengan Walikota Makassar. Pertemuan dengan komunitas berlangsung di Kampung Pisang, Mancini Sombala yang difasilitasi oleh Komite Perjuangan Rakyat Miskin (KPRM).

Selain warga dari berbagai kampung di Makassar, hadir juga perwakilan warga dari Bungkutoko, Kendari, Wakil Walikota Kendari, Anggota DPRD  Makassar dan juga Yayasan Lembaga Bantuan Hukum Makassar.

Kesaksian warga dari kampung di Makassar berkisar pada konflik tanah antara warga (kampung)  dengan pengusaha atau warga lain yang mengklaim sebagai turunan kerajaan dan memiliki hak atas tanah yang dipersengketakan. 75% penguasaan tanah di kampung-kampung miskin Makassar hanya berdasarkan pada fakta-fakta penguasaan tanah secara turun temurun yang dibuktikan oleh slip pembayaran tanah, rinci (riwayat penguasaan tanah), dan bukan bukti-bukti secara terulis (sertifikat tanah).  Dalam sepuluh (10) kasus yang dipresentasikan di Makassar, pemerintah Kota Makassar gagal memediasi sebagian besar konflik pertanahan tersebut. Banyak kasus di mana kekerasan, oleh aparat kepolisian maupun preman yang disewa oleh perusaahan, diterapkan pada warga.

Kerancuan bertambah dengan kekacauan pendaftaran tanah. Adnan Buyung Azis dari Yayasan Lembaga Bantuan Hukum Makassar menyebutkan banyak terjadi kasus di mana satu sertifikat tanah bisa diklaim dimiliki oleh tiga orang. Persoalan pendaftaran tanah juga menjadi kesulitan tersendiri bagi warga miskin dikarenakan biaya yang tinggi.

Tidak hanya itu saja, persoalan mendasar dari kasus konflik tanah yang berlarut-larut di Makassar, menurutnya, disebabkan oleh mata pisau sistem peradilan yang masih berdasarkan pada kepastian hukum dan bukan keadilan.

Kepastian hukum, menurutnya, melihat pada bukti-bukti tertulis dan tidak melihat pada fakta-fakta penguasaan tanah yang selama ini menjadi dasar bagi warga. Oleh karena nya, apabila diproses di ranah hukum, maka warga akan kalah dan berujung pada hilangnya hak bermukim.

Namun, warga yang bernaung di dalam KPRM tidak hanya memaparkan persoalan.  Sudah tiga tahun ini warga berupaya menawarkan konsep alternatif untuk persoalan tanah di Kampung Pisang, yaitu konsep berbagi lahan dengan pemilik tanah di mana warga meminta lahan sejumlah 7000 m2 (dari 3,7 Hektar tanah yang disengketakan) untuk memfasilitasi 43 KK. Konsep tersebut direncanakan warga secara partisipatif dan difasilitasi oleh ARKOM dan RCUS. Walikota Makassar hingga saat ini belum berhasil memediasi konflik tanah antara warga dengan pengusaha.  Justru Walikota meminta warga menerima tawaran pengusaha yang hanya bersedia memberikan 3000 m2. Tawaran tersebut ditolak warga karena tidak cukup memenuhi kebutuhan warga.

Selain presentasi dari Makassar, pertemuan hari itu juga diisi oleh presentasi warga Bungkutoko, Kendari. Warga yang juga merupakan anggota dari GERMIS (Gerakan Rakyat Miskin) Kendari menceritakan kisah sukses penataan partisipatif di Bungkutoko. 55 keluarga terlibat dalam proses relokasi partisipatif yang memindahkan warga sejauh 500 m dari permukiman semula. Proses relokasi dan perencanaan pembangunan dilakukan secara partisipatif  bersama warga dan difasilitasi oleh Rujak Center for Urban Studies (RCUS) dan jaringan arsitek komunitas Yogya (Arkom-Yoga). Tanah seluas 1,8 Hektar yang disediakan oleh pemerintah tidak diberikan secara cuma-cuma. Warga menyicil untuk biaya tanah dan pembangunan rumah melalui kelompok tabungan yang dibentuk oleh warga. Setelah 20 tahun, penguasaan tanah akan menjadi Hak Milik yang sebelumnya Hak Guna Bangunan (HGB).

Paparan yang disampaikan oleh warga Bungkutoko diamini oleh Wakil Walikota Kendari yang menyampaikan bahwa proses di Bungkutoko menjadi cikal bakal pendekatan City Wide Upgrading dengan warga terlibat dalam keseluruhan proses. Diharapkan pendekatan ini dapat mengatasi persoalan kemiskinan di Kendari karena memberikan kepastian jaminan bermukim.

 

Surabaya: Pengakuan akan Inisiatif Warga

Persoalan pemenuhan hak akan permukiman layak yang  dipresentasikan di Surabaya pada 7 Juni 2013 adalah kasus pemukiman bantaran pinggir kali (Stren Kali) Wonokromo. Di sepanjang 15 km sungai, tersebar tujuh kampung (Bratang, Semampir, Kampung Baru, Gunung Sari I, Gunung Sari II, Medokan, Braya) yang tergabung dalam Paguyuban Warga Sren Kali Surabaya (PWSS). Upaya warga melawan rencana penggusuran sejak tahun 2002 berujung manis pada Oktober 2007 di mana pada saat itu DPRD Provinsi Jawa Timur menghasilkan Perda No. 5/2007 yang memberikan izin keberadaan permukiman terbatas dan mewajibkan warga untuk melakukan penataan permukiman sesuai dengan konsep Jogo Kali, sebuah konsep yang ditawarkan oleh warga dalam memberikan jaminan sebagai penjaga kelestarian lingkungan sungai. Melalui konsep tersebut, warga ingin melawan stigma bahwa warga yang tinggal di bantaran sungai merupakan penyebab limbah yang mencemari sungai. Konsep Jogo Kali mensyaratkan warga untuk mundur 3-5 m dari bibir sungai (untuk jalan inspeksi) dan menghadapkan rumahnya ke arah sungai. Selama dua tahun terakhir, warga, secara swadaya dan gotong royong telah berhasil memperbaiki lingkungan di sepanjang sungai.

Terlepas dari prakarsa yang dilakukan warga secara mandiri, pengakuan dari Pemerintah Daerah berupa legalisasi lahan baik dalam bentuk sertifikat komunal maupun individu belum ada hingga saat ini. Warga juga masih bisa mendapatkan ancaman penggusuran sewaktu-waktu karena belum pastinya pengakuan hak bermukim di sana.

Selain paparan untuk kasus stren kali, warga juga berbagi cerita tentang Surat Ijo, yaitu bentuk surat sewa tanah di mana warga secara rutin membayar biaya sewa kepada Pemerintah Kota. Surat Ijo biasanya dimiliki dalam rentang waktu yang cukup lama. Memiliki surat Ijo tidak berarti memberikan rasa aman bermukim kepada warga karena sewa dapat dihentikan sewaktu-waktu oleh Pemerintah. Dalam pertemuan dengan Pelapor Khusus, warga yang memiliki Surat Ijo bertutur bahwa saat ini Pemerintah Kota Surabaya berniat mengalihkan Surat Ijo kepada warga. Artinya, warga akan memiliki kepastian bermukim. Dalam pertemuan tersebut, warga meminta Pelapor Khusus untuk mendorong Pemerintah Kota Surabaya untuk mensegerakan rencana peralihan kuasa atas tanah tersebut.

 

Pelajaran dari Lima Kota

Dari kasus yang disampaikan kelima kota di atas (Lampung, Jakarta, Surabaya, Makassar dan Kendari) dapat dilihat bahwa upaya Pemerintah dalam penyediaan permukiman untuk warga miskin masih belum cukup. Dalam pemaparannya di setiap pertemuan, Raquel Rolnik menekankan bahwa Hak atas Perumahan yang layak tidak boleh ditafsirkan dalam artian sempit tetapi mencakup penjaminan akan: (a). Hak milik (b). Tersedianya layanan dasar (sarana dan prasarana) (c). Keterjangkauan (d) kelayakhunian (e). Aksesibilitas (f) lokasi dan (g). Kesesuaian budaya.

Apa yang terjadi di lima kota menggambarkan pendekatan pemerintah dalam penyediaan permukiman untuk warga miskin, yaitu :

  1. Terkait Ruang. Dalam hal penyediaan ruang untuk pemukiman warga miskin, yang terjadi di hampir setiap kota besar di Indonesia adalah peminggiran warga miskin dari pusat kota melalui prioritas pemanfaatan ruang di pusat kota untuk pembangunan seperti mall, superblok, dan pusat bisnis. Tidak hanya itu, kawasan pinggiran pantai yang lekat dengan kehidupan nelayan pun berganti rupa menjadi waterfront city. Keberpihakan kepada investasi dan pembangunan masif akhirnya meminggirkan warga miskin dari pusat kota dan ditampung dalam mekanisme yang disebut Rusunawa.
  2. Terkait pendekatan. Alih-alih melibatkan warga dalam perencanaan kota, sebagaimana direkomendasikan oleh Pelapor Khusus, pendekatan yang digunakan oleh pemerintah dalam penyediaan perumahan untuk warga miskin adalah stigmasisasi (pemberian label sebagai warga liar; pembuat masalah; dll), diskriminasi, penggusuran dengan kekerasan dan bahkan kriminalisasi.

Warga miskin  yang terorganisir telah bekerjasama dengan kelompok-kelompok lain (akademisi, kelompok keahlian, lembaga bantuan hukum, dll) untuk mendukung kasus mereka dan untuk mengusulkan solusi alternatif atas persoalan yang ada.

Urban Poor Consortium (UPC), Arsitek Komunitas (ARKOM), Rujak Center for Urban Studies (RCUS), Universitas Petra, Universitas Indonesia, Yayasan Lembaga Bantuan Hukum Makassar adalah sebagian dari banyak pihak yang telah bekerja sama dengan kelompok miskin di lima kota (Lampung, Jakarta, Makassar, Kendari dan Surabaya).

Pendekatan Pengorganisasian, Advokasi dan Jaringan telah diterapkan oleh JRMK, FORSIL, KPRM,  GERMIS dan PWSS untuk mengusulkan alternatif solusi bagi Pemerintah Daerah dan DPRD.

 

Beberapa dari mereka telah cukup berhasil seperti:

1. Surabaya dengan lahirnya Perda No.5/ 2007 tentang pemukiman di tepi sungai

2. Perencanaan Partisipatif & Relokasi 55 keluarga di Bungkutoko Kendari

 

Dan beberapa masih berjuang untuk meyakinkan pemerintah, seperti:

1. Konsep alternatif untuk Relokasi dan perencanaan partisipatif di Waduk Pluit, Jakarta

2. Konsep Alternatif berbagi lahan di Kampung Pisang, Makassar

3. Advokasi untuk perumahan dan tanah di Lampung

 

Menurut saya, hal ini merupakan pertanda baik, mengetahui bahwa warga miskin terhubung dengan beragam pemangku kepentingan lain dan secara bersama mengusulkan solusi alternatif (bukan hanya menggambarkan masalah) kepada pembuat kebijakan. Warga yang terorganisir telah membuktikan bahwa mereka berhasil bekerja secara swadaya, bergotong royong dan bertahan dari pendekatan pemerintah yang belum sepenuhnya berpihak pada kepentingan rakyat miskin.

Sebagaimana disampaikan Raquel Rolnik dalam temuan awalnya, bahwa menjadi tugas pemerintah lah untuk memastikan adanya ruang bagi warga miskin dengan pendekatan utama yaitu, mengakui hunian yang sudah ada saat ini, misalnya dengan cara penataan kampung (site upgrading); mengakui inisiatif kolektif warga;  serta menjadikan kampung sebagai bagian dari perencanaan kota.

 

 

 

1 Comment »

Topics: , , , , , , , | Agent of Change: none |


28 Jun 2011

“Bangunan Peka” bersama Prof. Uwe Rieger, Indonesian Dream dan Arsitek Komunitas

BANGUNAN PEKA

Arsitektur Tanggap Lingkungan

6 Juli 2011, 16:00 WIB

Tur pameran dan bincang-bincang bersama kurator Uwe Rieger (The University of Auckland)

Museum Nasional Indonesia
Jalan Merdeka Barat No. 12

PameranBangunan Peka-Arsitektur Tanggap Lingkungan” di Museum Nasional 6-20 Juli 2011 diselenggarakan oleh Goethe-Institut Indonesien bekerja sama dengan Uwe Rieger, guru besar tamu untuk desain, ketua departemen arsitektur di School of Architecture and Planning The University of Auckland.

Pameran ini mengangkat tema arsitektur reaktif, yaitu arsitektur yang dapat menyesuaikan diri secara dinamis dengan iklim, cuaca, perencanaan atau pengguna. Tujuh instalasi akan dipamerkan. Lima di antaranya didatangkan dari Selandia Baru, sementara dua lainnya dari Indonesia: Ciliwung Recovery Programme (CRP) karya Indonesian Dream (Rezza Rahdian, Erwin Setiawan, Ayu Diah Shanti, Leonardus Chrisnantyo, Mario Lodeweik Lionar, Petrus Narwastu) dan Rumah Bambu Swapasang karya Arsitek Komunitas dari Yogyakarta.

Goethe-Institut Indonesien dengan Rujak Centre for Urban Studies (RCUS) mengundang Anda untuk tur keliling pameran dan bincang-bincang bersama Uwe Rieger pada:

Rabu, 6 Juli 2011 di Museum Nasional, mulai 16:00 WIB.

Acara akan dipandu oleh Marco Kusumawijaya dari RCUS.

Fakta-fakta menarik yang dapat didiskusikan antara lain adalah:
• Kebutuhan untuk mengembangkan arsitektur yang menghemat energi dan bahan dengan bereaksi positif atas alam
• Kebutuhan untuk mentransformasi pengetahuan dan kebijaksanaan dari bentuk-bentuk vernakular/tradisional arsitektur Indonesia ke konteks kontemporer dan perkotaan menggunakan metode ilmiah.

Kami mengharapkan pertukaran pikiran di antara kurator dan Anda semua!

Untuk mendaftarkan kehadiran pada acara ini Anda dapat menghubungi (selambatnya 5 Juli 2011):

Dinyah Latuconsina

Goethe-Institut Indonesien

Jl. Sam Ratulangi 9-15

Jakarta 10350

Tel. +62-21-23550208 – 147

Latuconsina@jakarta.goethe.org

1 Comment »

Topics: , , , , , , , | Agent of Change: none |


03 Aug 2010

TK Milik Nelayan

TK Nelayan di bawah tiang listrik

Teks dan Foto oleh Yanti Maryanti.

Aku pernah menawarkan latihan melukis di atas kain untuk anak-anak muda di kampung nelayan di Kampung Muara, namun Ibu Syamsudin malah menyarankan aku memberi latihan menggambar pada anak-anak TK di samping rumahnya. Dengan semangat istri pengurus organisasi nelayan itu mengeluarkan semua hasil karya anak didiknya. Aku terbelalak mendengar jumlah siswa yang belajar di sekolah kecil itu. Dua ratusan lebih siswa TK menunggu diajari melukis.

Dua bulan yang lalu Ibu Syamsudin memperlihatkan ratusan block note bergaris milik para siswa kepadaku. Block note itu adalah media latihan menggambar milik anak-anak TK di perkampungan nelayan itu. Ada gambar ikan, perahu, rumah, orang dan juga garis-garis tidak beraturan menghiasi lembar-lembar kertas bergaris itu. Mereka menggambar dengan pensil berwarna yang jumlahnya terbatas yang dipinjamkan sekolah. Para murid menggunakannya bergantian.

Sekolah TK itu tampak menyolok berada di tengah perumahan kumuh masyarakat nelayan. Sekolah itu tampak menyolok karena cat bangunannya yang baru dan berwarna-warni. Sementara perumahan di sekililingnya cenderung terlihat kusam. TK itu berdiri atas prakarsa masyarakat setempat yang menginginkan agar anak mereka memiliki tempat belajar di dekat rumah mereka. Pak Syamsudin memiliki peran besar dalam pendirian sekolah tersebut. Ia juga sering merelakan uang pribadinya untuk pengelolaan sekolah tersebut. Terakhir ada beberapa lembaga sosial yang mulai membantu mereka.

Saat aku datang, gedungnya masih baru karena baru saja dibangun dan dicat dengan dana bantuan dari Program Pundi Amal dari sebuah stasiun televisi. Meskipun memiliki alat permainan ayunan dan alat panjatan di depan sekolah, sesungguhnya masih banyak hal yang memprihatinkan dari sekolah itu.

Murid yang ditampung di sekolah itu jumlahnya sangat besar  dan tidak sebanding dengan luas gedung sehingga jadwal sekolah berlangsung pagi hingga menjelang sore. Pengajarnya pun bukan guru profesional yang terlatih mengajar anak-anak. Para pengajarnya adalah para remaja di perkampungan tersebut. Mereka mengajar secara bergiliran dengan sarana seadanya. Guru-guru tersebut tidak menerima gaji.

Sebagian besar siswa yang belajar di TK tersebut adalah anak nelayan di RW 04, Kelurahan Kamal Muara, Kejamatan Pejaringan, Jakarta Utara. Mereka adalah korban penggusuran pada tahun 1998. Kemudian mereka menempati lahan kosong tanpa surat kepemilikan tanah hingga saat ini.

Meskipun tahun ini Pemerintah DKI telah menganggarkan tujuh ratus milyard lebih dana untuk penanggulangan banjir, tampaknya hasilnya tak begitu dirasakan oleh masyarakat di sekitar TK itu. Sebulan sekali air rob dari laut datang menggenagi kampung mereka. Periodenya pun tergolong panjang. Bisa tiga hari hingga satu minggu air baru surut. TK tersebut juga tak luput dari banjir.

No Comments »

Topics: , , , | Agent of Change: none |


11 Jun 2010

NEW BOOK

Abdoumalig Simone, City Life from Jakarta to Dakar: Movements at the Crossroads, Routledge, 2010.

“City Life from Jakarta to Dakar is an important new book examining the potentials of urban life from unexpected places that has been consciously written for undergraduate urban courses, while not oversimplifying its subject.

Through powerful stories as well as an incisive theoretical point of view, the book puts cities in Africa and Southeast Asia as a cutting edge in thinking about the urban world of today. It shows how much of what is considered peripheral to urban life is actually critical to it and thereby opens up new ways for understanding what is possible to do in cities from now on.”

Abdoumaliq Simone is an urbanist and Professor of Sociology at Goldsmiths College, University of London. He has been visiting Jakarta and Indonesia at large since 1980′s, and especially intensely in the last five years. While in Jakarta he helps, among others, Urban Poor Consortium, with their research. He is visiting Jakarta again in later half of this year.

5 Comments »

Topics: , , , , , , , | Agent of Change: none |


25 May 2010

Balai Warga and Kebun Wisata Tanaman Obat

Text and Pictures by Anggriani Arifin.

Fostering a communal sense of home amongst Community of RW 09, Kelurahan Pondok Kelapa, Jakarta Timur:  What was the background of the initiative?

It begins when the community of RW 09, Kelurahan Pondok Kelapa felt the demand to have a secretariat’s office for daily administrative matters. Having located in a state-owned housing complex, the neighbourhood was in luck as there was a vacant land that was already allocated for social facility. With an area of over 500 square meters, the previous idea took a turn and elaborated into having a multi-function assembly hall. A series of lobbying process took place and finally the PD. Sarana Jaya approved the proposal with construction stage kick-started in 2003.

When Balai Warga comes into place…

The hall evoked community’s enthusiasms and became the manifestation of the RW officials’ humble intention, which is to ensure that every resident has a genuine sense of ownership toward their neighbourhood with a commonly-used public place. The effort to create a functioning public place was reflected in the name the community reffered to the assembly hall, which is “Balai Warga” in the hoped that in the truest sense belongs to every residents of the neighbourhood. The place could be utilize not only for community meetings, but the place was also open to be reserved for badminton games, weddings, private function, Karang Taruna and PKK agenda and any other social activities.

In light of such spirit, every phase in the construction process was self-organized and self-funded by the community. The building was 371 square meters, well-designed and facing the neighbourhood’s basketball field. The initiative had invited a relatively large attention and able to gain supports from the  local government. In 2007, Balai Warga had reached its final completion and the community of RW 09 began to enjoy the presence of a representable, comfortable and usable social facility  that is at the same time, informative on the neighbourhood’s activity.

Making neighborhood a home…

Balai Warga’s construction had fueled RW officials’ motivation to continue making betterment to the neighborhood.

Community-based Solid-Waste Management and Biopori Holes. In 2005, the buzz of community-based solid waste management reached the area, a site visit to pioneering Kelurahan Rawajati, South Jakarta was made. To make the neighbourhood environmentally-conscious by managing their solid waste was in response to the area’s vulnerability to flood and the lacking capacity of the surrounded transit disposal sites. The idea was very simple. Residents separate the waste, following the well-known organic, non-organic and toxic waste typology although for practicality, the residents were only expected to separate based on waste that was compost-material, recyclable to be given to scavengers and kinds that could not be utilize for either purpose, should be put in the waste residue category.  The seemingly easy task has proven to be quite difficult to be followed by the residents. Up to now, only a minority group in RW 09 who separated their waste. A short-term solution was proposed. The waste would be separated in a solid management post near the Balai Warga, cooperating with surrounding scavengers who were hired as staff. Although behavior changes was still encouraged, but the method had kept the composting production on-going and motivates the community to start separating waste.

For the composting process, the community of RW 09 opted for a simple method after a series of consultation and visit, The process of turning the organic waste into compost take within a 6-7 week period, with phases comprising of waste separation, aging, turning, sprinkling, and riping. The high points of this method is that it does not require incenerator, without using bio activator, does not produce odour and does not invite flies. Using this method, the compost production can now reach up to 200 bags per week, with selling price of Rp. 3000,- per bag.

In addition to the initiative, the RW officials also utilized biopori methods to reduce waste production and reducing flood risk (the neighbourhood occasionally suffered from flood risk, although a river embankment and dredging initiative of nearby Jati Kramat river in 2007-2008 had significantly overcome the threat). Up to 300 biopori holes were made around parks and main roads in the neighbourhood.

Kebun Wisata Tanaman Obat  (Agritourism Herbal Garden) and Green Spaces. The idea was to create an icon for the community that they can be proud of and would like to take part in its success. Located next to Balai Warga, the herbal garden was open for site visits, an information centre on herbs, its benefits and usage, increase awareness on natural health remedies, and as a functioning green space which can be enjoyed by the community.

The garden was built on a 5000 square metre land, and was self funded by the residents. It possessed up to ninety (90) types of herbal plants that was grown there. This effort was assisted by the ASPETRI (associaton of traditional herbs producers of Indonesia). A bamboo-made saung was also constructed with the idea that the residents can reserve the place for lunch, meetings or simply to have family moments overlooking the gardens and the balai warga. The overall idea was to ensure that the garden could really be utilized by the community.

To further creating livability, community were encouraged to have green plants in front of their home and on almost every streets within the neighbourhood. To add tidiness, the trotoirs were repainted and pots of plants were also put on the main streets, as well as making green spaces in idle lands.

Creating  Livability

The message that was continuously buzzed in the neighbourhood management is that a clean is the key to a healthy and comfortable living environment, in which community’s participation in maintaining the condition is pivotal. To keep the neighbourhood alive, community activities were highly encouraged, with routines like RW siaga (to combat dengue fever), kerja bakti (voluntary community work), independence day’s events trail, aerobics, and others, as well as incidentals such as Kampung Anti Narkoba (anti-drugs kampung) movement by building Anti-Narkoba posts accross the area. A monthly newsletter, Warta 09¸ were also circulated to keep every resident informed and acknowledged as part of the community.

Initiatives like one that RW 09 have, certainly would not take place without the work of a rigorous and dedicated RW officials as well as a supportive community. However, it would also never take place if there was no intention to nurture partnership amongst residents and the Rukun Warga (RW) official in making the neighbourhood becomes a home, instead of mere space, to be shared together. The community of RW 09, as well as many communities in DKI Jakarta, had proven that this simple intention is enough to ignite significant changes in any neighborhood.


5 Comments »

Topics: , , , , , , , , | Agent of Change: none |


30 Mar 2010

Shelter for All: Sine Qua Non, not a Chimera

By Muamar Vebry

Last week I went to one of the biggest housing and land development project in Serpong, trying to identify a potential house to buy. The result was depressing; it was way above my purchasing power — by far. Sadly, despite the splendid infrastructure and its impressive greenery, my dream house was out of reach.

This week, I went to check out several RUSUNAMI (high-rise and low cost apartment) in Eastern Jakarta. Surprisingly it was still beyond my reach. One question struck me, how on earth can low income and middle income earners in Jakarta afford a decent house if the price of the properties are way above their heads. Whilst Government interventions in affordable public housing through mass production of RUSUNAMI, which supposedly targeted the low-mid income groups with income less than 4.5 million per month, apparently is not affordable enough. The price of one RUSUNAMI unit is capped at IDR144 million maxima, which by whatever means would hardly be purchased by people in the low-income group.

Besides the price, another consecutive question struck me, one that relates to the compatibility of high-rise forms of low cost housing targeted for the low income. This question came from my earliest observation of 3 (three) Rumah Susun in Jakarta, one in Bendungan Hilir, one in Kebon Kacang and the other one in Tebet, regardless of the fact that Rumah Susun — which is also a low-cost housing introduced in 1990 — and RUSUNAMI is not an apples to apples comparison. Perhaps I am being very subjective here and made an over simplistic conclusion, but my lay mans observation is that the higher the Rumah Susun raises, the lower the maintenance.  That does tell me something:  the low-cost high-rise housing model in Indonesia is not working.

It should be noted that our beloved country has never had glimmering success stories in the provision of adequate shelter and secure tenure for the low income group. Despite the rosy programming, many low cost housing projects or Government’ funded programmes have failed to yield tangible results. The situation has worsened since developers became disinterested in low cost housing, simply because they could not milk a good profit out of it.

It’s been reported that many developers have terminated the development of RUSUNAMI and are no longer offering a subsidized low-cost apartment. Consequently, the price of RUSUNAMI has increased from the previously capped IDR 144 million maxima to a new ceiling capped at IDR 200 million — more that 25% increased in ballpark estimation — which now targets the mid-income group. The Deputy of Formal Housing for the Ministry of Housing confirms that many developers have terminated their commitment to develop subsidized apartments due to an increase of production cost (materials etc…). The Deputy pontificates that this could not be avoided as there is no legal binding clause between Government and Developers that says developers must develop subsidized housing. The Deputy also points out that it should be looked on from the bright side, in return; many apartments for mid-income earners are being developed and soon will supply the housing market (KOMPAS daily newspaper, February 27, 2010). Once again it shows a policy failure — low-income groups are left out in the cold.

In a nutshell, lack of political will to serve the low-income housing sector is one of the many causes, not to mention that a systematic, properly designed and well-targeted social housing program has never been considered as a top Government priority. What has happened is scattered and sporadic initiatives, poorly planned and managed interventions, and spread thinly on a piece meal approach.

In Indonesia, the market forces it-self plays quite a substantial role to limit the supply of low cost housing and manages to keep the housing price beyond low income’s earners purchasing power. Please don’t get me wrong, I am not against the free market I believe free market society is good. However, it somehow fails to address the needs of adequate shelter for the low income group.

To address this, a political will should be properly nurtured and intelligent Government interventions should be adopted. By learning from the past failures in dealing with low-cost housing provisions, by taking into account few facts: first, the landed property is overpriced; one could get an affordable landed property but it can be 2-3 hours driving to/from Jakarta; second, the current high-rise model for example RUSUNAMI (or probably the upcoming RUSUNAMI Version 2.0) is not affordable,  high-rises are not socio-culturally suitable for low income group and the maintenance cost is expensive and will increase incrementally over time; and third, a developer driven model has not been able to address the pressing needs of low-cost housing demand as most developers are bogged down supplying  houses to the niche market of middle income and high income groups.

***

To date, the Government is revising the regulation on subsidized housing. But I can’t see how any breakthrough will be made as it is still likely to play within the “old” context of the proven-failured-high-rise-apartment (RUSUNAMI). As highlighted in Kompas Daily in February 27, it seems the Government is merely aiming to enlarge the size of the of the unit, revising the amount of government’s subsidy and the funniest thing revising the income criteria for the targeted consumer from those earning IDR 4.5 million per month to IDR 6 million per month. This is completely misleading.

Hence, this might be a good time to challenge the Government to think outside the box and focus more on informal housing.

Construction costs are relatively small for low cost housing (landed house), whilst the land and infrastructure cost are relatively high. The Government, in this context Ministry of Housing, should play a more intelligent role in supporting other than developer driven modality such as self help modality to delivering a decent and affordable landed house or a duplex perhaps, and become a competitor in housing market — which so far has been monopolized by a developer driven approach for quite sometime.

There are various approaches which could be adopted, a possible solution could be attained through state interventions to provide matured land — either by giving a temporal right to use, providing land for free or selling it for an affordable price with reasonable repayment scheme –, and adequately equipped with basic infrastructure needs such as installed pipe-water, electricity connections and other vital basic services.

The housing delivery mechanism itself is not rocket science. It is simply utilizing a community development approach towards targeted groups by organizing and facilitating targeted low income groups to construct their own landed houses through self help modality — based on their individual needs and their financial capacity (core house or extended house). The planning and construction process could be assisted by professional/social architects, engineers and facilitators to ensure proper planning and design of the environment and that it meets the expected standard. The source of finance could vary, one possible way is to seek financing from community cooperative institutions or micro finance institutions which provides micro loans either for productive or consumptive purposes — so that the low income could avoid neck-chocking interest rates that are applied by mainstream Banks.

Thailand has successfully addressed the massive growth of slum areas in Bangkok by providing access to land to low income groups to build their own low-cost housing through participatory approach. The basic element of Thailand success story lies in the congruent approach, mutually agreed solution, high commitment coupled with strong synergy between stakeholders involved (i.e. Civil Society, Academic Institutions and the Government ultimately).

Another remarkable success was made by Enrique Peñalosa, a politician who served as mayor of Bogotá — Colombia’s capital city of 7 million — for three years (1998-2001). During his term, he bought undeveloped land on the outskirts of the city to prevent real estate speculation and ensured that it will be developed as affordable housing with electrical, sewage, and telephone service as well as space reserved for parks, schools, and greenways.

The question is now whether the Government of Indonesia is willing to give access to land for the poor and invest state funds to mature land by building the necessary infrastructure?

The Government has given access to state owned land to many developers to build RUSUNAMI, so why can’t they grant access to “well-organized low income groups”?

No Comments »

Topics: , | Agent of Change: none |


28 Aug 2009

Singgih of Magno Wooden Radio offers a New Urbanism

Singgih

Singgih Susilo Kartono among the trees surrounding Magno wooden radio workshop (August 23, 2009@Marco Kusumawijaya)

Singgih Susilo Kartono, the maker of Magno wooden radios, thinks we should grow together with our resources. He wants to prove it in his village, Kandangan, in Temanggung, only 8 km from the house where Police thinks Noordin Top hid.  Will it materialise sustainably or become a bursting utopia? Only more elaboration and testing-out will answer that question. We discussed this issue while enjoying fresh air in his workshop on August 23, 2009.

He envisions his village to develop sustainably with production, consumption and resources growing together in the same locale. He wants to literally grow resources for his factory. He has already started growing seeds of sonokeling, mahoni, and other hardwood that he uses for his products, the famous awards winning Magno wooden radios, toys and stationery. He distributes the seeds for free to his neighbours to plant them on their own lands. One slide of his powerful powerpoint presentation shows how more trees emerge and grow bigger as his production grows as well.

With demand for his products growing (creating a current backlog of one month), it is very likely that he will have to expand his production facilities soon, although he does not wish to hurry on that. His neighbours will also enjoy the desentralised distribution of benefits soon. If things go well in the next couple of years, the village vill soon experience a densification process, having new wealth that willl materialise in the “rural” space

Singgih’s vision of production based on local resources, and a fair distribution of wealth in the locale, revives our imagination of “garden city” and other utopias in the history of urbanism. Resources and production are closely linked with relationships clearly tangible and within sight. It would certainly means very low ecological footprint. Fortunately, his “inputs” of the electrical parts in his radios also come from nearby factories in Semarang, two hours by car from Kandangan, Singgih’s base.

His products are sold so far mostly to consumers abroad. MOMA in New York just started to sell them in their stylish museum shop. Can we assume that the value he added to the woods justifies the emission of CO2 of transporting them?

Need for a plan

In anticipation of the spectre of  “growth” that is lurking from behind both the demand for his products, and the needs of the village, Singgih is already thinking of  creating a “masterplan” to guide the village development into the future. A serious mapping of available assets (natural and man made) is needed. A vision of how a future growth wil also grow and nurture (instead of deplete) the assets will be an intriquing exercise of intellect, creativity and technical skills of many disciplines.

1 Comment »

Topics: , , , , , , , , , , , | Agent of Change: none |


30 Jul 2009

On Provisional Publics and Intersections: Remaking District Life in North Jakarta

by Abdoumaliq Simone

Introduction

     For residents of cities, a simple question remains at the heart of their engagement with the city: what can people do together and under what circumstances? What is it that people do with each other when what they do isn’t quite competition, collaboration, conflict, possession or dispossession?  From this question stem the critical dimensions of urban policy in terms of who residents have to deal with, talk to, be intruded upon or intruding; who does space belong to, who has access to what kinds of space for what purposes?  As soon as these considerations are opened up then a wide range of political, administrative and technical consideration about how cities are run also become more contestable and specific. 

See complete article (50 pages) in:

On Provisional Publics and Intersections: Remaking District Life in North Jakarta.

4 Comments »

Topics: , , , | Agent of Change: none |


24 Jul 2009

Lima RW Hijau di Jakarta.

Lima RW dan satu kelurahan di Jakarta memanfaatkan lahan pekarangan rumah-rumah warga untuk mengolah sampah menjadi kompos, yang kemudian dimanfaatkan sebagai pupuk untuk memperbanyak tanaman. Mereka juga melakukan kegiatan-kegiatan terkait peningkatan ketahanan pangan dan kebersihan lingkungan serta pemanfaatan teknologi tepat guna.

Lihat editorial sebelumnya: http://rujak.org/2009/06/a-week-full-of-hope-disappointment-next/ (more…)

1 Comment »

Topics: , , , , | Agent of Change: none |


20 Jul 2009

Indonesian Green Map makers look into the future in Borobudur

 

IMG_0758

Green Map needs to persistently engage people residing in the areas being mapped in order to help generating intimate knowledge of places, and giving local voice a chance in the changing world. Green Map needs to ever amphasize its participatory method. Indonesian Green Map makers all over the country need to assemble together the total assets they have so far generated to be the basis for strengthening their capacity to achieve that goal. (more…)

3 Comments »

Topics: , | Agent of Change: Peta Hijau |