Review Keberlanjutan Sistem Mega-Urban menuju SINERGI DAN KETERPADUAN PEMBANGUNAN KAWASAN JABODETABEKPUNJUR

8/10/2019 Review Keberlanjutan Sistem Mega-Urban menuju SINERGI DAN KETERPADUAN PEMBANGUNAN KAWASAN JABODETABEKPUNJUR

1/98

Review Keberlanjutan Sistem Mega-Urban

menuju

SINERGI DAN KETERPADUAN

PEMBANGUNAN KAWASAN

JABODETABEKPUNJUR

Ernan RustiadiP4W IPB


2/98

Topik yang diharapkan

(1) Pengelolaan wilayah hulu dan hilir kawasan

perkotaan jabodetbekpunjur

(2) Rencana penataan ruang Kawasan Perkotaan

Jabodetabekpunjur

(3) Rencana pengembangan kawasan

permukiman di kawasan perkotaan

jabodetabekpunjur


3/98

Background

Three Global major problems (Beatley, 2000):

(1) the increase in food demand

(2) population growth and

(3) environmental degradation

Cities and urban areas are viewed as one triggerof the problems (OECD, 2010).


4/98

Mega Urban concepts

megalopolis (Gottman 1961)

extended metropolitan region (McGee 1991)

mega urban regions (McGee 1995) world cities (Hall 1966; Friedmann 1986; Sassen 1994; Jones

and Douglass 2008)

global city-regions (Scott 2001)


5/98

Megacities: The Impacts

Mega urbanization impact on environment is

significant due to their rapid growth, high

population densities and high consumption

rate of their residents

Significantly affect the future prosperity and

sustainability of the world.

key issue: Sustainable mega-urban

expansion in developing countries


6/98

Spatial Pattern of Urban Expansion

concentric shape

polycentric shape

leapfroging sprawl

conurbation along transportation corridors.


7/98

Asian Mega Urbanization(McGee and others)

continuing outward expansion of extendedmetropolitan regions extends beyond cityadministrative boundaries.

No clear distinction between rural and urban

Blurred distinction between rural and urban Mixed land uses: agricultural & non-agricultural

lands take place side by side in suburban areas

region-based urbanization in East Asia and Southeast

Asia are often located in wet-rice production areas(Ginsburg et al. 1991)


8/98

Megacities: The Impacts

Mega urbanization impact on environment is

significant due to their rapid growth, high

population densities and high consumption

rate of their residents

Significantly affect the future prosperity and

sustainability of the world.

key issue: Sustainable mega-urban

expansion in developing countries


9/98

Global Urbanizaton

More than half of the worlds population now

lives in urban.

The United Nations (UN) expected that by

2050 about 66% of the worlds population willlive in cities (UN 2014).

Rapid urbanization in Asian developing

countries have been followed by excessive ofthe urban population concentration in verylarge urban agglomerations (megacities).


10/98

Megacities (UN 2014)

A metropolitan area (urban agglomeration) with > 10

million inhabitants.

Number of Megacities in the world:

1990: 10 (153 million, 7% urban population)

2014: 28 (453 million, 12% urban population)

2030: 41 megacities


11/98


12/98


13/98


14/98

Percentage urban and location of urban agglomerations

with at least 500,000 inhabitants, 2014


15/98


16/98

Global urban population growth is propelled by

the growth of cities of all sizes


17/98

Population distribution by city size

varies across major areas in 2014


18/98

RIHN Report (2014)

Kyoushu kankyou ruigatakara Megacity nogurobaru na renkan todoutai wo toraeru

From living environmentpoint of view tocapture globalmegacities dynamics

and cycles


19/98


20/98


21/98


22/98


23/98

(Nama of city) (Population in urban area)


24/98

(Nama of city) (Population in urban area)


25/98

Relation between population and population density


26/98

Relation between population and urban area


27/98

Population size rank, population, urban area,

population density, etc


28/98


29/98


30/98


31/98

List of 18 megacities


32/98

Kawasan Megacity Jakarta

danPiramida kependudukan 2011


33/98


34/98


35/98

Jakarta Megacity

(Greater Jakarta = Jabodetabek)

Largest megacity in South East Asia

seems to be underestimated, either by globalinstitutions (eg. UN) as well as by Indonesiainstitutions

UN (2014): Jakarta Megacitys population =10.2 million

RIHN (2014): Jakarta megacity as 2nd largestmegacity in the world with 27 millionsinhabitatns in 2010


36/98

POPULATION

Population

(perso

n)

1961 1971 1981 1991 2000 2010

Jakarta 2.906.533 4.576.009 6.555.954 7.108.359 8.385.639 8.502.818

Botabek 3.011.455 3.762.068 5.543.986 9.425.983 12.814.688 18.253.144

Jabotabek 5.917.988 8.338.077 12.099.940 16.534.342 21.200.327 26.755.962

Indonesia 97.085.600 119.208.200 151.314.600 182.940.100 203.456.005 237.641.326

-

5,000,000

10,000,000

15,000,000

20,000,000

25,000,000

30,000,000

1961 1971 1981 1991 2000 2010

Jakarta

Botabek

Jabotabek

Jakarta City

Bodetabek

Jabodetabek

A slowdown due

Asian Economic crisis

in 1997


37/98

Population Growth Rates

1961-1971 1971-1981 1981-1991 1991-2000 2000-2010

Jakarta 57,44 43,27 8,43 17,97 1,40

Botabek 24,93 47,37 70,02 35,95 42,44

Jabotabek 40,89 45,12 36,65 28,22 26,21

Indonesia 22,79 26,93 20,90 11,21 16,80

-

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

80.00

1961-1971 1971-1981 1981-1991 1991-2000 2000-2010

Jakarta

Botabek

Jabotabek

Indonesia

The highest

population growthrate of Jakarta City The peak ofsuburbanization

growth rate

(Bodetabek)

Re-suburbanization

?A slowdown due

Asian Economic

crisis since 1997

Population Share of Jabodetabek to National


38/98

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

Percentage(%)

1961 1971 1981 1991 2000 2004 2008 2010Year

Jakarta (I)

Botabek (II)

Jabotabek (I+II)

Population Share of Jabodetabek to NationalPopulation (%) 1961-2010

A slowdown due

Asian Economic crisis

in 1997

Peran PDRB sektor Industri Pengolahan terhadap pembentukan Total PDRB


39/98

Otokorelasi

Spasial Lokal(Kekuatan keterkaitan (Ii,l )

)

Kondisi

Eksisiting(Nilai Riil PDRB

(Xi,l) )

Model GWR(Koefisieni,l )

Perluasan interaksi spasial ekonomi

Pulau Jawa yang ditunjukkan dari nilai

koefisiennya justru di luar wilayah-

wilayah yang secara aktual merupakan

basis industri.Sektor ini menunjukkkan

kekuatan yang cukup signifikan di

bagian tengah/sebagian besar Jateng

hingga ke DIY terhadap pertumbuhan

total PDRB baik terhadap wilayahnya

sendiri maupun terhadap total PDRBPulau Jawa

Kuat keterkaitannyadi dalam kelompok

wilayahnya lemah

terhadap wilayah

lainnya

Kota-kota besar seperti:

Jakarta, Bogor, Depok

Tangerang (Jabodetabek),

Bandung dan sekitarnya,

Semarang, Surabaya dan

sekitarnya

Peran PDRB sektor Perdagangan, Hotel dan Restoran terhadap pembentukan Total PDRB


40/98

Perluasan sektor

perdagangan, hotel danrestauran di wilayahsekitar Jabodetabek-Bandung, bagian baratJawa Tengah, danbeberapa wilayah dibagian barat dan selatan

Jawa Timur

Kondisi Eksisiting

(Nilai Riil PDRB (Xi,l) )

Model

GWR

(Koefisien

i,l )

Otokorelasi

Spasial Lokal

(Kekuatan keterkaitan

(Ii,l ) )


41/98

Land Cover Change in Jabodetabek 1972-2012

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015

A

rea(Hectare)

Year

Built Up Paddy Field

Dry Land (Agriculture Non Paddy Field) Water Body

Forest

Decay Function model (Urban Sprawl Model) of Jabodetabek


42/98

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Jarak ke Monas (Km )

ProporsiRua

ngTerbangun

Tahun 1972

Tahun 1983Tahun 1992

Tahun 2000

Tahun 2005

ecay u c o ode (U ba Sp a ode ) o abode abe

RTB (i, t) = RTB (o, t) exp (abxi)

Average position of urbans

physical borders (RTBo) (0,223 -0,037xi); R

2= 0,76

x1 x2 x3

Urbanland

ratio

Distance to the center of Jakarta

Suburbanization of Jakarta results the expansion of housing and

industries in more distant areas from the city.

The fastest expansion of physical urban space was in the period of 1992-2000, in the

late period before the monetary crisis (before 1997).

1972

1983 19922000

2005 2010


43/98

Jabodetabeks

Land Use Change Scenarios

using

Land Transformation Model (LTM)

1972-2030


44/98

Illustration of how the neural nets were used with the driving variabel

Estimate error from

observed data seet

Input hidden output

Distance from urban landuse

1972

Distance from rivers

Distance from to arteri road

Distance from to county roadsDensity of arteri roads

Density of county roads

Distance from toll road

Assign weight to

estimate output

Presence=1 or absence=0 of a transition

Process repeated hundreds or thousands of

iterations in order to minimize error

Network

File

Neural Network Parameterization

2025 2030


45/98

Urban land use change

Scenario 1. population growth

rate is 1% per year until year

2025 and 2030

Scenario 2. population growth

rate is 2 % per year until year2025 and 2030

Scenario 3. Population growth

follows linear function for year

2025 and 2030

2025 2030

2025 2030


46/98

Urban land use change

A

B

Scenario 1. Population

growth follows the target

of economic growth 5 %per year until year 2025

and 2030

Scenario 2. Population

growth follows the target

of economic growth 6%

per year until year 2025

and 2030


47/98

P bli li d


48/98

Public policy and governance Ideological view: political necessity of building a

modern (world) city (Leaf 1994) 1980s: market-oriented policies to support of

corporate-led housing & industrial expansion;(Hudalah et al. 2013) to accelerate economic growth

Resulted enormous international capital influx(attract domestic and foreign investments)

Corruption & The weakness in the government's

ability to monitor and control the urbanization(Firman 2004; Server 1996)

i l d l d


49/98

Private-led settlements and new towns

Start from 1980s

1990s property boom, new towns rangingfrom 500 to 6,000 hectares were developedaround Jakarta alone (Firman, 2004; Winarso

and Firman 2002) Almost all new towns largely serve as

dormitory towns: socio-economically still

heavily dependent on the core, resultedmassive commuting and traffic (Firman 2004).


50/98

Private-manufacturing sectors

Industrial land development in suburban

China is often planned and carried out by

national state, rather than municipal or local

government (Wu and Phelps, 2008).

Start by government-supported industrial

parks and followed by private industrial parks

(Hudalah et al 2013).

T t ti id


51/98

Transportation corridor:

Highway roads

Establishment of highways affect urban form

by causing the population to spread out along

the highways

3 major highways: (1) The first highway is

Jagorawi (Jakarta-Bogor-Ciawi) Toll Road (to

the southern suburbs), (2) Jakarta-Cikampek

Toll Road (heading to Bandung, central andeastern Java) and (3) Jakarta-Merak Toll Road


52/98

Jakarta-Bandung Urban Corridor

New tpll road linking the city of Bandung and

Jakarta has shorten the travel time between

the two urban and forming Jakarta-Bandung

conurbation as a mega-conurbation.

This corridor is a continuation of meso-scale

conurbation from Jakarta to Cikampek.


53/98

Urban Expansion in

JakartaBandung Mega UrbanRegion (JBMUR)


54/98

Situation ap

The Greater Jakarta

(Jabodetabek Metropolitan Area)

Bandung

Metropolitan Area

POPULATION DENSITY


55/98

JAVA ISLAND

POPULATION DENSITYJAKARTA-BANDUNG MEGA URBAN REGION (JBMUR):

Population : 40.7 million (2010)

Area : 18,411 km2

Pop. Density : 2,211 person/km2

Population density (person/km2)

Based on PODES Data (BPS, 2010)

BANDUNG

JAKARTA

URBAN-RURAL STATUS


56/98

JAVA ISLAND

URBAN RURAL STATUS

Jakarta-Bandung Region (JBR) =

Greater Jakarta (Jabodetabek) + Bandung Metropolitan + Cianjur Regency +

Karawang Regency + Purwakarta Regency

BANDUNG

JAKARTA

Based on PODES Data (BPS, 2010)

Urban area

Rural area

Study area

CONURBATIONS


57/98

CONURBATIONS

CONCEPT

D dj=D -D ( )1 URBAN LAND RATIO


58/98

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

0 50 100 150 200 250

ULR_78

ULR_83

ULR_97

ULR_00

ULR_05

Adjusted distance (km)Jakarta Bandung

UrbanLand

Ratio

1 2 3

D adj=Dmax Dorg (west)

Dadj=Dmax+Dorg

Dadj=Dmax+130+Dorg (east)

1

2

3

URBAN LAND RATIO

vs.

ADJUSTED DISTANCE

Dadj=Dmax-Dorg (west)1 URBAN LAND RATIO


59/98

Adjusted distance (km)Jakarta Bandung

Dadj=Dmax+Dorg

Dadj=Dmax+130+Dorg (east)

1 2 3

2

3

Urban

Land

Ratio

URBAN LAND RATIO

vs.

ADJUSTED DISTANCE

Western side of

Jakarta

Eastern side

of Bandung


60/98

Impacts of Jakarta-Bandung

Conurbation

(1) land use-cover changes: rice field conversion

(2) Local and Global Environmental Impact

(3) raise disaster hazard

(4) changes in resources consuming pattern.


61/98

Rice fields conversion

Rapid urban expansion in

Jabotabek has caused land use

conversion and environmentalproblems as well.

Rice fields on Java

have been widely

known as one ofproduction centers

in Indonesia.

Spatial Distribution of Rice Fields in Java and Bali


62/98

Decay Function model (Urban Sprawl Model) of Jabodetabek

RTB (i t) = RTB (o t) exp (a bx )


63/98

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.30.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Jarak ke Monas (Km )

ProporsiRuangTerbangun

Tahun 1972

Tahun 1983Tahun 1992

Tahun 2000

Tahun 2005

RTB (i, t) = RTB (o, t) exp (abxi)

Average position of urbans

physical borders (RTBo) (0,223 -0,037xi); R

2= 0,76

x1 x2 x3

Urbanland

ratio

Distance to the center of Jakarta

Suburbanization of Jakarta results the expansion of housing and

industries in more distant areas from the city.

The fastest expansion of physical urban space was in the period of 1992-2000, in the

late period before the monetary crisis (before 1997).

1972

1983 19922000

2005 2010

URBAN SPRAWL IN JABODETABEK


64/98

Relation between urban land ratio and population density

y 2000 = 0.192Ln(x) - 1.242

R2= 0.62

y1992 = 0.176Ln(x) - 1.113

R2= 0.69

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000 80000 90000 100000

Kepadatan Penduduk (orang/Km2)

Rasiourban 2000

1992

The spatial trends of land utilization tends to become a more

inefficient land utilization (per capita land utility has been

increasing)

Urban physical expansion growth beyond its population growth

URBAN SPRAWL IN JABODETABEK


65/98

Amidst continued land use changes & urbansprawl in Jabodetabek region, variousenvironmental issues have been indicated:

temperature rise (urban heat island), flooding, landslide, etc.


66/98

Flood and landslides insidents follow top of

rainfall dynamic in rainy season, but the

probability for anthropogenic disastersincrease due to the decreasing of carrying

capacity

That caused by decreasing of conservatory

and agriculture area (Rustiadi et al., 2009)

Potential anthropogenic disasters such

landslides (and flood) in increasing

Floods and Landslides

in Jabodetabek Increase

Number of Desa/Villages


67/98

2000 2003 2006 2008 2011

6.00%

35.82%

19.53%

37.88%

22.61%

1.53%

5.59%

7.88%

17.94%

11.37%

Percentage of Desa/Villages

floods landslides

2000 2003 2006 2008 2011

102

609

332

644

338

26

95134

305

170

Number of Desa/Villagesfloods landslides

Years

Floods

Numbers of Village Persentage (%)

2000 102 6.00

2003 609 35.82

2006 332 19.53

2008 644 37.88

2011 338 22.61

Years

Landslides

Numbers of Village Persentage (%)

2000 26 1.53

2003 95 5.59

2006 134 7.88

2008 305 17.94

2011 170 11.37


68/98


69/98

Rainy Season

(maximum

discharge)

Dry Season

(minimum discharge)

Katulampa

Flood Control Station

(Bogor)

Flood Status:

- Siaga 1 (High)

- Siaga 2 (moderate)

- Siaga 3 (low)


70/98

17 Jan

066 Feb 01

26-28 Jan

999-14 jan 97

12 Mei 98

12, 14 Okt &

15 Nov 95

25 & 26

Mar 95

8 Jan 94

10 Jan 93

3 Des 92

24 jan & 28

Feb 92

21 Des 91

23 Jan

90 21 & 23 Jsn

05

12 , 17 Jan &12 Feb 04

14,15,,23,28-

30 Jan dan 1-

2 Feb 02

1-2

Feb 07

Record Daily Precipitation Level (mm/day) 1990-2010 in Puncak Area

and record of Major Floods in Jakarta


71/98

4 Feb 2007

3 Feb 200730 Jan 2002

21 Feb 2002

3 Jan 1996

6 Jan 1996

18 Jan

2005

21 Jan

1994

Record of Daily Precipitation Level (mm/day) 1990-2010 and Extreme Precipitation


72/98

The average of Monthly Precipitation Level (mm/day) 1990-2010 of Puncak Area

Mm/day

ChangesDry Season

Climate Change in Puncak Area

Rainy Season

Rainy Season


73/98

The average of Monthly Precipitation Level (mm/day) 1990-2010 of Puncak Area

Average of Flood Frequency at Katulampa Station (1990-2010 )


74/98

Yearly Flood Frequency at Katulampa Station (1990-2010 )

Yearly Flood Status Frequency at Katulampa Station (1990-2010 )


75/98

Flood Status at Katulampa Stattion

and the frequency of Flood status

Yearly Precipitation Level 1990-2011


76/98

Difference = mu (C1) - mu (C2)

Estimate for difference: 0.167500

95% CI for difference: (-4.496515, 4.831515)

T-Test of difference = 0 (vs not =): T-Value = 0.07 P-Value =

0.941 DF = 21

T-test for Independent Samples (Spreadsheet1) Note:

Variables were treated as independent samples

Mean -

Group 1

Mean -

Group 2 t-value df p

Valid N -

Group 1

Valid N -

Group 2

Std.Dev. -

Group 1

Std.Dev. -

Group 2

F-ratio -

Variances

p -

Variances

Var1 vs.

Var2 9.880.155 9.712.574 0.074727 22 0.941107 12 12 5.377.022 5.606.942 1.087.348 0.892032

Period of 1990-2000 Period of 2000-2011

Statistically there is no significant

different between

Average precipitation of period1990-2000 and period 2001-2011


77/98

Statistically there is a significant different in term of flood evidencebetween period 1990-2000 and period 2001-2011

Increase in environmental vulnerability (due to land use/cover

change) rather than change on precipitation

Flood Evidences Frequency

in Katulampa Station

Previous study (Rustiadi et al. 2002)


78/98

The Inconsistency

between Spatial Plan

and Existing Land

Cover (2001)

Production Forest Agric Land Uses

Agriculture Built Up Areas

Conservation Zone Built Up Areas

Spatial Plan of Jabodetabek +

Punjur 2008 2028


79/98

Punjur 2008-2028

(president Decree 54/2009)

Inconsistency between Land Use/Cover

vs Spatial Plan


80/98

vs Spatial Plan

Consistent

574.355,3 Ha

89,79%

Inconsistent

65286,0 Ha

10,21%


81/98


82/98

Land Use/Cover of Puncak Area


83/98

/

(1990, 2001 & 2010)

1990 2001

Shrub

Upland


84/98

Settlemen

tPlantationForest

Water Body

Idle Land/grass

Irrigated ricefield

Rainfed Ricefield

SettlementPlantation

Forest

Water Body

Idle Land/grass

Irrigated ricefield

Rainfed Ricefield

Shrub

Upland

a) Land use/cover inconsistency to spatial plan (%)

b) Land use/cover inconsistency to land capacity (%)

Inconsistency (%)

Consistency (%)

Inconsistency (%)

Consistency (%)


85/98


86/98

Permasalahan


87/98

Permukiman

PermukimanPertanian Lahan Kering


88/98

Inkonsistensi Penggunaan Lahan

Rencana Pola

Ruang(RTRW 2005-2025)

Status Kawasan

Hutan(BPLAN Kemenhut 2012)

Penggunaan

Lahan(Ikonos, 2012)

VS VS

Concluding Remarks


89/98

During the last two decades, the intensity of anthropogenic

disasters in Jabodetabek has increased due to declining

environmental carrying capacity

The decrease in carrying capacity associated with land Use/Cover

Change (LUCC) due to rapid urbanization pressure, especially due to

the decrease of greenery area

LUCC in jabodetabek tends to be inconsistent with spatial plan and

the carrying capacity

Future Jabodetabek environmental conditions are expected toincreasingly vulnerable to anthropogenic disaster. The intensity of

floods and landslides will continue to increase if there is no

significant change of control measures

Concluding Remarks


90/98

Regional Planning system should be supported by strong and

effective Controlling system.Urban sprawl & Suburbanization in Jabodetabek implicate on aninefficient resources allocation and environmental problems

The lack of integrated spatial development control in the long run

will become a threat to a sustainable development.

Amidst continuing global climate changes, various forms ofdegradation and destruction of natural resources and environmentare seemingly continue to happen and increase environment

vulnerability

Concluding Remarks

Isu dan Tantangan Penataan Ruang


91/98

g g

Kawasan Jabodetabek

1. Lingkungan: Indikasi terlampauinya dayadukung lingkungan

2. Ekonomi: Hilangnya Daya saya sebagai KotaGlobal

3. Sosial-Kelembagaan:

Lingkungan


92/98

LingkunganIndikasi terlampauinya daya dukung lingkungan

1) Alih fungsi lahandan inkonsistensi tata ruang

zona-zona berfungsi lindung (area resapan air)

dan pencegah banjir

2) Meningkatnya kerentanan lingkunganterhadap

dinamika lingkungan dan bencana (banjir dan

longsor)

3) Kontrubusi Signifikan pada Pemanasan Global

Ekonomi


93/98

EkonomiDaya saing Jabodetabek perekonomian nasional

1) Perspektif internasional: daya saing sebagai

kota global

2) Perspektif Nasional: Pusat perekonomiannasional

sistem transportasi yang sangat tidak efisien dan

boros sumberdaya

Sosial Kelembagaan:


94/98

Sosial-Kelembagaan:

1) Lemahnya koordinasi lintas sektoral nasional

2) Lemahnya koordinasi pembangunan lintas

wilayah administrasi (BKSP??)

Sejauh mana revisi perpres 54/2008


95/98

j p p

mengelaborasi

Urban sprawl

Environmental Impact

Food Security

Impact of High Consumption

Increase of Disaster Risk and Hazard

Governance

Apakah perpres 54/2009 masih memadai


96/98

sebagai payung regulasi penataan ruang?

Sinkronisasi pola & struktur ruang dg batas kaw hutan,

RTR terkait dan nomenklatur2 nya

Pembangunan infrastruktur: sistem Transportasi massal

terintegrasi Jabodetabekpunjur sebagai satu entitasKerjasama

antar daerah merupakan kunci

Kelembagaan koordinasi pengendalian danpemanfaatan ruang:

Koordinasi pembangunan, penanggulangan bencana dll

Organisasi dan aturan2 turunan


97/98


98/98

Aksi Penyelamatan Kawasan Hulu DAS Ciliwung Berbasis Masyarakat

PUNC K

yang Tenggelam, dan

Aksi Bersama Penyelamatannya

Review Keberlanjutan Sistem Mega-Urban menuju SINERGI DAN KETERPADUAN PEMBANGUNAN KAWASAN JABODETABEKPUNJUR

Documents