Configuring the Green Attraction and the right to the city ......1. Green Urbanism >> a conceptual model for zero-emission and zero-waste urban design, which arose in the 1990s, promoting

CONFIGURING THE ‚ ‘‘GREEN‘‘ ATTRACTION AND THE RIGHT TO THE CITY. THE CASE OF RIVERSIDE REVITALIZATION IN INDONESIA

Dortmund Conference 22-23

February 2016.

Spatial Pattern- Structures,

Dynamics, Planning

PRESENTED BY AMMALIA PODLASZEWSKA, M.SC- BAUHAUS -UNIVERSITÄT WEIMAR

AGENDA OF THE PRESENTATION

1. REVISITING THE CONCEPT ‚‘‘GREEN URBANISM‘‘

2. BACKGROUNDPROBLEM STATEMENTRESEARCH QUESTION METHODOLOGY

3. CASE STUDY: PALEMBANG RIVERSIDE

4. OPPORTUNITY FOR THE LOCAL ECONOMY

5. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

PRESENTED BY AMMALIA PODLASZEWSKA, M.SC- BAUHAUS UNIVERSITÄT WEIMAR

REVISITING THE CONCEPT

1. Green Urbanism

>> a conceptual model for zero-emission and zero-waste urban design, which arose in the 1990s, promoting compact energy-efficient urban development (Lehmann, 2010)

>> Cities and regions are becoming competitive and thus integrating a green planning framework to build a sustainable development.

>> In Indonesia, the percentage of the urban population increased from 12.4% (1950) to 48.1% (2005). It is expected that in the year 2050, 58.5% will live in urban spaces (Vorlaufer, 2011: 86).

Source: Lehmann, 2010


BACKGROUND

2. Strategic Urban Planning

National scale: ‘’National green city scheme’’ Pilot project of 10 Indonesian cities.

>>This project also encourages local administrations and residents to actively create open and green spaces

Regional scale: Green City Development Program (GCDP) in 2011 by the Ministry of Public Works.

>>This program will gradually alter city development approach, being heavily oriented on economic growth toward a more balance orientation between economy efficiency, ecological preservation and social justice.


PROBLEM STATEMENT

3. The right to the city in the ‚‘‘green‘‘ context:

Green-place making: city that builds a unique and special sense of place and as a way of nurturing a high quality of life and a strong commitment to community.

‘’The more place-oriented and locally self-sufficient a city’s economy is, the more it will reduce its ecological footprint and the more it will ensure that its valuable ecological features are enhanced’’ (Newman, 2011).


RESEARCH QUESTIONS

>> The research investigates the relevance of ‘’green’’ attraction in inner city area (marginalized neighborhood). It addresses the concern of social de-privileged in the dominant urban sustainability discourses.

>> The question of whether the intervention of green attraction has exacerbated the existing forms of social and spatial equality or provided new capital opportunities for marginalized areas.


METHODOLOGY

>> Urban Transformation:

The spatial transformations are investigated with the aim to analyze and interpret the spatial distribution of green intervention in association with a wider set of urban changes. Historical footprints are being analyzed.

>> From marginalized into the commiditizied community:

Marginalized actors is reflected in the form of informality (urban informality, economic informality). Investigating the occupation of (public) green space and its relationship to the local culture and economy. In-depth and semi-structured interviews with locals and formal and non-formal community organizations.



CASE STUDY: PALEMBANG RIVERSIDE

Development density map of Palembang

Source: Palembang Urban regional Plan, 2010

1. Palembang was ruling the Southeast Asian trade in

the beginning of the 7thcentury. During the first half of

the 20th century as the economic bridge linking

Singapore with the commercial life of Java and

Sumatra (Tall 2003).

2. In 2005 Palembang first inaugurated as a river city,

compared to Bangkok and Phnompenh and since

then has been hosted several international touristic

events.

3. Palembang city has a total area of 400.61 km2 with

a population of 1,455,284 inhabitants (Palembang in

Figures 2011) which means that each km2 inhabited

by 3,632 inhabitants.

8

LAND USE


GREEN AREA


1. Ideally, Urban area should consist of 30% Green Open Space, Public (20%) and Private (10%) (Law No.26/2007 Spatial Planning)

2. Palembang‘s master plan 2004-2014 shows that Green open space area (natural) is only 14,58% ( 5.835 Hectare) from the urban area.

3. Palembang‘s urban area is around 40.000 (ha), it needs at least 12.000 ha of Green open space.


Green Open

Space (30%)

&

Non- Green

Open Space

Environment Function Structure Ownership

Natural

Man-made Ecological

Social+culture

Aesthetic

Economic

Ecologic pattern

City pattern

Public

Private

PPP

GREEN AREA

Source: Adapted from the Standard of GOS Provision, Ministry of Public Infrastructure

GREEN AREA


GOS neighborhood

area (RT)

1m2/person

Min area 250m2

Within the radius of 300 m

GOS Community

Area (RW)

0,5 m2/person

Min area 1.250m2

Within the radius of 1000 m

GOS Subdistrict Area 0,3 m2/person

Min area 9000 m2

Serves subdistrict area

GOS District Area 0,2 m2/person

Min area 24.000 m2

Serves district area

Source: Adapted from the Standard of GOS Provision, Ministry of Public Infrastructure

y.1919

Built Environment: Residential,

Commercial, Office, Service, Industry

Semi-Natural: Empty land, Farm, Rice

field, Park

Natural: Swamp, Forest, Shrubs

y. 1969


RIVERSIDE SPATIAL TRANSFORMATION

Source: Podlaszewska, 2013

y. 1988

y. 2000 y. 2012


GREEN ATTRACTION ?

GREEN ATTRACTION


Source: Palembang‘s Master plan , 2009

is principally set-up as a

collaborative action

involving public, private,

and community through

the scheme of Corporate

Social Responsibility

(CSR).

OPPORTUNITY FOR LOCAL ECONOMY

Textile industry and

handcrafts (informal)

Restaurant and service

industry (formal)

Furniture industry

(formal)

unit worker unit worker unit worker

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

8

10

14

18

18

20

23

40

220

293

586

765

847

998

1176

1842

9

9

12

11

7

7

7

9

77

90

132

120

68

80

80

112

2

5

5

6

6

6

6

6

24

60

56

71

78

88

88

92



Income* Number %

<Rp. 350.000

Rp. 350.000- Rp. 750.000

Rp. 750.000- Rp. 1.000.000

Rp. 1.000.000- Rp. 1.500.000

>Rp. 1.500.000

767 people

4.008 people

2.175 people

1.256 people

948 people

8.40%

43.80%

23.70%

13.70%

10.49%

Occupation Number %

Formal

sector

Company employee

Public officer

Army and police officer

Private employee

Shop employee

Factory workers

87 people

225 people

35 people

982 people

314 people

79 people

0.9 %

2.44%

0.35%

10.70%

3.41%

0.80%

Informal

sector

Street vendors

Daily labor

Fisherman

Household industry

Taxi/bus drivers

Tourist Guides

3.028 people

3.942 people

40 people

237 people

27 people

12 people

33%

43%

0.44%

2.60%

0.30%

0.20%

Unemployed 223 people 2.04%

LOCAL ACTIVITY



FINDING: SPACE DYNAMICS


Transformation of urban

landscape




GOS as in-between

space or privatized area




Land acqusition to gain

the public space

CONCLUSION/DISCUSSION

Without rejecting the need for an ecological intervention, a ‘’green’’ urban development

seems inaccessible without addressing social justice and social dynamics:

>> The role of private sector is essentially intended to be as inclusive as possible where the role of public

sector will diminish gradually.

>> In the broader critique of the contemporary urban development policies and practices, green

intervention is for the benefit of the developers and other private sector actors, fueling the process of

gentrification and paying little attention to the needs of the urban poor and other vulnerable population groups.

>> Integrating planning, design, and implementation is a difficult exercise that requires extra efforts for key

actors (especially for urban planners, urban designers, and architects), and insofar is rare.

>> Local commitment and capacity to undertake the program is still lacking in some cities, for example in

local budget provision, land acquisition, and institutional settings.


BIBLIOGRAPHY Arianti, I. (2010): Ruang Terbuka Hijau (Green Open Spaces). Jurnal Ilmu Pengetahuan dan Rekayasa (1), 1-7.

Beatley, T. (2012). Green Urbanism: Learning from European Cities. Island Press

Heynen, N. & Robbins, P. (2005): The neoliberalization of nature: Governance, privatization,enclosure and valuation.Capitalism, Nature, Socialism,16(1), 6-8

Jonas, A. E. G. & Bridge, G. (2003): Governing nature: The re-regulation of resources, land-useplanning, and nature conservation.in Social Science Quaterly,84(4), 958-962

Fainstein, S.S. and Judd, D.R. (1999): Global forces, local strategies, and urban tourism. In Judd, D.R. and Fainstein, S.S. (eds.)The tourist city. New Haven: Yale University Press

Huning,S. & Novy,J. ( 2006): Tourism as an engine of Neighborhood Regeneration? Some remarks towards a better understanding of urban tourism beyond the ‘Beaten Path’. In CMS

Working Paper Series. No.006

Harvey, D. (1977): Social justice and the city. Baltimore, Md: Hopkins Univ.Pr

Gerke, S. (2002). Global Lifestyles under Local Conditions: the New Indonesian Middle Class. In C. Beng-Huat (Ed.), Consumption in Asia – Lifestyles and Identities (pp. 135–158)

Routledge, London.

Mitchell, D. (2003) The right to the city. Social Justice and the fight for public space. The Guilford press, NY.

Moeliono, T. P. (2011). Spatial Planning in Indonesia: From Planning to Implementation. University Leiden, Leiden, Netherlands

Newman, P. (2011). Green Urbanism and its application to Singapore. Asia Research Institute. Working Paper Series no.151.

Kirmanto, et al (2012). Indonesia Green city development: an Urban reform. $bth ISOCARP Congrress.

Werner, C. (2013). Green Open Spaces in Indonesian cities: Schisms between law and practice. Pacific Geographies no.41

Vorlaufer, K. (2011). Südostasien (Southeast Asia). 2nd Ed. Darmstadt..


Configuring the Green Attraction and the right to the city ......1. Green Urbanism >> a conceptual model for zero-emission and zero-waste urban design, which arose in the 1990s, promoting

Documents