Chapters Socioeconomy.pdf

8/11/2019 Chapters Socioeconomy.pdf

1/19

1

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

1.1

The Aim and Process of Study

The aim of Social Economic Study is to:

(1) Identify problems in society within the Walenae-Cenranae river basin by studying the

everyday activities of the population of the area,

(2)

Participate in focus group discussions and public consultation meetings where the local

people (society) express the everyday problems which they experience in society

(3)

Assemble primary social economic data from society and secondary data from the related

government agencies

(4) Process and analyze the social economic data gathered

(5)

Prepare a sectoral report on social economy of the Walenai Cenranae River Basin

1.2 The Structure of Local Government in the Study Area

Local government organization in Indonesia is shown in figure 1.

Figure 1 Structure of local government

Province (Pro insi)

Re enc Cit (Kota)

District (Kecamatan) District (Kecamatan)

Sub-District Village Sub-District

RW and RT Dusun/Kam un RW and RT


2/19

2

Figure 1 shows that the province is over the district and city to the subdistrict and village,

the district and city governments are over the subdistrict and village. The administrative

area and Walenae Cenranae river basin involves six Regency's and 50 districts as shown in

table 1.2 -1

Table 1.2-1 Districts in the Study Area

Maros Bone Wajo Soppeng SidrapEnrekan

gTotal

Number of

Sub-districtsin the Study

Area

4 16 13 6 10 4 52

Source : Primer Data (2003)


3/19

3

CHAPTER II PRESENT SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CONDITIONS

2.1

Economic Conditions in the 6 Districts

The economic condition in the 6 districts of the study area is defined by examining each

districts gross domestic product:

Table 2.1-1 Gross Regional Domestic Product for the last 5 years from 6 districts of the

Study Area (1997-2001)

YearsNo. Std Area

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

Average

GRDP at last

5 years

1 Maros 4,56 -6,56 4,17 3,43 3,71 1,86

2 Bone 2,30 -5,98 2,02 2,67 3,37 0,88

3 Soppeng 0,44 -2,50 5,04 4,99 2,09 2,01

4 Wajo -6,66 6,-06 4,07 7,00 6,56 3,41

5 Sidrap - - 3,15 3,51 3,72 3,46

6 Enrekang 4,27 -2,91 4,79 3,59 4,69 2,89

Source : BPS form 6 district (2003)

2.1.1 Economic Structure and GRDP Maros District

Economic structure and GRDP Maros district is a basis for economic growth in Maros district

shown in Table 2.1.1-1 :

Table 2.1.1-1 Economic Structure and GRDP Maros District at 1997 - 2001

YearsNo. Sector

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

Average in 5

Years

1 Agriculture 3,76 1,95 2,18 3,57 1,47 2,57

2 Mining 5,37 -22,94 10,28 5,47 7,94 5,81

3 Process Industry 4,62 1,17 189,40 10,07 4,79 42,01

4 Electric, Gas and Water 9,28 13,53 11,65 2,41 4,85 8,34

5 Building 4,52 -81,00 13,57 -3,01 7,24 -58,686 Trading, Hotel and Restaurant 5,89 -4,73 5,74 5,35 4,48 3,35

7 Transportation 7,79 -,1677 4,81 3,93 2,35 3,44

8 Finance, Rental and Business

Service

5,61 -14,37 0,10 -11,71 17,92 -0,49

9 Service 3,93 -6,47 0,97 5,50 9,31 2,65

GDRB 4,56 -6,56 4,17 3,43 3,71 1,86

Source : GRDP Maros District (2001).


4/19

4

2.1.2 Economic Structure and GRDP Bone District

Economic structure of Bone district for the last 5 years is shown in Table 2.1-2:

Table 2.1.2-1 Economic Structure and GRDP Bone District at 1997 - 2001

YearsNo. Sector1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

Average Level

1 Agriculture 0,40 -5,23 5,48 1,14 0,15 0,39 7

2 Mining 10,52 -23,63 6,50 3,94 3,03 0,07 8

3 Process Industry 6,81 0,99 -11,58 3,10 4,83 0,83 6

4 Electric, Gas and Water 4,18 38,12 7,33 7,25 7,97 12,96 1

5 Building 8,49 -14,19 2,99 4,23 4,26 1,16 5

6 Trading, Hotel andRestaurant

5,50 -4,12 3,91 1,02 3,92 2,05 4

7 Transportation 7,08 -6,74 5,15 9,92 7,69 4,62 2

8 Finance, Rental andBusiness Service

5,03 -1,18 -26,33 13,47 7,12 -0,38 9

9 Service 1,86 -13,2 1,80 5,97 18,02 2,89 3

GRDP 2,30 5,98 2,02 2,67 3,37 3,27

Source : BPS, GRDP Bone District (2001).

2.1.3 Economic Structure and GRDP Wajo District

The economic Structure and GRDP of Wajo District during the past 5 Years (1997 - 2001) ios

shown as Table 2.1.3-1:

Table 2.1.3-1 Economic Structure and GRDP Wajo District at last years (1997 - 2001)

YearsNo. Sector

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001Average Level

1 Agriculture -16,92 2,73 10,37 6,88 8,72 2,36 52 Mining 2,07 10,18 -26,41 13,76 5,99 1,12 7

3 Process Industry 0,48 -2,21 3,33 -2,96 -1,66 -0,02 8

4 Electric, Gas andWater

5,77 12,03 2,64 7,29 16,64 8,87 2

5 Building 11,36 -26,39 1,26 5,27 1,26 -7,24 9

6 Trading, Hotel and

Restaurant

3,23 -1,41 6,24 4,59 6,62 19,27 1

7 Transportation 3,75 0,78 4,02 3,91 2,55 3,00 4


12,01 -36,91 -8,19 66,54 3,77 7,44 3

9 Service 8,44 -10,52 2,29 2,27 4,57 1,41 6

GRDP -6,66 6,06 0,07 7,00 6,56 3,41

Source : BPS, GRDP Wajo District (2001).

2.1.4 Economic Structure and GRDP Soppeng District at last 5 Years.

The Economic structure and GRDP for Soppeng district over the 5 years is shown as Table

2.1.4-1 :


5/19

5

Table 2.1.4-1 Economic Structure and GRDP Soppeng District during the past 5 Years

YearsNo. Sector

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001Average Level

1 Agriculture 8,80 3,02 -0,85 3,65 5

2 Mining 1,67 -4,04 0,24 -0,71 9

3 Process Industry 9,42 2,06 1,20 4,22 3

4 Electric, Gas and Water 22,66 11,78 10,03 14,82 2

5 Building 8,30 4,70 -6,66 2,11 8


Restaurant

3,59 3,17 3,49 3,41 6

7 Transportation 1,46 3,70 6,71 3,95 4


-20,07 56,65 20,50 19,02 1

9 Service -2,51 4,54 7,20 3,07 -7

GRDP 5,04 4,99 2,09 4,04

Source : BPS, GRDP Soppeng District (2001).

2.1.5 Economic Structure and GRDP for Sidrap District during the last 3 Years.

The Economic structure and GRDP for Sidrap district for the last 5 years is shown as Table

2.1.5-1.

Table 2.1.5-1 Economic Structure and GRDP Sidrap District in 3 Years (1999 - 2001)

YearsNo. Sector

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001Average Level

1 Agriculture 3,73 4,19 -1,49 2,14 9

2 Mining 3,75 4,36 7,95 5,35 3

3 Process Industry 3,96 2,26 8,60 4,94 5

4 Electric, Gas and

Water

3,59 1,48 23,68 9,58 1

5 Building 2,02 7,60 9,76 6,46 2


Restaurant

4,82 1,44 6,11 4,12 7

7 Transportation 13,55 5,54 6,76 5,28 4

8 Finance, Rental and

Business Service

-3,20 -0,30 6,58 3,16 8

9 Service -2,38 1,90 17,03 4,18 6

GRDP 3,15 3,51 3,72 3,46

Source : BPS, GRDP Sidrap District (2001).


6/19

6

2.1.6 Economic Structure and GRDP Enrekang District over the last 5 Years (1997 - 2001)

The economic Structure and GRDP for Enrekang district over the last 5 years (1997 - 2001) is

shown in Table 2.1.6-1:

Table 2.1.6-1 Economic Structure and GRDP Enrekang District at last 5 Years (1997-2001)

YearsNo. Sector

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001Average Level

1 Agriculture 3,38 7,79 10,37 1,88 2,13 5,11 3

2 Mining 0,66 -28,38 2,84 2,39 0,15 -4,47 8

3 Process Industry 13,71 10,71 27,45 4,83 1,96 11,73 1

4 Electric, Gas andWater

7,03 29,41 0,33 7,90 6,86 10,31 2

5 Building 2,26 -45,79 4,37 0,52 0,02 -7,72 9


Restaurant

5,56 -7,31 3,81 1,66 2,12 1,17 7

7 Transportation 7,35 -4,35 1,63 7,12 3,40 3,03 5


-0,82 -1,21 42,52 43,2 11,86 2,12 6

9 Service 5,69 -7,86 0,76 1,65 19,37 3,92 4

GRDP 4,27 -2,91 4,79 3,59 4,69 2,89

Source : BPS, GRDP Enrekang District (2001).

2.1.7

GRDP Per sector and GRDP per capita From 6 districts

GRDP per sector and GRDP per capita from 6 districts of the Study area and the economic

condition From 6 districts are shown in Table 2.1.7-1.

Table 2.1.7-1 GRDP per sector and GRDP per capita from 6 districts in 2001 in the study area (Rp. million)

AgricultureElectric/Gas and

Clean WaterService

No.Economic

Sector

DistrictValue % Value % Value %

PDRB /

Capita

1 Maros 543,007.91 35,63 6,456.17 0,42 111,370.56 7,31 5,627,878

2 Bone 1,484,116.69 65,02 15,597.89 0,68 194,856.43 8,54 3,502,388

3 Wajo 849,584.29 57,35 14,454.87 0,87 97,689.97 5,90 4,599,549

4 Soppeng 420,204.22 53,94 5,805.43 0,75 98,031.36 12,58 3,560,148

5 Sidrap 516,666.59 55,09 7,195.37 0,77 72,744.45 7,76 3,924,917

6 Enrekang 282,403.48 61,64 3,378.61 0,74 51,398.77 11,22 2,721,433


7/19

7

Mining Industry Building

No.

Economic

Sector


1 Maros 13,286.87 0,87 671,623.45 44,07 1,268.60 0,83

2 Bone 8,831.60 0,39 157,211.63 6,89 72,849.34 3,19

3 Wajo 148,049.58 8,95 66,413.41 4,01 37,920.75 2,29

4 Soppeng 4,062.73 0,52 58,390.90 7,49 42,410.20 5,44

5 Sidrap 19,225.97 2,05 31,301,93 3,34 61,301.93 6,54

6 Enrekang 2,308.36 0,50 24,671.59 5,37 13,730.20 2,99

Trading Transportation Financial / Rental

No.

EconomicSector


1 Maros 65,944.78 4,33 71,103.70 4,67 28,522.43 1,87

2 Bone 188,486.66 8,26 95,909.86 4,20 64,650.74 2,83

3 Wajo 315,897.32 19,09 75,200.53 4,55 49,168.81 2,97

4 Soppeng 71,236.59 9,15 44,503.97 5,71 34,311,52 4,40

5 Sidrap 169,802.30 18,11 27,219.66 2,90 32,322.14 3,45

6 Enrekang 53,867.41 11,76 11,682.30 2,55 14,731.27 3,22

Sources : PDRB Maros district, Bone, Wajo, Soppeng, Sidrap and Enrekang, 2001

The above tables show that GRDP value from 6 regencies represented by 9 sectors of the

economic show the following: The agriculture sector gives the largest contribution to the

economy of Rp. 282.403,48 (million rupiahs) to 1.484.116,69 (million rupiahs) in percentage

35,63% until 65,02% of the total GRDP of every district. This indicates that agriculture is thegreatest contributor to the economy in all districts of DAS Walanae Cenranae.

2.2

Employment

Employment % for population in each district is shown in Table 2.2-2

Table 2.2-2 Percentage of population employed in each sector by district in the study area

Employment (%)No. Study Area

Agriculture Industry Trading Service Others

1 Maros 57,17 8,02 15,83 10,63 8,36

2 Bone 73,09 4,72 10,06 7,54 4,59

3 Soppeng 66,23 4,77 12,86 12,10 4,05

4 Wajo 60,30 8,92 17,44 9,62 3,72

5 Sidrap 56,90 9,32 14,53 11,77 7,48

6 Enrekang 74,40 3,20 13,11 5,95 3,4

Source : Susenas, 2001


8/19

8

2.3 Unemployment

Unemployment in study area for year 2001 is shown in table 2.3-1

Table 2.3-1 Jobless in Study Area

No Study AreaTotal of

PopulationTotal of Jobless Percent (%)

1 Maros

(3 Sub district)

37,311 1,690 4,53

2 Bone

(147 Sub district)

334,383 6,420 1,92

3 Wajo

(14 Sub district)

361,239 10,292 2,96

4 Soppeng

(6 Sub district)

219,901 7,652 3,48

5 Sidrap(11 Sub district)

239,556 17,942 7,49

6 Enrekang

(2 Sub district)

44,986 577 1,23

T o t a l 1,239,376 44,973 3,63

Sources : BPS, Susenas, 2001

The above table shows that total of population in study area is 1,239,376 and of that total there

are 44,973 jobless (3,63%).


9/19

9

CHAPTER III SOCIOECONOMIC PROBLEMS AND CONSTRAINTS

The following is an account of the problems and constraints to society in the six districts

(made up of 52 sub districts), as expressed in focus group discussions and public consultation

meetings held by the WalCenMP project during the year 2003.

The government does not spend enough time convincing the population of the importance

of conservation and sustainability. An example of this is in forestry where people are not

aware of the laws and the reasons why the upper watershed should be conserved.

There is not sufficient policing of forest and other government owned land. Guidance

laws concerning illegal felling trees, and using poison for fishing have not yet been

adequately provided.

Very little information exists regarding the importance of coordination of activities within

one river basin such as WalCen Basin.

Coordination and understanding between the government and the people (Society) is low

Education of the people (Society) in the study area is low.

The district governments has limited funding for social and infrastructure programs

The cooperation between the provincial and district governments seems low.

Awareness of the relationship between the provincial and district governments is low.

Government programs not based on social participation which are carried on these days

do not function well.

The availability of financial capital within Society is low.


10/19

10

CHAPTER IV DEVELOPMENT ISSUES AND POLICIES

4.1 Regional Development Issues and Policies

4.1.1

Regional Autonomy

Law No. 22 of 1999 has brought about a dynamic reform in the Indonesian Government

system providing wider authority and responsibility to local government. This reform is called

regional autonomy. According to the Government Regulation of Republic of Indonesia

(PERATURAN PEMERINTAH REPUBLIK INDONESIA NOMOR 25 TAHUN 2000) the

aim of regional autonomy is to increase the peoples prosperity, equality, fairness,

democratization and respect of local culture. In general, the notion of regional autonomy has at

least two dimensions, namely decentralization of governance and the participation of the

community in decision-making. For the present, the former would be the major issue for the

local government.

Based on the rule of regional autonomy, city/district governments have been empowered to

play a major role in local governance. On the other hand, the role of provincial government is

limited to inter-city/district matters such as security, water use, and control of environmental

pollution.

All district governments in the Study area have already prepared new regional development

plans considering the regional autonomy. In most cases, decentralization of governance is

understood to be fully considered in those plans.

However, as far as implementation of regional development is concerned, the new system has

not yet been consolidated even by the provincial government. In this condition, some problemsare observed in the field of regional development, such as shortage of human resources, lack

of planning and implementation know-how of regional development, difficulty in integrating

inter-regional matters, and shortage of the budget.

The conditions described above will continue for at least for a few more years, in addition the

system of governance requires strong guidance from public participation to develop the future

system of local government.

4.1.2 National Development Policy

The latest 5-year National Development Program (PROGRAM PEMBANGUNAN

NASIONAL, or PROPENAS), which describes basic design of economic development from

2000 to 2004, was issued at the end of 2001. PROPENAS predicts economic growth in

Indonesia to be 6-7% during 2001-2004.

In the latest government plans, only the national level plan has projected economic growth.

Therefore, the forecast of future economic framework in the Study Area shall be based on the


11/19

11

national level economic indicators considering regional characteristics GRDP growth rate of

Indonesia by sector is targeted as shown in Table 4.2.2-1.

Table 4.2.2-1 GRDP Growth Rate by Economic Sector in PROPENAS

Year

Economic Sector

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Agriculture 2.1% 1.4% 2.5% 2.5% 2.7% 2.9%

Industry 2.6% 4.8% 6.4% 7.3% 8.4% 9.2%

Services -1.2% 5.33% 5.5% 6.0% 6.2% 6.4%

Source : Program Pembangunan Nasional Tahun 2000-2004

These indicators are based on recovery in private investment derived from improvement of

investment conditions including financial reform. Based on the figures in Table 4.2.2-1

economic development policies are formulated as shown below.

(1)

To create a new working environment and improve labor conditions through a labor

social insurance program to cope with poverty;

(2)

To develop micro-businesses and small-scale enterprises by securing wider access to

capital;

(3)

To create economic and monetary stability in order to stimulate private investment by

accelerating financial reform, debt restructuring in private sector and increasing state

income;

(4)

To improve economic competitiveness in order to increase exports by increasing industrial

capacity and promoting investment from overseas countries;

(5)

To increase equity-based investment instead of loans by improving the investmentlicensing system and motivating the private sector through privatization and restructuring

of state-owned companies;

(6)

To provide infrastructures and facilities for economic development, such as transportation

system, telecommunication, information system, electricity, mining and energy, and

irrigation system;

(7)

To make the most of natural resources taking the sustainability and conservation of

ecology into consideration.

4.1.3

Regional Development Policy in South Sulawesi Province

(1)

Regional Development Plan (Propeda)

The existing PROPEDA describes only guidelines in order to formulate regional

development plans, though the former PROPEDA had been formulating development

policies and programs. The development guidelines strongly related to the study are:


12/19

12

Resources Development

Economic, social and cultural aspects of the regional development should be taken into

consideration in the integrated manner in natural and environmental resources

management.

Rural DevelopmentRural development should be accelerated in order to empower rural people to play a

major role and to give incentives to joining the rural development thought

strengthening the rural institution

In this study, coordination process of the inter-city/district mattes shall be fully

considered. For preliminary understanding, the basic roles of provincial government were

derived from Government Regulation No. 25 as below. Authorities of provincial

government are composed of inter-city/district matters coordination and the following

items stipulated in clause 9 of law No. 22.

1. Planning and control on macro regional development;

2.

Training on governmental official for special purposes;

3.

Allocation of human resources for administration;

4.

Research through all of province;

5.

Management of provincial harbor;

6.

Environmental control;

7.

Promotion of trade, cultural and tourism activities;

8.

Control of spread of disease and insect;

9.

Formulation of regional management plan through all of province

Provincial government may execute or implement any authority which is not done by

city/district governments. In this execution, prior agreement with city/district governments

are required.

(2)

Local Strategic Plan (Renstra)

Formulation of local strategic plan (Renstra) in South Sulawesi province shows the

willingness to realize in the form of vision, mission and objective.

Vision is the descriptive expression that represents an ideal condition, wish or aspiration to

realize in the future and form basic reference to be used in the establishment of South

Sulawesi province development plan.

Vision is formulated based on consensus to give motivation to realize ideal condition or

vision for the future with using local capability as inspiration and motivation source for allparties concerned (Stakeholder) to perform development efforts optimally and sustainably.

Social justice: equal rights for person inundating public service and in dealing with the

government. This would mean that rich and poor receive the same government services.

Properly inhabitable settlement: would be the provision of housing and settlements for

communities of lower income so they can become independent. This would include the


13/19

13

provision of clean water, drainage, sanitation roads and social infrastructure among others.

Continuing Regional Development: represent one form of wise urban and rural resources

utilization and development emphasizing on the consideration of environment

conservation and its region, so that the balanced urban and rural development can proceed.

Community prosperity: cultivating and improvement as well as being responsibile of each

persons livelihood to improve quality of living and play an active role in the realizing the

prosperity of the community. From the inventory of local South Sulawesi government

development, ideal target for each region is to realize community development that is

advanced, established, autonomous, democratic, prosperous, and sustainable.

Advanced: means that future condition is better than existing condition.

Established: means the community succeeds in achieving the targeted required level of

development.

Autonomous: means that by itself the community can give common service and fulfill

basic needs of the local community members now and in the future.

Democratic: means implementation principle from, by, and for the community with

community participation.

Sustainable: means that development is performed continually in the long term through

generation to generation without environmental degradation and other negative impacts.

In South Sulawesi urban and rural vision essentially wishes for community life to be more

prosperous through generations in development of urban and rural areas that grow and

develop more intensively, to do so requires infrastructure as well as common service

facilities in great number and capacity.

Vision that has been explained previously is spelled out into urban and rural development

missions as follows.

Urban development mission

1)

Improve region capability in the management of urban resource development

according to local condition.

2)

Support community empowerment in the context of urban sustainable

development.

3)

Increase the role of business sector and rural competitiveness through

competition of conductive climate for urban and regional economic

development.

4)

Support urban development that have environmental perception and support

effort on then improvement of environment quality (physical, social and

cultural) of urban region.

5)

Mutual and balance support in rural development.

6)

Support inter-urban development interconnection as well as between urban and

rural in effort to support regional development.


14/19

14

Rural development mission are as follows

1) Increase institution and rural capability to develop advanced, established, and

autonomous rural development.

2)

Increase community empowerment in effort to improve rural community

prosperity and the acceleration of sustainable rural development.

3)

Improve rural community access on capital, market, information, and

technology to guarantee wide and equal economic growth.

4)

Support the realization of rural marketing structure in favor of rural producer to

reduce structural poverty.

5) Support rural development with environment perception.

6)

Support rural and urban development interconnection in effort to support

regional development.

4.1.4 Development Issues and Strategies of Six Districts

The local governments of district formulated the PROPEDA (Five-Year Socio Economic

Development Program), REPETADA (One-Year Implementation Program) and spatial plans

for its own regional development, while the present state of the preparation after regional

autonomy varies from region to region. Major regional development issues and strategies in

each district were derived from the above existing plans and are summarized in Tables 4.1.4-1

to 4.1.4-3.

Table 4.1.4-1 Development Issues and strategies of Maros and Enrekang district (up stream)

Target key

issues for

regionaldevelopment

1. Forest cutting at community level are still occuring due to low control of forest

official and low community awareness.

2. Low level of community cooperation to take care rivers as show by erosion anddamage of irrigation canals.

3. Low level of agricultural production due to damaged irrigation canals and

frequent erosion.

4. Institutional community development as a motivating force of community

economic development is not function optimally.5. There is frequent disposal of waste in to the rivers by the local communities

6. Low community, knowledge (farmers fishermen) so they utilized pestisides to

catch fish.7. Mush of the agricultural land potential and fishing potential is not well utilized

DevelopmentStrategy

1. Increase forest official control of forest cutting and low enforcement of forestcutting prohibition for the community.

2. Community institutions and the province are not well organized to maintain

erosion protection and repair damaged irrigation canals.3. Increase agriculture production by development irrigation.

4. Optimalisation of community institution of community institution roles

machinery forces for community economic development.5. Mitigate the frequency of waste disposal in to the river by community.

6. improve community knowledge show they no use pestisida to catch fish.

7. Empowering potential agriculture and fishery land.

8. Irrigation development of Walanae and Bila River irrigation network.

Potential Wide range of forest and agricultural land resource available.


15/19

15

Resource

Table 4.1.4-2 Development issues and Strategies of Bone, Wajo, Sidrap, Soppeng District(Midlestream)

Target Key

Issues for

Regional

Development

1. High level of community lose when flooding occur during rainy season

2. a lot of flooded agriculture land due to flooding during rainy season.

3. Low level of agricultural and fishery production

4. Low fishery production during dry season

5. High level of irrigation canal damage6. High number of community live in and around lake

7. Several community institution and machinery force of community economy do

not optimally function.8. Low level of community skill about pestisida utilization so, they use it to cut

fish and accurence of clean water stained.

9. High level of price of production input for agricultural and fishery community

10. Low price of harvested production earned by farmers and fishermen due tomarketing mechanism not functioning.

11. Low level of farmers and fisherman knowledge about technical culture andcontrol of agricultural and fishery pest and disease.

Development

strategy

1. Irrigation development of Wal-Cen River Basin and Tempe barrage.

2. Strengthening of community institution in order to increase cooperation in theintegrated management of Walanae - Cenranae and Tempe Lake.

3. Improvement of community knowledge about management of irrigation and

environment protection.

Potentialresources

Water resources of Walanae - Cenranae River Network and Tempe Lake area

Table 4.2.5-3 Development Issues and Strategies of Bone District (Down Stream)

Target Key

Issues for

Regional

Development

1. Low level of community cooperation to take care irrigation and river result

in swallowing of river.

2. High number of community live around Cenranae river.

3. Community institution as machinery force of community do not function

optimally.

4. High level of waste disposal by the community into the river.

5. Low level of community knowledge about environment.

6. Level of agricultural land inundation is high during the rainy season.

Development

strategy

1. Irrigation development of Walanae - Cenranae River Basin through the

construction of Tempe Lake Barrage

2. The strengthening of community institutions in order to increase cooperation

for the integrated management of Walanae - Cenranae River irrigation.

3. Improvement of community knowledge about management of irrigation and

environment protection.

Potential

resources

Water resources of Cenranae River Network

Source : FGD, PCM Based Line Survey, 2003


16/19

16

4.2

Socio Economic Problem and Constraints to Present and future development

4.2.1

Socio Economic Problems and Constraints

The following is the listing of present problems and constraints for the WalCen river basin

1.

Maros and Enrekang district (upstream)

Felling of trees and destruction happens since society is not aware of the advantages of theforest and laws and regulations are confusing and not evenly enforced

Cooperation of society with the government is low so flood control and irrigation channelsare not respected by the public and are often damaged

Farm production is decreased due to damage and lack of repair for irrigation infrastructure

Institutional development within society do not function optimally

Rubbish is thrown into rivers by society because of their lack of awareness of the role thatthe river and the availability of water play in their lives

Farmers and fishermen often use pesticides to grow crops and kill fish in the Tempe lake

area since their awareness of the need to use the lake in a sustainable manner is lacking

Fishery and agricultural potential is not utilized for the maximum advantage of society

2. Wajo, Soppeng, Sidrap and part of Bone Districts (midstream)

Flooding is common in rainy season

Agriculture and fishery production is low in the dry season

Irrigation channel malfunction influence the agriculture and fishery production

Fishery production is low in the dry season

The total population living around Tempe and Sidenrang Lakes is high

Institutions of society do not function optimally

Input costs for agriculture and fishery production high

The revenue received by fishermen and farmers for their produce is low

Education of farmers and fishermen concerning cultivation and fishing tackle is low


17/19

17

3. Bone District (downstream)

Cooperation of society in caring for basin is low

Population in the area is high

Institutions within society do not function well

Society throws a large amount of rubbish into rivers

The knowledge of society concerning the environment is low

Present Social Economic Constraints are listed below:

The government has not sufficiently explained the advantages of good forestry practice and

upper watershed management to the people in the basin

The total official land for forestry and agriculture is low

Laws and regulations regarding use of water and forest are weak

Coordination between government and the people in developing effective institutions is not

optimal

The education of society in the environment in the basin is low

The government's funding available to encourage society to care for the river basin is lowSociety's awareness of the advantages to using the basin in a sustainable manner is low

Government do not involve the population for decision making

Private enterprise participation is low and not sufficiently encouraged

Financing capital of society for agricultural and fishery development is low


18/19

18

CHAPTER V DEVELOPMENT CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT PLAN FROM

SOCIO ECONOMIC VIEW POINT

From the result of field analysis through FGD, PCM, and base line survey indicate that the

dominant means of livelihood in the river basin is agriculture and fisheries.

Within the regions of upstream, midstream and downstream floods frequently happened during the

rainy season and agricultural land becomes inundated causing a decrease in agricultural production.

Also, People's residences become submerged during flooding causing substantial loss to people and

communities.

Areas in the middle stream such as Wajo, Soppeng and Sidrap as well as part of Bone area

experience problems with irrigation canals sill silting in. The following recommendations have

been made to relieve the problems caused within the Basin by natural and man-made phenomena.

Forestry rehabilitation should be done in the upstream areas

Explanation to the local people is necessary to tell them of the advantages of community

Forest management

There should be a coordinating body between the local governments of upstream, middle

stream and downstream areas.

Construction of Tempe barrage is necessary to regulate Tempe lake levels

Some improvement of Cenranae river is necessary

It is necessary to improve community knowledge through public awareness campaigns tomaintain people's knowledge of the advantages of community forestry in the upstream

areas. People living in the upper watershed areas should be aware of and care for the

environment in a sustainable manner.

Irrigation and Agriculture should be supported by more effective P3A (water users

association). P3As should be self-supporting community agricultural irrigation

organization.

Irrigation canals and infrastructure should be improved

The above elements require serious attention in Walanae-Cenranae river basin since theserecommended improvements will have a large impact on the income and well-being of the local

communities within the river basin.

The focus of development in the three downstream districts is construction of Tempe barrage.

Construction of Tempe barrage will provide an opportunity for increasing irrigation area,

improving river navigation, and the improvement of water quality among other benefits.


19/19

CHAPTER VI RECOMMENDATIONS

Recommendations for the development, conservation and management of the Walanae-Cenranae

River Basin from the socio-economic aspect are as follows:

1.

Construction of Tempe barrage to control the water level in Tempe Lake is a basic requirement

for improvement of Walanae and Cenranae river basin regional economy.

2.

Community participation is urgently needed from planning, design, implementation, and

maintenance of integrated development and management of Walanae-Cenranae river basin and

Tempe lake through the empowerment of community institutions.

3.

Farmers and fisherman as a beneficiary of the project need improvement of their knowledge

and skill to enable successful management of their enterprises through the application of

science and technology. Therefore, development of increased labor skill through trainingcenters is necessary. Business information centre, and training centre for the development of

skilled farmers and fisherman is required.

4. Assistance for the expected improvement of agricultural, fishery, and forestry production is

necessary by: (a) developed and improved post-harvest support activities and industry; (b)

development of commodity exchange, contract business and trading houses for agricultural,

fishery, and forestry products; (c) development of warehousing and processing management of

agriculture, fishery and forestry products, (d) development of an agriculture, fishery, and

forestry product assessment board, (e) development of land resource for agriculture, fishery,

and forestry information centre; (f) construction of transportation access such as farm roads and

management of road axis from Makassar to Wajo for agriculture, fishery and forestry industry

support.

5. Formulation of regional regulations that support the aspects of: agriculture, fishery, forestry

and the community is required.

6. Development of credit guarantor board

7.

Construction of tourism infrastructure and recreation parks

8.

Improvement of primary, secondary and tertiary irrigation and drainage canals and the

provision of facilities for water pumping

9.

Intensification and extensification of new indigenous regional income

10.

Improvement of environment performance through conservation of critical land in the upper

watershed portion of the Wal-cen river basin and Tempe Lake

11.

Setting up of an observation center for Cenranae river basin in the down stream portion of

Walanae-Cenranae river basin

Chapters Socioeconomy.pdf

Documents