a creative placemaking approach to empower poor bandung
TRANSCRIPT
THE CREATIVE KAMPUNG: BRIDGING THE GAP A creative placemaking approach to
empower poor Bandung communities
INSTITUTION: UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM
DATE: 20TH OF JUNE 2014
THESIS PROJECT: URBAN POVERTY & INEQUALITY
CODE: 734301370Y
TUTOR: DR. DENNIS ARNOLD
NAME: VALÉRIE VAN LIESHOUT
STUDENT ID: 10216073
EMAIL: [email protected]
MOBILE: 0031636149330
ADDRESS: DRIEHOEKSTRAAT 80
1015 GL
AMSTERDAM
TABLE OF CONTENTS Acronyms ............................................................................................................................................. 4
Introduction ....................................................................................................................................... 5 1.1 Urban inequality in Bandung ............................................................................................................. 5 1.2 A time for change? ............................................................................................................................ 7
Theoretical framework ............................................................................................................... 10 2.1 The urban divide .............................................................................................................................. 10 2.2 Bridging the urban divide - placemaking ......................................................................................... 12
Placemaking ...................................................................................................................................... 12 Public space ....................................................................................................................................... 14 Social capital ..................................................................................................................................... 15 The participatory citizen .................................................................................................................... 15
2.3 Bridging the urban divide - creative opportunities ......................................................................... 18 The creative city ................................................................................................................................ 18 Different perspectives ....................................................................................................................... 20 Creative placemaking ........................................................................................................................ 22
Research design ............................................................................................................................. 24 3.1 Structuring creative placemaking implementation ......................................................................... 26
Placemaking strategies ..................................................................................................................... 26 Different tasks ................................................................................................................................... 28 Supporting factors and actors ........................................................................................................... 29
3.2 Structuring program outcomes ....................................................................................................... 31 3.3 Data collection ................................................................................................................................. 34
Findings & results .......................................................................................................................... 36 4.1 Kampung Dago Pojok ...................................................................................................................... 36 4.2 Project analysis ................................................................................................................................ 38
Komunitas Taboo .............................................................................................................................. 39 Bandung creative city forum ............................................................................................................. 42 Batik Fractal ...................................................................................................................................... 47
4.2 Project results analysis .................................................................................................................... 51 Impact on physical environment ....................................................................................................... 51 Impact on social capital .................................................................................................................... 55 Impact on economic values ............................................................................................................... 59 Impact on political empowerment .................................................................................................... 62
Discussion .......................................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
Conclusion .......................................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
References ........................................................................................................................................ 69
Appendix I: List of Creative Cities Network members ...................................................... 73
Appendix II: Project location map in Dago Pojok ............................................................... 74
2
Appendix III: Kampung Kreatif implementation ................................................................ 75
3
ACRONYMS
3Ts Talent, Tolerance and Technolgy AAM American Architectual Foundation BCCF Bandung Creative City Forum BFC Batik Fractal Cooperative BJR Bandung Jakarta Region CCI Cultural and Creative Industry CCN Creative Cities Network CCPs Creative City Policies ITB Bandung Institute of Technology MIT Massachusetts Institute of Technology NGOs Non Governmental Organizations KBU Government Business Funding Group PKBM Community Learning Centre PPS Project for Public Space PPPs Public-Private-Partnerships UNDP United Nations Development Programme UNESCO United Nation’s Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization USCM United States Conference of Mayors
4
INTRODUCTION
1.1 URBAN INEQUALITY IN BANDUNG Bandung is an Indonesian city located on the west bank of Java near to the capital Jakarta. Its core
population counts over 2.5 million inhabitants. Due to massive urban growth, the city is
increasingly incorporating surrounding settlements, comprising a total of 4.15 million people
(Widyarini Hapsariniaty et al., 2013). Like many cities nowadays, Bandung is subjected to the
urban divide, which is: ”a fragmentation of society underlying to the way in which space and
opportunities are produced, appropriated, transformed and used” (UN-Habitat, 2008). Bandung’s
Gini-index of 0.52 reveals an unequal income distribution, in comparison to 0.33 in Europe.
Unequal income opportunities of Bandung’s inhabitants have many different causes. Some are
obvious and some are still unknown. Neoliberal urban development, mega-urbanization, the Asian
crisis and political decentralization explain the underlying trends of Bandung’s urban divide.
Neoliberalism in the global South did not happen according to the growth guidelines of Northern
institutions as conceived by the World Bank and United Nations. The post-colonial development
state was based on the idea that the state had to play important roles in economic development
and that Southern states should cooperate with each other to achieve progress of
‘underdeveloped’ countries. “The development state is a political economy that combines
elements of both market and planning to generate a more egalitarian distribution of income and
wealth” (Radice, 2008). It is not before Suharto’s presidency in the late 1980s that neoliberalism
and deeper integration with global capitalism, fitting within the development state discourse,
started showing results. A decline in poverty and improvements in other welfare indicators such as
infant mortality rates and education became visible during this period (Booth, 2005). Such
Comment [Kv1]: Difference South & North??
Comment [Kv2]: Meaning what?
5
socioeconomic developments have accelerated rural-to-urban migration in Indonesia, resulting in
mega-urbanization (McGee, 1995). The Bandung Jakarta Region (BJR) counted over 32 million
people in 2004 (Firman, 2009). Urban development of this region emerged in line with neoliberal
strategies in which the needs of global capital have mainly defined the urban landscape. Upper
and middle class new towns and emerging businesses besides infrastructural developments
characterise this.
However, neoliberal urban development leads to uneven distribution of benefits in which poor
communities are often completely missed out (Douglass, 2000). Neither the market nor the
government have been able to provide basic needs to all the Bandung citizens. After political
decentralization, local authorities gained more autonomy, which resulted in bureaucracy and
corruption instead of strong implementation of development policies (Takeshi, 2006). Another
factor that has triggered uneven distribution of benefits is the Asian financial crisis in the 90s. The
crisis decreased the government ability to implement pro-poor policies resulting in an urban crisis
(Firman, 1999). High unemployment rates, decreased government revenues, and weak spatial
development planning have amplified urban poverty and thus urban inequality.
As poorer groups do not have resources or power to access formal urban development systems
(registered employment and tax-paying housing), they have got trapped in informal job circuits
and unattractive neighbourhoods with poor living conditions. Social exclusion and the urbanization
process have led to the development of urban slums alongside railway tracks, riversides, and
graveyards in Bandung. Many of these slum villages, called ‘kampungs’, lost their rural character
and have transformed into poor urban areas in which government policies largely failed to meet
the basic needs of its residents. Besides emerging kampungs, a growing middle class, on the other
Comment [Kv3]: What?
6
hand, started to segregate themselves in gated communities and new towns to avoid crime and
enjoy security and convenient living conditions (Widyarini Hapsariniaty et al., 2013).
Even though the government has not succeeded in enforcing pro-poor urban planning policies,
there have emerged theories to so to say “bridge the gap”. Concepts like ‘the inclusive city’ and
‘the right to the city’ aim to equalize social, economic, political, and spatial opportunities from a
bottom-up perspective (UN-Habitat, 2012). A not much deliberated concept that is based on
elements of the above-mentioned concepts is creative placemaking. Community empowerment is
the main emphasize of this concept.
1.2 A TIME FOR CHANGE? Nowadays, placemaking is a common tool for community and urban development. What began in
the 1960s as a reaction against auto-centric planning and bad public spaces has expanded to the
inclusion of concerns about healthy living conditions, social justice, community-capacity building
and economic revitalization (Silverberg et al., 2013). Placemaking projects can differ from place to
place but their general characteristic is their emphasis on creating positive change for
communities through the transformation of a physical, mainly public space. David Harvey’s
concept of the right to the city is a key foundation for the placemaking movement of today as well
as Jane Jacob’s theories about the use of public space (Harvey, 1989; Jacobs, 1961).
The topic of this research however is creative placemaking. Creative placemaking is gaining more
significance as a bottom-up development tool these days by incorporating elements of the
creative economy. The case of Bandung offers an interesting opportunity for poverty reduction
based on creative placemaking (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Comment [Kv4]:
Comment [Kv5]: Beetje vaag nog
7
Bandung’s selection in 2008 to become member in the Creative Cities Network (CCN) formed by
the United Nation’s Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) stimulates its
creative economy. This strategy is based on attracting creative professionals and offering
education in the creative sector in order to create a vibrant and profitable creative economy. The
creative economy is based on the production of ideas and the exploitation of the human mind
(Hawkins, 2002). This sector currently comprises seven percent of Bandung’s GDP. Unfortunately,
due to a weak socioeconomic status and a lack of opportunities (what kind of opp?), many poor
communities struggle to get included into this market-based “creative” system. These market-
based systems are exactly what Jacobs, Harvey and Lefebvre are criticising. However, creative
placemaking does offer interesting opportunities to enhance the production of value and
community life in poor neighbourhoods (Markusen & Gadwa, 2010).
Creative placemaking is a brand-new concept that emerged less than ten years ago. As the
creative economy becomes more significant and urban inequality continues to grow, creative
placemaking should be explored more. This research therefore aims to explore: how creative
placemaking in a poor Bandung neighbourhood serves as a bridge for the urban divide. This will be
explored through the following sub-questions:
1. ”Which creative placemaking projects exist in kampung Dago Pojok in Indonesia?
2. How have they been implemented?
3. Did they improve physical, social, economic and political conditions to empower the
community?”
Before the results of the research are revealed and elaborated on the literature review will
provide the relevant themes, concepts and critiques around the topic of creative placemaking. The
theoretical framework is built up as following: the first part goes deeper into the urban divide and
Comment [Kv6]: Dit is the rechtvaardiging van je werk: moet sterker!
Comment [Kv7]: Kromme zin
8
how it is visible in Bandung. This is relevant because creative placemaking derives from unequal
empowerment opportunities in urban environments. The second part describes the placemaking
concept in detail. Placemaking is a rather extensive concept wherefore all the relevant concepts
where it is based on are given as well including their critiques. The third and last section of the
framework explains the creative dimension of creative placemaking in detail and why it is relevant
in today’s world. This section will emphasize why Bandung in particular is the right place for
creative placemaking, according to literatures. After the literature review, the research design
explains what research strategies, operationalizing and method is chosen in order to answer the
research question.
Chapter 1 describes ….
Chapter 2 focuses on … blablabla. In 5 min herschreven!
9
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
2.1 THE URBAN DIVIDE The urban divide is ”a fragmentation of society underlying to the way in which space and
opportunities are produced, appropriated, transformed and used” (UN-Habitat, 2008). The
separation of uses and degrees of prosperity are so obvious in the developing world that the
middle incomes class lives in well-serviced and well-built neighbourhoods, whereas the poor are
confined to inner city or peri-urban settlements and slums. As mentioned in the introduction,
Bandung’s urban divide and urban crisis have several causes. This section will elaborate on one
underlying cause in particular: the neoliberal urban development in the context of Indonesia.
Neoliberal urban development has a big accountability in Bandung’s urban divide due to its
“survival of the fittest” character and limited success opportunities for people with informal
backgrounds (Douglass, 2000). Neoliberalism has infiltrated both commercial and housing sectors.
Before Bandung turned into a service city in the 90s it was well-known for its manufacturing
businesses and enormous outlet stores, attracting many visitors from all over Java. However,
privatization and soaring land prices have pushed manufacturing businesses to the countryside.
The shift towards the service economy became visible in inner city office and commercial
developments, which has limited room for local businesses (Firman, 1999). International investors
took over the housing sector. This is visible in new towns and gated communities that have largely
failed to serve those who are in need most. The shortage of adequate and affordable housing
resulted in slum formation (Leisch, 2000). These forms of neoliberal development are mainly
serving the needs of global investors who in most cases (not all) do not distribute benefits evenly
among local urban communities (Harvey, 2012; Peck, 2005; Ross 2009).
10
The urban divide is present in every city and visible in many different domains. In economic terms,
enormous income gaps are visible in Bandung (Reerink, 2006). Social inequality can be found in
the numbers of school dropouts in poor communities (Anderson et al., 2010). Many cases about
corruption reveal the political inequalities (Takeshi, 2006). The most visible divide within Bandung
is the space divide. The space divide in the developing world is characterized by the separation of
uses of urban space. Invisible and visible borders divide well-built settlements from urban slums.
Gated communities, which are segregated areas where higher middle classes concentrate,
emerged as a result of increased income gaps (Widyarini Hapsariniaty et al., 2013). On the other
side, there is a rise of urban kampungs, which are villages that lost their rural character and
developed into poor neighbourhoods in unattractive urban areas. Many kampong communities
have a high incidence of crime, have deteriorated living conditions, are socially excluded from
formal urban systems, and lack social interaction (UN-Habitat, 2008).
Public space is a tool to enhance social cohesion and cooperation among community members,
which will become clear in the next part. However, in many poor communities public space is
lacking in quantity as well as in quality. Public space in Bandung is increasingly scarce as private
parties are occupying the space for commercial developments. Less public space means a decrease
of Bandung’s public life and opportunities for social interaction. This resulted in an on-going
negotiation between government, private enterprises, and citizens at all levels of society for the
right to use that space (Conrad et al, 2008). As a reaction against the space divide, the Bandung
Creative City Forum (BCCF) founded two public spaces, which aim to serve the general public and
creative community: ‘Simpul space #1 and #2’ (BCCF, 2013).
11
2.2 BRIDGING THE URBAN DIVIDE - PLACEMAKING Academics, professionals and government officials realise that the (socioeconomic?) conditions of
poor communities, even within the same city, vary much. An effective way to address poor
situations in communities is to empower them. Empowerment is a process through which
individuals, as well as local groups and communities, identify and shape their lives and the kind of
society they live in. “Empowerment means that people are able to organize and influence change
on the basis of their access to knowledge, political processes and financial, social, and natural
resources” (Slocum et al., 1995). Placemaking is a community empowering strategy based on the
joint development of urban public space. This chapter shall first describe the concept of
placemaking and how it has developed overtime. It will then discuss the themes related to
placemaking, involving: public space, social capital, and the participatory citizen.
PLACEMAKING Placemaking emerged as a critique on the top-down approach to shape and built the urban
environment and to overtake public space by private parties, which belonged to the citizens before.
Lynch (1960) and Jacobs (1961) were one of the first urban sociologists that began questioning how
public space was appropriated and for what purpose. Jacobs wrote: “there is a quality even meaner
than outright ugliness or disorder, and this meaner quality is the dishonest mask of pretended order,
achieved by ignoring or suppressing the real order that is struggling to exist and to be served”. These
critiques emphasize the importance of community involvement in the transformations of physical
space and how this can be achieved through right to transform space (Silverberg et al., 2013).
One of the first organizations engaging with place-based and community-centred approaches to
urban planning is the ‘Project for Public Spaces’ (PPS), which was founded in 1975 by Fred Kent.
Together with William H. Whyte, Kent worked on the ground breaking ‘Street Life Project’ in which
12
the real needs and aspirations of people in New York communities were first discovered. PPS was
one of the first organizations to define placemaking: “placemaking is about how we collectively
shape our public realm to maximize shared value, which is rooted in community based-
participation”. According to PPS, effective placemaking exploits the local community’s assets,
inspiration, and potential in order to create good public spaces that promote people’s health,
happiness and well-being. (PPS, 2012)
The department of Urban Studies and Planning at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)
completed an extensive research on placemaking in 2013. Placemaking evolves on different scales
and through different strategies. Diverse local conditions and situations generate many
approaches to implement placemaking strategies. However, all are based on the same principles:
emphasizing flexibility; embracing temporariness; sharing information; and drawing on innovative
sources of influence (Silverberg et al., 2013). Another emphasis is the importance of process over
product. Where ‘product’ refers to the place that is being transformed, the ‘process’ is about the
making the place. It is due the process that connections are built, civic engagement occurs and
citizens can be empowered. The MIT research states the following: “eventual success derives from
successful social capital building, in which communities are enabled to form identities and a sense
of community. This happens through the collective making of place” (Silverberg et al., 2013). Point
of critique is that, like all democratic processes, the reality is much more chaotic. Opinions clash,
motives contradict, strong personalities dominate, and politics, money, or bad media stories can
sidetrack the entire process. Good places still take years to become great places. Placemaking is a
collective act that happens in the public space.
13
PUBLIC SPACE At its core, placemaking is a return of public space to people. Among public spaces we understand
streets, sidewalks, squares, public buildings, parks, beaches, waterfronts, public markets.
Lefebvre’s (1991) work on urbanisms and the creation of space argues that people have a
fundamental right to the city and its public space. Why is public space so important to people? As
Harvey (1989) wrote: “the right to the city is far more than the individual liberty to access urban
resources: it is a right to change ourselves by changing the city.” Moreover, Harvey refers to public
space as a common right since the transformation is based on collective power to reshape
urbanization processes. Another vision on public space is Oldenburg’s (1999) concept of ‘third
places’. Third places are places of social gathering and community get-togethers. According to
Oldenburg, community connections and life-experience exchanges happen in urban public spaces.
With regard to placemaking, social interaction often occurs in third places over the comforts of
home (Mehta, 2007). Some other authors (who? Otherwhise delete sentence) refer explicitly to
the enhancement of community sentiment within public space.
Carr et al., (1992) argue that public space is “the common ground where people carry out the
functional and ritual activities that bind a community”. Swanwick et al., (2003) mention how
community spirits are created through social interaction between all sectors of society. This
interaction should happen on neutral, thus public ground. Rivlin (1971) stresses the symbolic
interaction that residents have with the physical environment. He describes ‘place attachment’ as:
“a positive affective bond or association between individuals and the environment.” The public
space serves as a means for communities to attach to places and to form identities. Besides, it
fosters social relations and the exchange of knowledge and experiences of community members,
which nurtures social capital.
14
SOCIAL CAPITAL Involvement in community life has a positive impact on the well-being of individuals and leads to
community empowerment and the ability to preserve it (Ahlbrandt & Cunningham, 1979). Social
capital building is the key success factor in community empowerment. It is a widely discussed
concept and used in many different fields. Bourdieu (1983) gave one of the first definitions: “social
capital is the aggregate of the actual or potential resources which are linked to possession of a
durable network of relationships of mutual acquaintance and recognition.” Field (2003) also
reflects on social capital theory as a relationships matter: “social networks are valuable assets that
enable people to build communities, to commit themselves to each other, and to knit the social
fabric”.
The sense of belonging, trust and tolerance, he argued, brings great benefits to people. In relation to public space, Putnam’s (1993; 2000) writings are very influential. He launched social capital as a popular focus for research and policy discussion. The term is central in his arguments on the reclaim of public life by civil society. According to him, civic and personal health was at risk in North-America from decreased community activity. He describes social capital as: “the connections among individual’s social networks and the norms of reciprocity and trustworthiness that arise from that.” Putnam (year) makes a distinction between ‘loose’ and ‘strong’ connections between people. Strong ties are connections between community members. Strong ties sustain in community sentiment and identity formation for example. A community however needs loos ties with other communities and institutions in order to enable an influx of outside sources or approvals that help communities to advance (Putnam, 2000). Placemaking cannot evolve in communities that lack connections with supporting parties such as funders, designers or government institutions (Silverberg et al., 2013). Without a favourable institutional and democratic context in which citizens are enabled to participate in transforming space, placemaking could not happen.
THE PARTICIPATORY CITIZEN The participatory citizen has become almost synonymous to a decreased citizen dependence on
social services and other welfare arrangements (Marinetto, 2003). Participatory or active
citizenship requires people to take personal responsibility for employment, health and finance
for example (Borgi & Van Berkel, 2003). However also for social cohesion, safety and liveability of
15
communities, which is more relevant to placemaking (Newman & Tonkens, 2011). Governments
are more and more promoting civil engagement in volunteering and community building projects
(Muehlebach, 2013). However, there are some sceptics towards participation. As Twigg (2001)
puts it: “the influence of participatory ideas and approaches should not be exaggerated. They
have extended their influence rapidly since the early 1980s, but the prevailing approach to
development remains a top-down one”. He refers to people in power positions being reluctant to
hand over authority to the grassroots. Many organizations have called their work participatory
but have not changed the substance of their approach he argues.
Community empowerment and participatory citizenship in Bandung have been enabled after
decentralization of the political regime, which improved bureaucratic efficiency to enhance the
quality of community life and effective citizen participation at the neighbourhood level (Takeshi,
2006). The 2003 Consultation on Planning and Development Activities have introduced higher
levels of engagement in decision-making by locals and participatory planning. This means a shift
from citizens making a ‘wish list’ to citizens taking action. Cooperation between civil society and
the local government has become the main driver for local governance reforms. Takeshi (2006)
recognizes flaws in these bottom-up mechanisms: (1) it is not clear how each citizen gets involved,
(2) activities of higher levels do not always meet people’s necessities and (3) they are not always
transparent and accountable.
This part of the literature review showed the importance of understanding public space, social
capital and the participatory citizen in relation to placemaking. As has become clear from the
above sections public space is the core of placemaking for several reasons: (1) it is the space being
transformed for the advantage of the community, (2) it serves as a identity generator that the
community can relate to and (3) it fosters social connections among community members. Social
16
connections can generate trust and reciprocity on which social capital is based. Social capital
underlies to placemaking because: (1) it fosters community sentiment, which is crucial to achieve
community capacity to execute placemaking projects and (2) it generates the exchange of
knowledge and experience that can help in defining the community’s needs that that are
addressed with placemaking. Where social capital fosters mutual relationships within a
community, the participatory citizen concept shows the importance for communities to foster
connections that surpass the boundaries of the community. In relation to placemaking this is
important because placemaking projects involve people from different background and scales that
cooperate with each other.
17
2.3 BRIDGING THE URBAN DIVIDE - CREATIVE OPPORTUNITIES The previous section described how placemaking involves public space, social capital and the
participatory citizen. In order to create opportunities for community empowerment. Moreover,
placemaking is about exploiting local resources and human capacity. According to Soemardi
(2006): “It is important to understand how specific local knowledge regarding human creativity
and lived-experience from different cultural contexts can contribute to urban community life”. This
section will elaborate on Bandung’s creative city status and how this offers opportunities to
include cultural and creative activities in placemaking projects in Bandung.
THE CREATIVE CITY Many cities in the world have adopted Creative City Policies (CCPs) to encourage economic growth
based on cultural potential. UNESCO’s Creative City Network (CCN) has defined seven categories
on which cities can base their CCPs: literature, film, music, crafts, design, media arts and
gastronomy. Bandung is currently opting to be designated as City of Design (BCCF, 2013).
Appendix I shows a list of all the designated creative cities by UNESCO (UNESCO-UNDP, 2013).
Florida (2002) was the first to write about the importance of the creative class within a city.
Florida’s creative core includes: scientist, engineers, professors, poets, artists, entertainers, actors,
designers and architects. These creative individuals that drive the urban economy are perceived to
be highly mobile and are attracted to creative places based on: Talent, Tolerance and Technology
(3T’s). Tolerance refers to openness, inclusiveness and diversity to all ethnicities; Talent is based
on the number of bachelor degrees of people within a city; and Technology refers to innovation
and high-technology concentrations. Successful cities score high on all three T’s (Forida, 2004).
Research on Bandung as creative city has shown the presence of Talent. More than 70% of
Bandung’s population is below the age of 30 and they are provided with a good creative
18
infrastructure. The city counts over 40 universities that teach various creative courses (Anderson
et al., 2010). Tolerance is applicable as historically Bandung is a very mixed social and ethnic city
that lived together for over hundreds of years. Technology is the least present because all the
knowledge-intensive businesses concentrate in nearby Jakarta, which serves as the business and
financial hart of the country (BCCF, 2013).
The creative city concept as it has been presented by Florida has many critiques. Jamie Peck (2005)
for example argues that: “stratification and displacement are intrinsic to the creative city as the
interests of certain residents and city parts are being advanced over others”. Public and private
funds flow into certain areas in which a talented minority commands huge premiums, while others
get stuck in unstable labour markets and low-end service jobs. Dolowitz (2003) and Harvey (1989)
pointed to the failure of policy transfers from the Western world to developing countries.
Uninformed, incomplete and inappropriate transfers are the basis for policy transfer failures. As a
result, Bandung citizens, professionals, creative people and government officials have diverging
ways to describe the aim of the Bandung CCPs, which have been adopted since 2008. Soemardi
(2006), for example, adds the need for better understanding on how local knowledge of creative
communities in developing countries, particularly the informal sector, contributes to the
continuing discourse of community-based creative cities.
Bandung got involved with creative city strategies in several ways. After Bandung got selected to
become a creative city by UNESCO in 2008 it was recognized for two things: (1) as a creative hub
that promotes socio-economic and cultural development and (2) as a socio-cultural cluster that
connects socio-culturally diverse communities to create healthy urban environments. Besides that
the British Council selected Bandung as the research site for a three-year pilot project on creative
cities in Asia and it has been named as the home of Indonesia’s Young Entrepreneurs twice
19
(Anderson et al., 2010). The Indonesian government identified the following 15 cultural sectors
since then: advertising, architecture, art markets, handicraft, design, fashion, visual industry,
interactive games, music, performance art, print publishing, software, radio & television, research
& development and the culinary industry (Kelompok Kerja Indonesia Design Power, 2008).
The Cultural and Creative Industry (CCI) in Bandung has been present for a long time. However,
since the political decentralization, creative industries have been triggering a new wave of cultural
movements with the collaboration of artists, the local government and international agencies. An
example of this is the founding of the Bandung Creative City Forum (BCCF) in December of 2008.
This cross-community and cross-profession independent organization and platform provides the
larger (creative) community of Bandung with an educational approach towards creativity, planning
and city infrastructure improvements. It is aiming to support the development of the creative
economy by empowering creative entrepreneurs as well as communities as a whole. The ‘Helar
Festival’ is one example of this. This annual event incorporates 15 creative industries celebrates
the cultural and creative economy in the region, while knowledge and experience about cultural
and creative activities is being shared among people (Aritenang, 2012).
DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES Anderson et al. (2010) explored different viewpoints of people on what role the CCPs in Bandung
have. The authors came up with four diverging visions including critiques. Most government
officials and some creative professionals see the creative policies as a way to create a regional
creative centre and a hub of creative minds. The promotion of great architecture and design to
attract creative workers fits in this perspective. This vision is most in line with Florida’s theory and,
thus, criticizes that certain creative groups are excluded from participating.
20
Others saw the primary focus of the creative city policies as a tool for addressing the loss of textile
manufacturing jobs in Bandung. In other words: as a strategy to encourage economic development
and increase employment, especially in the T-shirt production. This vision of creative policies is
most similar to other cities in developing economies. A critique on this vision is the failure to
examine the economic impacts on the informal industries. The economic benefits for kampung
dwellers are ignored in this vision. Only via trickle-down impacts, such as the improvement of
public space, the poor communities are reached.
Again others viewed creative city policies as a tool for assisting local grassroots artists. While
artists require little direct support from the government and are happy to work with ‘Do It
Yourself’ philosophies, they felt the creative community would be more productive by providing
certain resources. For example, empowering communities via upgrading public space but also by
guaranteeing freedom of expression. Critique on the grassroots vision is that many underground
creative groups do not have the desire in the first place to be incorporated into CCPs. They prefer
to focus on social networking as a tool for creativity and innovation.
The last vision is based on city building. To some, creativity was primarily a tool for achieving
broader city development aims in which creativity enables innovative ways to solve a broad range
of urban problems. Besides increasing employment, strategies to improve public spaces in
kampungs are also part of this. Critiques on this vision are mainly referring to other social
problems within the city that are more important to address. People complained about financial
security, the lack of public spaces and a lack in knowledge transfer to foster creative innovation.
21
CREATIVE PLACEMAKING As discussed in the previous section, the role of creativity in urban development and city policies is
contested. Nevertheless, one cannot deny culture that has become an important driving force in
today’s economy wherefore it is being adopted in many city strategies (Kooiman & Vliet, 2000).
Landry (2003) argues that cities are changing dramatically in ways that require a paradigm shift to
solve urban problems. Human creativity has become a major urban resource, which can address
urban problems while creating liveable, vibrant and attractive cities. A growing body of evidence
indicates that fostering cultural and creative activity is an essential strategy in building quality of
place, maximizing talent, enhancing sustainability and defining competitiveness in the knowledge
economy. Creative placemaking is the tool to realise creative potential in economic and social
benefits for the community.
Markusen and Gadwa (2010) worked together on the ‘creative placemaking paper’ for the United
States Conference of Mayors (USCM) and the American Architectural Foundation (AAM). They
defined creative placemaking as follows: “it is an evolving field of practice that intentionally
leverages the power of the arts, culture and creativity to serve a community’s interest while driving
a broader agenda for change, growth and transformation in a way that also builds character and
quality of place”. According to them, the involvement of the creative economy generates: (1) more
local expenditures, (2) less vacant and unutilized land, (3) higher local taxes that improve
maintenance and (4) it nurtures the self-employment of artists. Bandung’s culture of everyday
urbanisms provides the right context for creative placemaking on a community level. Bandung’s
urbanisms are characterized by public spaces turned into ‘urban living rooms’ that foster activities
for the wider community such as festivals, street markets, open-air cinemas and outdoor
workshop (Soemardi and Damajani, 2008).
Comment [Kv8]: Herschrijf
22
Bandung’s government adopted CCPs as a means to evolve as a creative city. This part of the
literature review has shown that the creative city topic is enormously broad involving different
definitions, many critiques and institutions implementing the concepts in practice in different
ways. Fact is that the influence of creativity and culture as a means to trigger the economy is
gaining significance today (see appendix II). The different views on the concept show how this
topic does not pursue a one-fits-all approach, which is where creative placemaking taps into the
story. Creative placemaking has the power to define specific local cultural and creative
opportunities while turning these into benefits for the community. Through the transformation of
space and community involvement, both the economic needs and social goals are included.
23
RESEARCH DESIGN
The research question: ”which creative placemaking projects exist in kampung Dago Pojok in
Indonesia? How have they been implemented? Did they improve physical, social, economic and
political conditions to empower the community?” This research is a combination of an exploratory
and descriptive case study. The scope of the case study is defined by the boundaries of kampung
Dago Pojok (see appendix II). Dago Pojok has been the first community in Bandung where creative
placemaking projects have been implemented according to specific local traits (BCCF, 2013). The
scale of this research is the community level because issues are being addressed at the
neighbourhood scale.
A case study according to Yin (2003) applies when the impact of a phenomenon, in this case
creative placemaking, is being influenced by contextual conditions, which are bounded to the
Dago Pojok community. Silverberg et al., (2013) agree on how different local conditions request
appropriate strategies to tackle various problems that fit the neighbourhood’s characteristics. The
first question is based on exploratory research methods and the second and third question are
based on descriptive methods. The overarching theme of this research, which is creative
placemaking in Dago Pojok, is highly underexposed in academic literatures. Therefore, an
explanatory approach is avoided due to a lack of available data on the topic limits the opportunity
to reveal causality.
The analysis of this research is structured as following. The first part deals with the first two
questions. It explores which projects have been implemented and by whom. Then, a description of
the implementation of creative community projects will be given. The second part of the analysis
deals with the third question and defines what specific physical, social, economic and political
24
conditions the projects have created for the empowerment of the community. The second and
third questions are both analysed trough pre-defined models. The part of the analysis that deals
with the second question is grounded on the “structuring creative placemaking implementation
model”, which is based on a combination of Silverberg et al. their (2013) “virtuous cycle on
placemaking” and the “creative placemaking facets” as conceived by DeNatale & Wassel (2007).
The part that deals with the third question is structured according to different pre-defined
indicators of (1) use and activity of public space, (2) social capital and (3) economic impact as
defined by MIT research on placemaking (Silverberg et al., 2013). Indicators of the fourth outcome
category, (4) political empowerment, are based on Hingor’s (2010) research on “participation in
placemaking”.
The relevance of this research comes to light when tapping into the global problem of urban slum
formation (Hingor, 2010). Among other factors, rapid urbanisation together with a decreased
ability of authorities to address the needs of the entire population calls for more self-reliance of
the individual and, where possible, the community. Creative placemaking gains more significance
as a bottom-up, community approach to better people’s standard of living and avoid further
deterioration of living conditions (Markusen & Gadwa, 2010). The creative aspect of placemaking
is relevant for two reasons. First, cultural and creative industries, which are one of the three main
aspects of creative placemaking, encourage the emergence of new types of economic activity in
declining local economies. Second, through the creation of sustainable jobs and the making of
more attractive city neighbourhoods, creative placemaking becomes a means to serve social and
territorial cohesion, which is lacking in many city neighbourhoods across the globe (Inteli, 2011).
25
3.1 STRUCTURING CREATIVE PLACEMAKING IMPLEMENTATION
PLACEMAKING STRATEGIES There are several strategies to implement placemaking. Distinction can be made between short-
and long-term placemaking. Short-tem placemaking has a short implementation period but its
long-term effects on the community can still be significant. Investments are less high and the
results can be quickly derived, which boost the community sentiment. Examples of short-term
placemaking projects are community cleans ups, painting and decorating of public space and
simple events such as fairs or street markets. In most cases short-term events are being followed-
up by long-term events. (PPS, 2012)
Long-term strategies aim to increate long-term values within the community. It is the continuing
making of place according to an iterative process. Steps of the program, which will be discussed in
the next section, are being repeated continuously during long-term placemaking. It is important to
reflect on programs to assure long-term results. Long-term strategies are a tool to trigger longer
engagement of the community to the project. However, it can sometimes be challenging to keep
the community enthusiastic. Examples are: parks, community centres, flex-work spaces,
workshops, libraries, event spaces etc. Besides short- and long-term projects several other
strategies can be distinguished. (PPS, 2012)
Some communities choose to implement cultural and creative activities when executing
placemaking programs. Several authors refer to this as ‘creative placemaking’ (Markusen &
Gadwa, 2010). Creative placemaking exists through combining the creative economy with
placemaking. Figure 3.1.1 shows how the facets of placemaking (people, organizations, and places)
relate to creative workers, creative industries, and creative communities: a creative dimension is
being added to ‘standard’ placemaking. Creative workers refer to individual workers active in
26
(creative) industries that involve creative skills. Creative and cultural industries are those
employing high concentrations of artists in their workforce. The creative community is linked to
space. It refers to the spatial setting for art and cultural production and consumption such as:
creative infrastructure, forums, and services. (Markusen & Gadwa, 2010)
Figure 3.1.1: Facets of creative placemaking (Source: DeNatale & Wassell, 2007)
Event-based placemaking is another placemaking strategy, focusing on single events. These events
can range from very small events, such as book markets or open-air cinema, to bigger events, such
as yearly music and food festivals. Community design for large products is a placemaking strategy
that focuses on big projects, such as the development of parks and squares. This strategy includes
the local community in the designing phase (Silverberg et al., 2013). A final note regarding the
implementation of strategies: several strategies can be implemented simultaneously and more
activities can happen at the same time depending on the scope and range of the projects.
27
People (creative workers)
Businesses, organizations and
entrepreneurs (cultural
industries)
Places (creative communities)
DIFFERENT TASKS Placemaking has been implemented in many different places across the world using different
tools, actors and strategies. These strategies resulted in many different, yet successful outcomes.
The MIT department of Urban Planning and Urban Studies has put effort in designing a single
model that encompasses the primary entry points into placemaking projects, which is very helpful
to apply on other cases too. This model is derived from thirteen diverging case studies. The entry
points, simply referred to as tasks, vary among different projects depending on contextual
conditions, resources available and strategies applied. The entry points, which could be occupied
by the same actor too, normally encompass: organizing, programming & budgeting; designing;
funding; hosting of stakeholder events; promoting; monitoring & evaluating; and maintaining.
(Silverberg et al., 2013)
(i) Organizing, programming, and budgeting are the core tasks in placemaking as they
encompass the whole initiation of the project. Tasks that the local government is unable to
achieve are being taken over by the community, which are determined by the organizing
team. Furthermore, the situation of a community is being mapped, potential sites to
improve are pointed out, the right actors are brought together and a budgeting plan is
developed.
(ii) The designing is the detailed development plan of the project. The designing team decides
with what means to execute plans and improve space. Several short- and long-term
strategies and activities are being developed and final decisions are made regarding project
sites.
(iii) Funding is another entry point into placemaking projects. Especially long-term project
implementations need funding in order to survive. The amount of required funding varies
depending on the costs of the planned activities and physical developments.
28
(iv) Hosting of stakeholder events should not be confused with the organizing phase of the
projects. Once the placemaking project has been set up, stakeholders should meet to
assure the execution of plans or share knowledge about progress.
(v) Promotion is of great importance for the success of placemaking projects. By promoting all
the different placemaking activities, projects can achieve more community capacity
(people that support the project). Promotion can happen offline via posters, pamphlets,
newspapers and word of mouth as well as online via websites, blogs and social media.
(vi) Monitoring & evaluation of the project is vital to achieve long-term viability. By assessing
program outcomes the success of the project can be determined. This enables thoughtful
decision-making regarding future continuation of the project.
(vii) Maintaining the project is an underrated task, while it is very important to achieve the
iterative character of placemaking. Without keeping the public space into good condition
and the planning and organizing of new and upcoming events it is likely that the
community’s will to participate will stagnate. (Silverberg et al., 2013; PPS, 2012)
SUPPORTING FACTORS AND ACTORS Besides strategies and task, placemaking implementation also requires some supporting factors to
be filled up in order to achieve successful results. These factors and actors include: institutional
approval, PPPs, leadership, community capacity and supporting organizations. In all cases, the
community must be actively involved as a maker. However, supporting activities can differ from
case to case. All strategies, tasks and supporting tasks are mapped below in table 3.1.1.
29
Table 3.1.1: Structuring placemaking implementation Placemaking model Strategies 1. Rapid placemaking
2. Long-term placemaking 3. Cultural and creative activities
involvement 4. Event-based placemaking
Tasks 1. Organizing, programming & budgeting
2. Designing 3. Funding 4. Stakeholder events 5. Implementing & operating 6. Promotion 7. Monitoring & evaluating 8. Maintaining
Supporting factors/actors 1. Institutional approval
2. Public-Private-Partnerships 3. Community capacity 4. Supporting organizations 5. Leadership
Source: Silverberg et al., 2013; deNatale & Wassel, 2007
30
3.2 STRUCTURING PROGRAM OUTCOMES Besides the different strategies, tasks and supporting activities that are needed to implement
creative placemaking, the outcome of the program is what placemaking is all about. This research
grounds in theories that are stating that community empowerment can happen through the
physical change of public space. This research is aiming to assess the effects of several creative
placemaking projects in kampung Dago Pojok. The change of public space and community
empowerment are the main outcomes of program implementation. These outcomes have a
symbiotic relationship in which they enhance each other (figure 3.2.1). This section defines the
indicators for creative placemaking outcomes in Dago Pojok. Table 3.2.1 at the end of this section
gives an overview of all program outcomes and their indicators.
Figure 3.2.1: Symbiotic relationship between community empowerment and physical change of space (Source: Silverberg et al., 2013; Hingor, 2010)
Creative placemaking
Physical change of
space
Community
empowerment
Community empowerment
Social capital building
Increase economic
value
Increase political
particpation
31
The first outcome of placemaking is the improvement of physical space. Assuming that the few
accessible public spaces in the Dago Pojok community used to be qualitatively poor and desolated
this research maps the change of public space according to use and activity of public space
(Prasetyo & Martin-Iverson, 2013). Indicators of ‘use and activity’ used in this research are: (1)
functions, (2) usage and (3) condition of the project site (Silverberg et al., 2013). A better mix of
functions increases the usage and thus livelihood of a place (Jacobs, 1961). On the other hand,
better conditions of the environment can also trigger more functions (Silverberg et al., 2013).
The next outcome of creative placemaking in Dago Pojok is social empowerment, which is most
significant in relation to placemaking theories (Silverberg et al., 2013; Markusen & Gadwa, 2010).
Social capital is often used as social empowerment tool (Bourdieu, 1988; Putnam, 2000). Boeck et
al., (2009) distinct between two types of social capital relevant for this research: ‘Bonding’ and
‘Bridging’ social capital. Bonding social capital relates to enhancing relationships between friends,
family and peer groups. This can be achieved through community socializing activities and social
networks. ‘Bridging’ social capital is about creating links with people outside immediate circles.
This can happen through stakeholder events and cross-community socializing. The indicators used
to map social capital as outcome from creative placemaking in Dago Pojok is therefore: (1) number
of stakeholders involved, (2) number of stakeholder events, (3) community socializing, (4) cross-
community socializing, (5) volunteerism and (6) online socializing. (Silverberg et al., 2013; Boeck et
al., 2009)
32
Economic empowerment of the community in the light of creative placemaking is mapped
according to changing values in the creative economy of the neighbourhood. Creative placemaking
generates economic returns on cultural products through the involvement of creative people,
businesses and places (DeNatale & Wassel, 2007). Indicators for changing economic values used in
this research are therefore: (1) number of creative businesses or value generating activities, (2)
number of new creative workers and (3) increase in land value.
Political empowerment in light of this research refers to how creative placemaking is fostering
community participation in neighbourhood development and decision-making. Arnstein (1969)
defines the degree of citizen participation according to three categories. The lowest category ‘non-
participation’ is visible when those who have power manipulate those that don’t for their own
gain. The middle category is called ‘tokenism’. Tokenism applies when the community does have
the ability to be heard but there is no guarantee that the institution in power will be careful with
this as they have the ultimate right to decide. The highest category is ‘citizen power’, that is
explained as real and meaningful participation where the community has a much bigger
opportunity to make decisions concerning their future. Partnerships between communities and
public parties are a form of citizen power. Indicators for political empowerment used in this
research are therefore: (1) citizen participation, (2) number of PPPs, and (3) political expression
and social critique. This last category is defines whether the community is resisting against current
power relations. All the indicators are displayed in the table below.
33
Table 3.2.1: Placemaking outcome indicators Category Indicators
Improvement of physical environment
Physical space: Use & activity
1. Function of space or building 2. Usage of space or building 3. Conditions of space or building
Community empowerment
Social empowerment: Social capital
1. Stakeholders involved 2. Number of stakeholder events 3. Community socializing 4. Cross-community socializing 5. Rates of volunteerism 6. Social Network mapping
Economic empowerment: Changing economic values
1. Number of creative businesses or value generating activities
2. Number of creative workers 3. Property value
Political empowerment: Citizen participation
1. Political participation 2. Public – private partnerships 3. Political expression/social critique
Source: Silverberg et al., 2013; Hingor, 2010
3.3 DATA COLLECTION Table 3.1.1 and 3.2.1 are the backbone of this research, which means all data is structured and
analysed according to these tables. Different sources are accessed to collect data to enhance the
credibility of this case study. Documentation, literatures, interviews and physical artefacts such as
pictures are the central data sources of this research. Normally, participant-observation
techniques would suit a case study better in order to collect primary data. However, due to the
lack of proximity, this research is limited to a desk research supplemented with one in-depth
interview and 5 semi-structured interviews that have been conducted online. The data collection
happened in three phases within a time span of three months (April – June 2014). The first phase
was based on a desk-research devoted to collecting as much online information about the
34
organizations behind the creative projects in Dago Pojok. The BCCF database, some academic
literature and several social network pages have assisted in defining what organizations and
projects to address in the research. The second phase was finding the right people to interview.
Interviewees have been approached according to a “snowball technique” (Bryman, 2004). After
contacting Bandung Institute of Technology (ITB) and the Arte-polis conference board it was
possible to get in touch with the following persons: a professor from the urban development and
policy department; a professor from the industrial design departments; a project leader of Dago
Pojok’s creative projects; the secretary of the BCCF; and two initiators of the Batik Fractal
community program set up in Dago Pojok. Four semi-structured interviews were conducted in this
phase to gain knowledge about project implementations and program effects of Komunitas Taboo
and Batik Fractal. The last phase of the data collection resulted in the only in-depth interview that I
have been able to arrange. This interview with the secretary of BCCF and industrial design lecturer
at ITB was conducted in the Netherlands and enabled me to tie the story together and fill up
empty spots. During this phase I also got in touch with a professional photographer that I
encountered online. He provided me with the imagery of creative projects in kampung Dago
Pojok. The photographer, that coincidently is a friend of the project leader has been active himself
in several creative events in Dago Pojok wherefore a fifth semi-structured interview could be
conducted. The list of interviewees is given below:
1. Rahmat Jabaril Project leader of Komunitas Taboo
2. Dr. Frans Prasetyo Department of regional and city planning at ITB
3. Dr. Tita Larasati Lecturer at ITB design department
Chairman of secretary of BCCF
4. Nancy Margried Initiator community program Batik Fractal
5. Muhammad Lukman Initiator community program Batik Fractal
6. Ikhlasul Amal Dago Pojok photographer
35
FINDINGS & RESULTS
This chapter clarifies whether creative developments in Dago Pojok fit within the creative
placemaking framework. Before the analysis, some background information about Dago Pojok is
given. The analysis itself is divided over two sections. Section 4.2 first explores the organizations
behind the project implementation before it elaborates on the project implementations according
to table 3.1.1 “structuring placemaking implementations”. The analysis describes what strategies
are used, what tasks are occupied and what supporting actors are involved to achieve community
empowerment goals. Section 4.3 describes the program outcomes. In what physical, social,
economic and political conditions have the project implementations resulted? These outcomes are
analysed according to table 3.2.1 “placemaking outcome indicators”? The last sections of part 4.2
and 4.3 give a concise reflection on the findings. A final note regarding the analysis, parts from the
interviews are quoted with number ranging from [1] to [6]. These numbers refer to the people
listed on the previous page (page 35).
4.1 KAMPUNG DAGO POJOK Kampung Dago Pojok is located in the north of Bandung within the Dago area of Bandung. The
Dago area has a long history as an important hub for commerce, socializing and as transport route.
During colonial times the area along ‘Dagostraat’ became resided by Dutch elites, which is still
visible in the rows of Dutch colonial style heritage buildings. However, through the 19th and 20th
centuries, Dago became increasingly urbanized resulting in a mixture of different residential
settlements defined by the socioeconomic status of its inhabitants and rural-urban characteristics
(Sumardjo, 2012). Kampung Dago Pojok is located within the administrative zone RW 03, which
houses 1512 residents within an area of 30 hectares. Appendix II shows kampung Dago Pojok
36
within its wider area. The wider Dago area has become an important site for rockers, punks and
other youth in favour of alternative lifestyles (Prasetyo & Martin-Iverson, 2013). Furthermore it is
well known for its cultural and artistic activities, which have contributed to Bandung’s creative city
status. However, most kampung residents were not actively engaged with these developments
until recently various organizations have started putting effort in engaging local communities
within the creative economy. Residents of Dago Pojok rely on low incomes mostly derived from
informal and insecure labour. Their access to education, employment opportunities, public service
and modern consumption is rather poor (Prasetyo & Martin-Iverson, 2013). The Dago Pojok
community can be considered a social transition between traditional and modern societies. Due to
its rural characteristics, the area is full of potential in terms of traditional cultural exploitation.
Especially the incorporation into the urban fabric of Bandung offers potential to exploit local
culture and generate economic value.
37
4.2 PROJECT ANALYSIS It came about that one independent organization has been a big driving force behind the initiation
of the projects. However, more organizations have played significant roles in the Dago Pojok
transformation, which refers to: “the community-driven cultural and creative developments that
aim to sustain and empower the Dago Pojok community” [1]. Table 4.2.1 shows a timeline of the
involved organizations and their initiated projects that are being discussed in this research. The
organizations behind the discussed projects are Komunitas Taboo, BCCF and Batik Fractal. As said
before this analysis is structured according table 3.1.1. Strategies that are being discussed are
long-term, short-term, creative and event-based placemaking. The task that need to be filled up
according to placemaking implementation theory are: organizing, programming & budgeting,
designing, funding, stakeholder & community events, promotion, implementation & operating,
monitoring & evaluating, maintaining. The supporting factors that will be elaborated on are:
institutional approval, PPPs, community capacity, supporting organizations and leadership.
Table 4.2.1: project timeline < 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Komunitas Taboo Community learning centre Lomba mural Dago Tea House Independence
fest
Bandung creative city forum Kampung Kreatif project KKF* KKF Helarfest H’fest Helarfest Batik Fractal Batik Fractal workshop Batik
Mini
*kampung kreatif fest
38
KOMUNITAS TABOO Komunitas Taboo is the big initiator of Dago Pojok’s transformation according to respondents [1],
[2] and [3]. This initial art collective was set up in 2003 as a response to the exclusion of local
residents from the tourist and commercial developments of the Dago area (Prasetyo & Martin-
Iverson, 2013). An informal agreement was established with the local government that allowed
Komunitas Taboo to set up cultural and creative activities with local residents. “The program
snowballed and resulted in the growth of the Komunitas Taboo arts collective” [2]. The
organization seeks to avoid social exclusion from Bandung’s formal creative urban developments
by adopting a more democratic and grassroots approach to creative urban development. As will
become clear from the initiated projects, Komunitas Taboo mainly tries to achieve this through
community art programs, education, activist programs and creative events. Besides, it is building
public awareness of the potential that poor Bandung neighbourhoods have in exploiting local
culture and the local economy. “Through the right support the kampung is being turned into a
space for educational, cultural and economic activities over which the local community is
developing independent consciousness” [1]. The following projects have aimed to realize this:
centre for community learning (PKBM), lomba mural and Dago Tea House.
PKBM is the centre for community learning, which has been recognized by the government in
2009 as a community education institution. According to respondent [2]: “the formal recognition
stimulates students to participate”. In the program art education is being conceived alongside with
reading and writing in order to stimulate children and students and to make learning more fun.
The less formal activities include the more creative and cultural activities of the centre such as:
jewellery craft workshops, female puppet shows but also workshops on marketing of art and craft
products. The PKBM can be perceived both as short and long-term placemaking. The community
centre itself is a long-term initiative and is growing every year. More students and volunteers are
39
attracted to become part of the projects aiming to sustain the future of the local community. The
workshops bring different stakeholders together over a longer period of time. Komunitas Taboo
for example gives a workshop that engages the local community with traditional instruments such
as calung, gamelan and drums while helping them to do a ceremonial performance. The second
project of Komunitas Taboo’s, which is one of the most significant projects, is the lomba mural.
Lomba mural is the complete transformation of the physical environment of Dago Pojok through
wall paintings (see figures 4.2.6 – 4.2.16). It is perceived to be a short-term strategy, according to
Silverberg et al. (2013), as the process that brings people together in the making process is
finished. “Nevertheless, the project still has positive influence on the desirability of the place” [1].
On top of that the paintings have formed Dago Pojok’s identity as Kampung Mural (BCCF, 2013).
The third project discussed is Dago Tea House. Dago Tea House is a great example of creative
placemaking. It is an existing space in Dago Pojok that is being used as exhibition space,
community centre and festival site by Komunitas Taboo. “Every week different artisans from the
community and wider Bandung get the chance to exhibit their art works in the Tea House and its
surrounding garden” [1]. Besides, Indonesian dishes according to typical local recipes are being
served in Dago Tea House restaurant. It shows how all three facets of creative placemaking are
combined according to figure 3.1.1. Dago Tea House is offering a creative space for diverging
creative activities attracting people from all over Bandung; creative workers are present on the
site to run the projects and show their art works; and the running restaurant and the exhibition
hall are examples of value generating creative businesses. Bandung is one a few that has added
culinary activities to the creative businesses list because: “food in Bandung is very often used to
express local culture” [1].
40
Successful placemaking asks for a good coordination of tasks and responsibilities that come along
with implementing projects (see table 3.1.1). Komunitas Taboo fills up most tasks itself, which is
not surprising considering the size and scope of the organization. The organising task mainly
concerns organizing all that needs to be done in order to implement & operate the projects.
Komunitas Taboo decides on the goals of the projects and how they should be achieved. All the
additional tasks are being designated during the organization and programming of the project. The
design tasks more or less refers to what strategy is being used to achieve the goals. Komunitas
Taboo clearly decided to use different ways to engage the community in exploiting local culture.
Workshops, events and festivals are the main strategies that are being used to promote the
exploitation of local culture. According to respondent [1] most projects are funded with help from
the government. The government Business Study Group (KBU) has mainly funded the PKBM
project [2]. Stakeholder events incudes brining together all involved parties before the
implementation & operation starts. No data is available on this matter. However, once a month
there is a reflection meeting with the government but without community members. Community
members, volunteering students, artists and project leaders contribute to the implementation of
the projects. Then projects and project results need to be promoted and communicated to the
neighbourhood. Via social media, pamphlets and posters and BCCF advertisement efforts the
community is being kept up-to-date. “Good promotion makes communities more flexible to initiate
plans and continue to explore more possibilities” [1]. The significance of Dago Pojok as well-known
creative site within Bandung has been promoted through formal and informal publications and
word of mouth among journalists, academics, students and locals (Prasetyo & Martin-Iverson,
2013). The monitoring & evaluation of the project happens once a month during a reflection
meeting with project leaders and the local government. The implementers use outcomes from the
monthly meetings to maintain the project.
41
The first supporting activity, institutional approval, is covered as the government is funding the
project activities that are being organized. A noteworthy remark is the fact that the current mayor
of Bandung is the previous chairman of the BCCF, which has reduced government restrains
significantly. Then, no PPPs exist so far as Komunitas Taboo is operating independently with
support from BCCF and ITB students. According to respondent [2]: “in the beginning Komunitas
Taboo faced some difficulties in involving all the residents as many short-term migrants could not
identify with the long-term residents”. The following factor is community capacity. Arts and
performance have been used as forms of media to express ideas and use an “understandable
idiom” that local people could relate to. This idiom according to respondent [2] had to be
entertaining instead of stressing explicitly the need to develop the area. Students involved with
creative university courses mainly cover the factor supporting organizations. They help to train
locals in acquiring the right skills to develop creative products with value. The last supporting
factor is leadership. Rahmat Jabaril is a 45 years old artist and activist well known in the
community for his paintings and other visual arts that mainly raise social issues such as inequality,
abuse of state power, corruption and environmental injustices (Prasetyo & Martin-Iverson,
2013:8). While he is not a native in the area he already lives there for more then seven years now.
“He is a respected figure in Dago Pojok that has been extremely successful in persuading the
community to participate” [3].
BANDUNG CREATIVE CITY FORUM Bandung creative city forum (BCCF) was declared on December 21st in 2008 as a legal organization
that accommodates the needs and activities of creative communities and individuals in Bandung in
their purpose to nurture creativity and creative events within the context of the creative economy
(BCCF, 2013). Members of the BCCF come from different fields, including academics, researchers,
entrepreneurs, artists, musicians, engineers, architects, city planners, designers and even lawyers.
42
All members run on voluntary basis in a heterogeneous environment. The BCCF operates from a
creative city perspective based on people, places and ideas. Through design-based solutions BCCF
exploits Bandung youth’s vibrant energy as main potential for change. “It is so important to
undertake action and reveal people’s potential. They have to learn how to be contributing citizens.
The Kampung Kreatif program sustains in this” [3]. BCCF activities cover many various topics such
as creative networks, city branding, public discussions, education, events & festivals, public space,
urban ecology, parks and kampungs. These are framed within four major programs: Helarfest
Bandung, Simpul institute, Design action and Kampung Kreatif, which all deal with social,
economic, infrastructural and cultural issues; the potential of generation Y; entrepreneurship; and
community support. The forum has been set up after the first successful Helarfest in 2008.
“Helarfest is considered the heart and start of the organization” [3]. Within a time-span of 1,5
month all sorts of creative community events took place in the forest, along the river and in parks
containing exhibitions, conferences, workshops and performances. Since then two more successful
festivals have been organized in 2009 and 2012. The festival site covered several public spaces in
Bandung including Dago Pojok, the inner-city kampung Taman Sari and the Bandung city forest.
Over 70 creative events took place. Simpul institute focuses on creative community education and
activities. It serves as a community network and public space to be used for informal courses and
meetings. Design action is concerned with the “road to iden(c)ity”. City branding is used to
promote bottom-up solutions for urban issues and create a collective identity. The last and most
relevant program to this research is kampung kreatif. “Through placemaking and community
development we aim to generate independent kampungs that can serve as tourist destinations”
[3]. Kampung Kreatif focuses on skill-building and entrepreneurship in order to connect the area to
the outside market and eventually build an tourist destination.
43
Both short and long-term placemaking strategies apply to Kampung Kreatif. Its long-term strategy
is based on ‘urban akupunktur’. Respondent [3] explains this strategy as follows: “BCCF sees
Bandung as a body that is ill. Unfortunately we do not have the hospital to cure it. Rather we inject
needles that trigger places and people to build responsibility for their own environment. We
injected these needles in the five kampungs now called kreatif kampungs”. The long-term aim of
the Kampung Kreatif is to eventually create a tourist attraction of each kampung according to
specific local cultural traits. However, the long-term program is build up from different short-term
stages. Activities such as movie screening, urban farming, workshops for creative industries and
wall paintings are being organized for the betterment of Dago Pojok in the long run. To quote
respondent [3] again: “Kampung kreatif can be perceived as un on-going process of different
activities, events and workshops”. Besides short- and long-term placemaking Kampung Kreatif also
fits within creative placemaking framework. All three facets of creative placemaking (creative
places, people and businesses) apply to at least some extent (figure 3.1.1). First of all BCCF is
targeting specific kampungs for the project where some sort of creative infrastructure exists.
Creative infrastructure in this case refers to the neighbourhood’s opportunity to produce specific
local cultural products. Secondly BCCF selects sites where at least a small network of creative and
motivated people exists. Many creative people are present in Dago Pojok, especially artisans
according the BCCF. Nevertheless skill-building programs aim to (1) increase potential of existing
ones and (2) generate even more creative workers that produce locally derived cultural and
creative products. The final facet (creative businesses) is partly applicable to Kampung Kreatif
because they indirectly derive from the empowerment of creative entrepreneurs. The last strategy
that applies is event-based placemaking. “Events are very important in communicating the project
with the wider community, it is an important part of the whole process” [3]. The link between
Helarfest and the BCCF shows perfectly well how strategies sustain long-term values of
44
placemaking. Helarfest is perceived to be the creative community hub for creative individuals.
New projects, ideas and innovations derive from here. In the case of Dago Pojok a yearly festival
takes place. Kampung Kreatif festival has taken place twice already in Dago Pojok in 2012 and
2013. Following respondent [1]: “Kampung Kreatif festival actively engaged the local community
into the creative process. In turn the community gained confidence in their own knowledge, skills
and creative potential”. Dago Pojok serves as the creative space where this festival takes place
bringing both creative workers and businesses together.
The executors of the tasks of Kampung Kreatif in Dago Pojok overlap with Komunitas Taboo’s
project implementations. Even though BCCF has developed fixed steps to implement Kampung
Kreatif, Komunitas Taboo leads the project in Dago Pojok. The two parties collaborate very closely
for another reason because Komunitas Taboo’s initiator has always been an active figure in the
BCCF according to respondent [1] and [3]. Both parties undertake the organizing and design of the
project. BCCF developed a scheme to target suitable kampungs for the project and to implement
CCPs to the neighbourhood (see appendix III). BCCF’s fund raising department takes for a large
part responsibility of the funding. Government funding covers the remaining parts. The
stakeholder events are organized by BCCF as the project belongs to a whole range of other
initiatives as well. Simpul space #1 is where most of the departments of BCCF are located and
where stakeholder meetings take place. Nevertheless, meetings do not at all stick to meeting
rooms: “the field is where action happens and this is where we should be and what we should
observe” [3]. Promotion of the project happens through various media sources. First of all through
events where local communities, stakeholders and the wider public meet such as Helarfest,
Kampung Kreatif fest and Arte-polis conference that takes place every summer. Another very
useful source is social media. Via Twitter, Facebook and Flickr Kampung Kreatif festival is being
45
promoted and information on the project is being shared. Part two of the analysis will elaborate
more on the effectiveness of social media. Evaluation & monitoring of Kampung Kreatif happens
monthly. Project leaders and stakeholders come together once a month to evaluate progress of
program implementations. Then will be decided if programs need to be adapted, stopped or
continued. These meeting foster a good maintenance of the project as well.
As for most of the regular tasks Kampung Kreatif relies on the very same supporting actors as
Komunitas Taboo does. First of all, institutional approval is there. However, respondent [3]
explains that organizations must define their own ways of handling official institutions, as
corruption is a daily struggle to deal with. Official recognition does not result into flawless
execution of plans. Even though the mayor fully supports the projects, his deputies do not always
agree on the value of bottom-up programs. The second supporting actor, PPPs, have not resulted
from the project. The third factor, community capacity, is getting better. Currently, the community
is getting more and more involved as drafters and initiators of the project. “In the end they are the
ones that need to take responsibility for the future of their neighbourhood” [1]. However, some
locals still have to get used to tourists. “They are not used to strangers and they do not speak
English very often” [3]. The next factor is supporting organizations. They refer again mainly to
students. BCCF mainly draws on ITB students. “Every year I got 200 new design students that use
to help executing plans. Their skills and knowledge are very valuable and can be implement on a
wide range of activities” [3]. BCCF’s general secretary and design professor at ITB explains that
local leadership, the last factor, is highly important to gain local’s trust and the will to collaborate.
46
BATIK FRACTAL Batik Fractal is a creative enterprise based in Bandung. It is a self-innovated program that creates
Batik patterns according to fractal formulas. These patterns are later on being printed on different
kinds of fabrics. By drawing on self-developed Batik software, the business is using technology to
generate economic value. Batik Fractal operates under a core business called Piksel Indonesia. This
organization draws on fashion design, training and technology. However, since 2011 Piksel
Indonesia started to collaborate with batik artisans located in Dago Pojok after an invitation from
Rahmat Jabaril. Since then, a program aimed to empower local communities has been set up in
the form of a creative economic platform: Batik Fractal, further referred to as Batik Fractal. The
aim is to train Dago Pojok residents to use the software to design batik patterns according to
traditional methods. Besides, people are trained to create good end products ready to be sold
through Piksel Indonesia’s business channels. Respondent [5] formulates the organization’s aims
as follows: “through our program we aim to spread the use of technology in creative fields,
empower technology skills, create engagement and collaboration between different stakeholders,
preserve Indonesia’s culture and gain financial benefit from it”. Dago Pojok has been a suitable site
to try out the program as its community leader contacted Batik Fractal to organise a training
session. “The community got so enthusiastic that we decided to continue and establish the
activities” [4].
Through business activities mainly, Batik Fractal tries to address the low employment rates and
low-income problems of the neighbourhood. The design trainings are part of a long-term program
in which different stakeholders are brought together. “The stakeholders involved intentionally
leverage the place through means such as technology arts, culture and creativity for the ultimate
betterment of Dago Pojok” [4]. The four stakeholders are business parties, funders, the
government and the community. The trainings are held every wee in the rented workshop in the
47
area. Besides the trainees can come every day to practice and continue their productions. The
continuously bringing together of different stakeholders in the workshop over a longer period of
time shows how value is being generated also on the long run. Creative placemaking obviously
suits well as a strategy too. “Through regular training the community is engaging with creative
activities and other parties to collaborate and help to address economic but also social problems in
Dago Pojok” [5]. The initiative even has resulted in a small event: Batik Mini’ This mini training
took place the 28th of July 2013 in Simpul Space #2, which is one of the two public spaces BCCF has
opened for workshops, events and conferences. Batik Mini shows how Batik Fractal is
experimenting with event-based placemaking as well.
The scope of the project is rather small as only one workshop in Dago Pojok currently runs as
training space for about 15 people. The organizing task is therefore is not very complex. A
workshop is being rented and furthermore the initiator of the project arranges some volunteers
and funders that help to operate the project. The program initiator in collaboration with Piksel
Indonesia, that has the in-house technology, has designed the project. ‘Gabungan Koperasi Batik
Indonesia’ is the only funder of the project. “The funder is very satisfied with the program as it is
the first Batik producing business in Bandung and also because the results of the community
programs really start to get visible” [4]. Batik Fractal is not organizing stakeholder & community
events. However, it does join other events as stakeholder, for example BCCF’s events for all the
linked creative collectives. As Batik Fractal is linked to BCCF it can use the platform to promote
Batik Fractal’s activities and integrate it into the Kampung Kreatif festival. Besides BCCF, the Arte-
polis conference in Bandung, that is being held every year since 2008, offers a great opportunity to
share information about the project. The Arte-polis conference brings together to Bandung,
creative champions from different places around the world, to share and learn from their creative
48
experiences on placemaking. Participants come from a diverse range of disciplines, including
architecture, landscape architecture and planning, business and management, cultural and
development studies, design and visual arts, digital-media and information-communication
technology, economics and geography, as well as the arts and humanities (Arte-polis, 2012). Batik
Fractal’s initiator is presenting the community program in Bandung this summer. Monitoring &
evaluation is also taken into account. “By making sure to involve each member of the community
into activities and by listening to their aspirations and ideas Batik Fractal tries to run the business
more smoothly in the future” [5]. The idea to establish the project in all the Kampungs Kreatif
locations should happen along with the establishment of an interlinked platform where
experiences and knowledge among trainees and trainers can be shared. This platform also assists
in the maintenance of the project.
The government acknowledges the program but they are not contributing anything to the
program. As Batik Fractal is an independent organization that runs well without governmental
help, PPPs are not applicable. The supporting organizations are funders, BCCF and vocational
schools all over Bandung. “Vocational schools in Bandung deliver volunteers that train the
members of the community and help to increase their skills such as sewing, making patterns and
finishing products” [5]. Batik Fractal also acknowledges the importance of local leaders and local
leadership. “The community needs someone that they can trust and that directly involves them in
organized activities” [4].
49
The different projects discussed above have been structured per implementing organization. The
findings show that all the organizations behind the projects shape creative placemaking according
to their own aims, scope, stakeholders, activities and in-house expertise and knowledge.
Komunitas Taboo’s projects are drawing on a democratic grassroots approach to creative
development through art programs, workshops and events mainly. BCCF is an organization
nurturing the needs of creative communities as well as individuals all over Bandung in exploiting
local culture. Kampung Kreatif is BCCF’s successful community program through which it aims to
create touristic spots of different poor neighbourhoods. Also its main focus goes to young people
below thirty. Batik Fractal is the only profit-oriented organization in this research that through the
incorporation of technology in the creativity production processes of Batik patters tries to address
low incomes of the Dago Pojok community. Even though these organizations and their projects
differ among each other, they all have the mutual goal of creating Dago Pojok into a better place
for its current inhabitants by empowering them through different creative activities. In addition to
that all organization stress the importance of promotion and local leadership to persuade the
community to be actively involved. An interesting fact is that most of the promotion happens
through short-term placemaking events. Batik Fractal for example makes use of Kampung Kreatif
fest to promote its activities. Another positive and notable remark to be made is the enormous
rate of volunteerism in the projects. Young, talented and educated students support all projects.
Besides all these positive findings unfortunately all organizations are lacking stakeholder events
that involve the community. This means their voice cannot be optimally heard. Both Komunitas
Taboo and BCCF rely on government funding. Nevertheless, they both stress the unreliability of
the government when it comes to active support on the long run. The current presidential election
can have a big influence the current participatory policies towards urban development.
50
4.2 PROJECT RESULTS ANALYSIS IMPACT ON PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT This section describes the physical change of the community since the projects have been
initiated. The results are based on the impact of the projects on the physical environment of Dago
Pojok. Physical improvements of buildings and space are mapped according to their current
function usage and conditions. The physical spaces discussed in this research are the PKBM
community learning centre, Dago Pojok Tea House, Batik Fractal workshop and Dago Pojok streets
(see table 4.2.1).
Table 4.2.1: Usage and conditions of project space and buildings Space/building Function Usage* Conditions PKBM
- Workshops - Events - Community centre
- Daily (20) - Monthly (40) - Weekly (20)
- Building has become covered in paint, conditions are reasonable
Tea House
- Exhibitions - Restaurant - Performance
- Monthly (50) - Daily (30) - Monthly (100)
- Good condition, suitable for many purposes, popular spot
Batik Fractal workshop
- Workshop - Three days a week (20)
- Only Batik workshop in area, building is old and too small
Dago Pojok streets
- Lomba mural - Helarfest - Independence fest - Kampung kreatif
festival - Cycling tours
- Streets used daily - In 2012 (n/a) - In 2012 (300) - Yearly in October
(500) - Weekly (n/a)
- Vibrant place attracting tourism, suitable for creative events, many places only accessible by foot
* Usage by average number of people are based on interviewee estimations
51
The PKBM has multiple functions. It is mainly being used as workshop and space to teach students
and children (see figure 4.2.1). Every day about 20 students are involved with PKBM activities and
workshops. Besides space for teaching, it also functions as community centre. Respondent [1]:
“Every week new people come and visit the workshop. It is a public space and so people come and
meet people in the centre”. The building is open for community meetings as well. The space has
turned into a mixed functional space that is being used much more often since Komunitas Taboo
occupied the space. The building conditions have not changed significantly. Respondent [1]: “The
walls of the working spaces have been
coloured to improve the ambiance”. The
physical conditions have improved for
the eye but in technical sense conditions
have stayed the same.
Figure 4.2.1: Rahmat Jabaril giving arts classes at the community center (Source: [3], 2013)
Dago Tea House has always served as a restaurant and tearoom since colonial times (Prasetyo
& Martin-Iverson, 2013). Currently, Komunitas Taboo is using the space to expose art works of
artisans and to perform sports and music acts of every month. About five artists each month
get the chance to show their works. This attracts people from the community and wider
Bandung of which the exact number is unknown. The mixed functions have increased the usage
significantly according to respondent [2]. Conditions of the place are very good. “Dago Tea
House is able to host events and exhibitions for large crowds”. The figures below show how the
space is suitable for multiple purposes. Figure 4.2.2 on the left shows the gathering of children
52
after school to play games. Figure 4.2.3 on the right shows the stage area of Dago Tea House,
which is very popular for gigs and events.
Figure 4.2.2: Gathering outside Dago Tea Figure 4.2.3: Community performance at Dago Tea House (Source: [6], 2012) House (Source: [6], 2012)
The Batik Fractal workshop is rented from a Dago Pojok homeowner and is partly open to
public from Monday to Friday. Currently, 15 people are involved in the batik training. They
come together in the workshop about 2 to 3 times a week. Batik workshop itself is not a very
mixed-used space. Nevertheless is has contributed to a slightly better residential-commercial
ratio in the neighbourhood. Respondent [4]: “today the space has turned into a workshop and a
running business. Also, there is no other batik workshop in the area”. The conditions of the
space have to be improved according to the project leader. It is too small and the building
conditions are a bit poor. Therefore, Batik Fractal is aiming to occupy a larger space within the
area with better sewing facilities. Through this the organization can involve and train more local
community members and extent its business (see figure 4.2.4).
53
Figure 4.2.4: Nancy making preparations for Figure 4.2.5: Batik promotion at Dago Pojok Batik training in Dago Pojok festival (Source: [6], 2012) (source: [4], 2012) The last and most significant impact is on the physical appearance of the streets and buildings in
Dago Pojok. The streets are used for many purposes such as for wall paintings, festivals and
obviously for daily use. Dago Pojok’s physical appearance and its creative events have attracted
many people from all over Bandung. The Independence fest in 2012 attracted over 300 visitors
and the Kampung kreatif festival in 2013 attracted more than 500 people. Dago Pojok’s wall
paintings serve as a permanent exhibition that attract many tourists and that make the public
space much more vibrant and desirable (see figures 4.2.6 – 4.2.9).
54
Figure 4.2.6: Wall painting 1 in Dago Pojok Figure 4.2.7: Wall painting 2 in Dago Pojok (source: [6], 2011) (source: [6], 2011)
Figure 4.2.8: Harvest dancing at kampung Figure 4.2.9: Artist Ki Suhardi painting Dago Pojok anniversary (Source: [6], 2012) street walls (Source: [6], 2011)
IMPACT ON SOCIAL CAPITAL The impact on social empowerment is defined according to opportunities for the community
members to grow their social capital. According to placemaking theories communities can grow
their social capital through organized activities that bring people from different fields and
different backgrounds together. The involved stakeholders, stakeholder events, community
socializing, cross-community socializing, volunteerism and online socializing all define whether
these organizations offer favourable opportunities for Dago Pojok’s inhabitants to nurture their
social capital. Table 4.2.2 gives an overview of this.
55
Table 4.2.2: Opportunities for community to nurture social capital Komunitas Taboo BCCF Batik Fractal Stakeholders involved
- Community - Organization - Government
- Community - Organization - Academics - Government
- Community - Organization
Stakeholder events
- Once a month at community center
- Once a month at Simpul institute
- n/a
Community socializing
- PKBM - Tea House - Kreatif festival
- Kampung Kreatif Fest - Workshop space - Kreatif festival
Cross-community socializing
- Independence day festival
- Helarfest - Simpul institute
- Idea to build Batik Fractal cooperative network
Volunteerism - Organizing stakeholders all operate on voluntary base
- Organizing stakeholders all operate on voluntary base
- Profit oriented firm but trainings are done voluntary by students
Online socializing - 77 Twitter followers - 177 Tea House
Facebook check-ins
- 155 Facebook members
- 317 Twitter Followers - 10 Flicker posters
- 153 Facebook members
- 26 Twitter followers - 2 Flicker posters
Komunitas Taboo has three stakeholders involved during program implementations. First of all the
organization itself, which exists of 6 fixed people but during large events this number can grow up
to 15 according to respondent [1]. The second stakeholder is of course the community itself. All the
events have as main target serving the needs of Dago Pojok inhabitants, which is empowering them
to be completely independent one day. The governments is a stakeholder in the sense that it gives
support financially and gives legal permission to perform all the activities without any constrains.
Stakeholders meet once a month at Simpul institute in the city centre to evaluate progress of the
projects. Before this happens, community leaders come together with members of Dago Pojok to
discuss the projects and gather insights and new ideas. Community socializing occurs in places
56
where Dago Pojok residents come together to organise new events or to simply meet people as a
result from the Komunitas Taboo projects. People meet at PKBM to do workshops or attend
community meetings. Dago Tea House hosts community members during art exhibitions and
performance acts. Kampung Kreatif festival is open to all public. Nevertheless, the Dago Pojok
residents are involved as organizers, performers and visitors during Kampung Kreatif festival.
Komunitas Taboo also collaborated with another kampung kreatif, which resulted in Independence
fest. Members from both communities executed the organization and performing acts, which has
nurtured the opportunity to get in touch with other kampung kreatif residents. Komunitas Taboo’s
network online does not seem as strong as reality. No organizational Facebook page exists of the
organization or its organized activities, only a Twitter page with 77 followers. Tea House also does
not have an online social network page. The only information found regarding Tea House is the total
of Facebook check-ins, which comes at 177.
BCCF involves four different stakeholders in its projects. BCCF together with Komunitas Taboo form
the initiating organization, the government is again involved marginally as funder and the
community as target, organiser and performer. This time a fourth stakeholder ‘academics’ is added.
The heterogeneous background of BCCF reveals that the organization puts value on various insights
during project design and implementation. Kampung Kreatif festival has been designed by
academics from different fields, which is why academic have been added as stakeholder in the
project. The stakeholder event takes place every month at simple institute. As has been discussed
earlier, different community leaders, BCCF members (including academics) and government officials
meet to evaluate the process and the results. The community is to a lesser extent involved in
stakeholder events. However: “BCCF welcomes them anytime at Simpul Institute to join workshops,
lectures and conferences” [3]. Community socializing via BCCF activities mainly happens through
57
preparations for the yearly Kampung Kreatif festival. Also as drafters, organisers, performers and
eventually visitors. Cross-community socializing through BCCF activities mainly happen via the
Helarfest. Helarfest is organized almost every year at various places within the city over a longer
period of time. Dago Pojok and another more central kampung have served as festival sites. The
communities mainly presented their own local cultural products. “As the festival site was spread
across the city, it triggered people to leave their own community and explore new areas”[5]. Online,
Kampung Kreatif has some more significance than Komunitas Taboo activities. The Kampung Kreatif
Facebook page has over a thousand members. However, Dago Pojok’s specific page has (only) 155
members. As the Dago Pojok community is not ridiculously big this number does not have to be very
disappointing. The webpage serves as promotion tool for events mainly and is more actively during
the event dates. On Twitter Dago Pojok Kampung Kreatif is less popular with 71 followers. The last
tweets remain from August 2013. The photo weblog Flickr counts 10 different persons that have
uploaded pictures about Dago Pojok kampung kreatif festival.
Batik Fractal is a small organization that runs the business with two initiators and several
volunteers. The community program has involved locals in the production process of Batik fabrics
and clothing. Community members meet volunteers and project leaders at the workshop. As the
scope of the organization is rather small no stakeholder events take place. Community socializing
happens within the workshop about 3 times a week. “The participants are not able to be away from
home every day because of home chords wherefore they take their work back home” [5]. Of course
this does not improve the opportunity to socialize. Nevertheless, three days a week is already an
improvement in comparison with before. Batik Fractal does not yet foster cross-community
socializing as this is the first community workshop. However, Batik Fractal wants to extent its
business to other kampungs, as marked earlier, and to create a network in which experiences, ideas
58
and innovations can be shared. Batik Fractal’s official Facebook page is very popular with 8.500
members. The local page has 153 members. Two persons have posted photos on Flickr about the
community program of Batik Fractal in Dago Pojok.
IMPACT ON ECONOMIC VALUES Economic values in Dago Pojok are changing. However, it is a gradual process. As respondent [1]
puts it: “it takes some more years for Dago Pojok to lift itself up to middle class standards but what
we do is providing the right tools to achieve this.” These changing economic values are captured
according to number of value generating activities that have been set up, number of creative
workers that have been trained during the activities and increase of property value.
Table 4.2.3: Changing economic values Komunitas Taboo BCCF & Komunitas Taboo Batik Fractal Value generating activities
- Jewellery craft workshop
- Puppet shows - Music performance - Art exhibitions - Independence fest
- Tourist catering - Tourist souvenirs - Creative craft
workshops - Kreatif festival - Helar festival
- Batik fabrics and clothing
Number of new creative workers*
- 80 - 50
- 15
Property value
- Physical change and creative activities attract creative events, tourists and migrants
- Physical change and creative activities attract creative events, tourists and migrants
- n/d
*Number of creative workers is based on people that attended creative workshops
Komunitas Taboo has set up various value generating activities. Currently, a jewellery craft
workshop, puppet shows, music performances and an art exhibition are generating value.
Jewellery is being sold on the streets and at festivals. Puppet shows and music performances also
59
generate value at the festivals. “Most activities belong to informal economic activities wherefore
it is a very difficult task to measure the real economic value they generate” [3]. Nevertheless, the
workshops and trainings have contributed to the creation of many new creative workers that are
able to perform creative value generating activities now and in the future. More than 80 local
residents have in involved in one or more activities according to Komunitas Taboo’s project leader.
The physical transformation and the value generating activities definitely have led to higher
property values but no formal data exist on this matter unfortunately. According to respondent
[2]: “the physical change and creative businesses have attracted many tourist and Bandung
inhabitants that are willing to spend some money crafts, souvenirs and snacks”. Figure 4.2.10
shows a small snack shop surrounded by wall paintings made by artists. This snack shop is serving
the influx of people to the area according to respondent [6].
Figure 4.2.10: wall paintings around snack shop (Source: [6], 2011)
The Kampung Kreatif is very much aiming to transform Dago Pojok into a tourist destination. Core
activities such as local cultural products, wall paintings and festivals have to be supported by smaller
tourist related activities such as snack corners, hostels, souvenir shops and so forth, respondent [3]
explains. About 50 people have been involved in these sorts of activities. This number includes the
organization and the performance of acts during festivals. Again no data about land value is present.
“We are aiming to develop a cost-benefit analysis for Kampung Kreatif. However the complexity of
60
all formal and informal parties involved makes this a very hard task”. Respondent [3] also explains
how the department of Antropology at ITB is developing an “enthusiastic scale” to measure to social
benefits from Helarfest. Batik Fractal’s community program is profit-oriented. It is a professional
organisation using formal distribution systems. “All the 15 trainees receive a fair amount of the
profits” [5]. Batik Fractal’s primary aim is to enable residents to make their own money and
empower their families in econmic sense mainly. Nevertheless, these activities contribute very well
in social sense as has become clear from the previous section. The property value of the place has
not gone up as the conditions of the workshop are still rather poor.
61
IMPACT ON POLITICAL EMPOWERMENT Political empowerment has been least addressed with the project implementations. Table 4.2.4
below gives an overview of three indicators of political empowerment in Dago Pojok: political
participation, PPPs and political expression.
Table 4.2.4: Shifting political involvement through activities Komunitas Taboo BCCF & Komunitas Taboo Batik Fractal Political participation
- Still passive actors in daily politics
- Still passive actors in daily politics
- n/d
PPPs - Some government involvement in PKBM, not much
- Government is involved as funder not as initiator
- n/d
Political expression & social critique
- Some political education through art
- Community is enabled to express social struggles through art mainly
- n/d
- n/d
Batik Fractal does not have the aim at all to empower its trainees in political sense. No PPPs or
political participation has derived from the Batik workshops according to respondent [4] and
[5]. The government is not very much playing a dominant role in the projects. It does not seem
that political participation from community members has resulted from creative activities: “the
on-going inequalities in social, economic and educational sense leave most residents to be
spectators in the arena of politics” [2]. However, slowly the Dago Pojok residents are gaining
confidence to express some form of social critique. Komunitas Taboo is mainly responsible for
this shift. The organization is following an ‘art for the people’ discourse that emphasizes local
empowerment rather than political revolution. Nevertheless, some challenging expressions of
protests intent to give political education to the community (Prasetyo & Martin-Iverson, 2013).
62
The project has helped to overcome the negative image of Dago Pojok once carried. “The
community is being empowered to legitimize or delegitimize local administrative authority and
fear of exploitation and conflicts over land” [6]. Figures 4.2.2 – 4.2.5 below give an impression
of what political or societal messages the Dago Pojok community is expressing.
Figure 4.2.11: “Woman emancipation” Figure 4.2.12: “City forest in danger” (Source: [6], 2011) (source: [6], 2011)
Figure 4.2.13: “learning is an obligation” Figure 4.2.14: “please boss, do not destroy all” (Source: [6], 2011) (Source: [6], 2011)
A reflection of the above findings shows some interesting results. Firstly, the use and activity of
public spaces shows some interesting outcomes. It is hard to draw conclusions on what projects
have been most successful as the target various small groups with people to achieve different
aims. The outcomes according to the analysis show the following results. All projects sites have
improved in terms of function. Especially the streets of Dago Pojok show a good mixture of
63
different activities held. Batik Fractal on the other hand uses its project space only as workshop,
which is reflected in the lower usage. The conditions of the spaces have improved mainly in
sense of looks, however technical improvements still lacking behind according to the results.
Social empowerment opportunities are analysed per organization. In terms of involved
stakeholders, BCCF “wins” with four, followed by Komunitas Taboo with three and Batik Fractal
reaches at the bottom with two. This is not surprising considered the different scopes of the
organizations. BCCF and Komunitas Taboo are involved in the same monthly stakeholder
meeting that elaborates on the Kampung Kreatif projects. Komunitas Taboo counts most
opportunities for community socializing. Three different local events trigger this. Cross-
community socializing mainly happens through major events such as Helarfest and
Independence fest, but also in BCCF’s public spaces. Again rates on volunteerism are
remarkably high, which indicates high social concerns of the Bandung population. Online
socializing is getting along more and more. More types of online media are being used to share
knowledge and involve people to different projects. However, it has potential to become much
more significant. Economic values are again analysed per organization. All organizations are
making good efforts in creating value through cultural products. Crafts, puppet shops and
souvenirs are examples of this. However, they do not seem to become real gold mines. Batik
Fractal is an example with positive long-term expectations of its activities. The last indicator,
property value, shows not much result. The informal characteristic of the activities impedes the
collection of valid data on this matter. The last outcome, political empowerment shows the
least impressive results. In terms of political participation, none of the projects or organizations
has sustained in that. Members still have to be actively involved in activities. The only
improvement is in terms of political expression, fostered by Komunitas Taboo. An obvious
explanation for this is the fact that the current project leader is a critical artist himself.
64
CONCLUSION The central question in this research is: ”which creative placemaking projects exist in kampung
Dago Pojok in Indonesia? How have they been implemented? Did they improve physical, social,
economic and political conditions to empower the community?”
To elaborate on the first question, this exploratory and descriptive research has shown indeed
that several creative projects are being implemented in kampung Dago Pojok according to rather
fixed steps as defined by creative placemaking theories (Silverberg et al., 2013; Markusen &
Gadwa, 2010). The discussed projects are: the community learning centre, lomba mural, Dago
Tea House, Kampung Kreatif, and Batik Fractal. Although these projects are not the only creative
initiatives in Bandung, they appeared to be most well-known among Bandung creative workers
for their community involvement.
The second question has dove deeper into the structure of the projects defined by the first
question. It can be state that the discussed projects fit within a creative placemaking framework
as they all involve elements of the creative economy (DeNatale & Wassel, 2007). The structure of
implementation corresponds with other creative placemaking cases (Silverberg et al., 2013).
Although some sort of universal structure can be applied, it certainly has come to light that each
organization has its unique beliefs and behaviours on how to achieve community empowerment.
Execution of plans shows that different parties carry out different tasks. This observation is in
line with theory that states that existing case studies about creative placemaking emphasize the
flexibility and wide range of implementation possibilities to achieve community empowerment
(Markusen & Gadwa, 2010). Even though all project goals can be classified under the same
65
“community-empowerment through creativity” label, their different organizational backgrounds
resulted in the use of a wide variety of resources, expertise and strategies to achieve these goals.
The third question required the exploration of specific community outcomes in terms of physical
space, social capital, economic values and political participation. Beforehand different indictors
for these outcomes had been identified according to theories (Silverberg et al., 2013; Hingor,
2010). For each project, outcomes have been mapped according to these indicators. Findings
show that projects have resulted mostly in the change and improvement of the physical
environment and in community empowerment, which is in line with theory. Many opportunities
for the nurture of social capital have been created such as community, cross-community, and
online socializing. This has happened along with physical improvements, which refers to a higher
usage of the public space and better visual conditions. In economic terms more value generating
activities have been created. Particularly Batik Fractal has showed to be a great example in this.
However, it is unsure whether changing economic values will sustain in the long run as they are
mostly still based on informal activities. The political dimension of community empowerment is
in most placemaking literatures referred to solely implicitly. Topic of political participation is in
itself already very extensive and contested wherefore it is not often incorporated explicitly into
placemaking outcomes (Hingor, 2010). The case of Dago Pojok confirms the difficulties in
defining political empowerment as a result from creative placemaking. The projects have not
showed much impact on political participation or the emergence of public-private-partnerships.
Thus to conclude the community’s opportunities for empowerment have mostly derived from an
improved public space and an increase in social activities that have brought people together and
nurtured social capital. Changing economic values have contributed in long-term empowerment
66
for a small part of the community. Almost no opportunities for community empowerment have
resulted from political empowerment.
DISCUSSION The issue raised in the introduction concerns the global urban divide that in the case of Bandung
has been triggered by mass urbanization, strong neoliberal influences and governmental policies
(Booth, 2005; Douglass, 2000; Firman, 2009). The way in which space and opportunities are
produced, appropriated, transformed and used are integral to the causes of the urban divide
(UN-Habitat, 2008). Creative placemaking has proven to be a successful tool to challenge the
urban divide in favour of the bottom of society, also in Dago Pojok. By creating and improving
opportunities to nurture social capital and exploit local culture and creativity to generate
economic value, creative placemaking is contributing to bridging or at least narrowing down the
gap between advantaged and disadvantaged urban inhabitants. In addition to that creative
placemaking has a positive impact on the production and better use of public space. For example
Dago Pojok’s wall paintings have transformed the “looks” of Dago Pojok, which has created an
attractive public space for a diverse range of value generating creative activities.
Most of the outcomes in Dago Pojok confirm that creative placemaking creates opportunities for
community empowerment, mainly through the physical change of the public space and the
magnetic effect of creative events. What have been underexposed in this research however are
issues that constrain implementations of projects and the way organizations deal with them.
They were not fully addressed, because of practical limitations that pushed this research into a
descriptive and exploratory direction instead of an explanatory one. Struggles such as continues
financing, clearing regulatory obstacles, countering community scepticism, sustaining
partnerships, ensuring maintenance and avoiding displacement of gentrification are thoroughly
67
discussed issues in literature (Markusen & Gadwa, 2010). While the case of Dago Pojok does
show some countering efforts to these issues, the community still has some way to go to achieve
middle-class standards. More research on how to counter these struggles could improve future
implementations of projects and benefit long-term results. Despite the positive initial results, the
long-term effect of creative placemaking in Dago Pojok is not yet visible. Future research should
therefore put effort in revealing the difficulties that current organizations are facing in Dago
Pojok. Another effort that should be made by researchers is to reveal to what extent current
efforts have an impact on long-term value of the community, taken into account the limited time
that has passed after the implementations of projects.
68
REFERENCES Ahlbrandt, R. & Cunningham, J. (1979) a new policy for neighborhood preservation. Paeger: New York.
Anderson, K, Hansen, H., Isaken, A. & Ruanio, M. (2010) Transferring the creative city concept to Bandung. Industry & Innovation 17: 215-240.
Arnstein, S. (1969) A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners 35: 355-382. Aritenang, A. (2012) The impact of state restructuring on Indonesia’s regional economic convergence. University College London Press: London.
Arte-polis (2012) Creating places and connections. Arte-Polis International Conference and workshop. School of Architecture, Planning and Policity Development, ITB. July. BCCF (2013) Kampung kreatif Bdg. Bandung Creative City Forum: Bandung Boeck, T., Makadia, N., Johnson, C. & Cushing, J. (2009) The impact of colunteering on social capital and community cohesion. Presented at youth action network. Leicester. Booth, A. (1999). Survey of recent development. Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies 35: 3–38. Booth, A. (2005) The evolving Role of the Central Government. Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies 41: 197-219. Borgi, V. and van Berkel, R. (2007) Individualised service provision in an era of activation and new governance. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy 27: 413–24. Bourdieu, P. (1983) The forms of capital. Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education: 241-258.
Bryman (2004) Social research methods. Oxford Univerisy Press: Oxford. Carr, S.. Francis, M., Rivlin, L. (1992) Public space. Cambridge Univeristy Press. New York. Cho, C. S. (1999). Urban corridors in Pacific Asia. Globalization and world large cities: 155–173. Damajani, D. (2008). Third space phenomena in the city of Bandung: Paradox in contemporary urban public space. Doctoral dissertation, Faculty of Art and Design, Institute of Technology Bandung: Bandung.
Department for infrastructure and Economic Cooperation (2011) The informal Economy: Fact Finding Study. World Bank.
69
DeNatale, D. and Wassall, G. (2001) The creative economy: A new definition. New England Foundation for the Arts: Boston.
Dolowitz, D. (2003) A policy makers guide to policy transfer. Political Studies 44: 14-45
Douglass, M. (2000). Mega-urban regions and world city formation: globalization, the economic crisis and urban policy issues in Asia Pacific. Urban Studies 37: 2315–2336.
Fallah, G. (1996). Living together apart: residential segregation in mixed Arab- Jewish cities in Israel’. Urban Studies 33: 823–857. Field, J. (2003) Social Capital. NY Routledge: New York. Florida, R. (2002) The rise of the creative class. Basic Books: New York. Florida, R. (2005) Cities and the creative class. Routledge: New York. Firman, T. (1999) Indonesian cities under the Krismon. Cities 16: 69 – 82. Firman, T. (2009). The continuity and change in mega-urbanization in the Jakarta-Bandung Region (JBR) development. Habitat International 33: 327 – 339. Harvey, D. (1989) The condition of postmodernity: An enquiry into the origings of cultural change. Blackwell: Oxford. Harvey, D. (2012) Rebel Cities: From the Right to the City to the Urban Revolution. Verso: London.
Hawkins, J. (2002) Creative Economy: How People Money from Ideas. Penguin Global.
Hingor, D. (2010) Participation and placemaking: Empowering communities to transform their living environments. Oxford Brookes University Press: Oxford.
Inclusive city observatory (2010) Bandung, Indonesia: An inclusive approach to developing the future Bandung community. UCLG Committee on Social Inclusion, Participatory Democracy and Human Rights: Bandung. Inteli (2011) Creative-based strategies in small and medium-sized cities: Guidelines for local authorities. Centre for Intellegence and Innovation: Lisbon.
Jacobs, J. (1961) Death and live of great American cities. NY Vintage: New York. Kelompok Kerja Indonesia Design Power (2008) Buku Rencana Pengembangan Ekonomi Kreatif Indonesia 2009-2015. Kementerian Perdagangan Republik: Indonesia.
Kooiman, J. & Vliet, M. (2000) Self-Governance As a Mode of Societal Governance. Public Management Review 2: 359-378. Landry (2003) The creative city: A toolkit for urban innovators. Earthscan: London.
70
Leisch, H. (2000). Structures and functions of new towns in Jabotabek. Paper presented to the Workshop of Indonesian Town Revisited, The University of Leiden, 6–8 December: Leiden. Lefebvre, H. (1991) The Production of Space. Basil Blackwell: Oxford. Lynch (1960) The image of the city. MIT Press: Cambridge.
Marinetto, M. (2003) Who wants to be an active citizen? The politics and practices of community involvement. Sociology 37: 103–20.
Markusen, A. & Gadwa, A. (2010) Creative placemaking paper. National Endownment for the Arts: Washington.
Massey, D. (1973) Towards a critique of industrial location theory. Antipode 5: 33-39. McGee, T. (1995) The mega-urban regions of Southeast Asia. University of British Columbia Press: Vancouver. Mehta, V. (2007). Third places and social life of streets. Paper presented at the 48th annual conference of the Association of Collegiate Schools of Planning (ACSP): Milwaukee.
Muehlebach, A. (2012) The Moral Neoliberal: Welfare and Citizenship in Italy. University of Chicago Press: Chicago.
Newman, J. and Tonkens, E. (2011) Participation, responsibility and choice: Summoning the active citizen in Western European welfare states. Amsterdam University Press: Amsterdam.
Oldenburg, R. (1999). The great good place: Cafes, coffee shops, bookstores, bars, hair salons and other hangouts at the heart of a Community. Marlowe & Co.: New York.
Peck, J. (2005) Struggling with the creative class. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 29 (4): 740-770. PPS (2012) Placemaking and the future of cities. Project for Public Spaces: Washington.
Prasetyo, A. & Martin-Iverson, S. (2013) Art, activism and the ‘creative kampung’. Department of Regional and City Planning: international conference. March. Putnam, R. (1993) Making democracy work: Civic tradition in modern Italy. Princeton University Press. Princeton and New Jersey Putnam, R. (2000) Bowling alone: The collapse and revivial of American Community. Simon and Schuster: New York. Radice, H. (2008) The development state under global Neoliberalism. Third World Quarterly 29: 1153-1174. Rivlin (1971) Systematic thinking for social action. The Brookings Institutions: Washington D.C.
71
Ross, A. (2009) Nice work if you can get it: Life and labor in precarious times. New York University Press: New York and London. Slocum, R.. Wichart, L.. Rocheleau, D & Thomas, B. (1995) Power, process and participation. ITDG Publishing: London Soemardi, A. (2006) Bandung as a creative city: visions on creative culture and the making of place. International Seminar on Urban Culture – Arte-Polis: Bandung. Soemardi, A. & Damajani, D. (2008) Third space, urban informality and creative communities: redefining café in contemporary Bandung: Arte-polis, Institute of Technology Bandung: Bandung. Sumardjo, J. (2012) Sejarah Budaya Kampung Kota Bandung. Paper presentation in Akupuntur Kota. Bandung.
Takeshi, I. (2006) The dynamics of local governance reform in decentralizing Indonesia: participatory planning and village empowerment in Bandung. Asian and African Area Studies 5: 137-183.
Twigg, J. (2001) Guidance notes on participation and accountability. Benfield Hazard Research Centre: London.
UNESCO-UNDP (2013) Creative economy report: widening local development pathways. United Nations Development Programme: New York. UN-Habitat (2008) Bridging the urban divide – state of the world’s cities 2010/2011. United Nations Human Settlements Programme. UN-Habitat (2012) Prosperity of Cities – state of the world’s cities 2012/2013. United Nationas Human Settlments Programme. Widyarini Hapsariniaty, A., Darma Sidi, B. & Nurdini A. (2013) Comparative analysis of choosing to live in gated communities: a case study of Bandung metropolitan era. Social and Behavioral Sciences 101: 394 – 403. World Bank (2011) Measuring Inequality. The World Bank Yin, R. (2003) Case Study Research. Sage publications: London
72
APPENDIX I: LIST OF CREATIVE CITIES NETWORK MEMBERS Category City Literature Edinburgh
Melbourne Iowa City Dublin Reykjavik Norwich Krakow
Cinema Bradford Sydney
Music Sevilla Bologna Glasgow Ghent Bogota Brazzaville
Crafts Santa Fe Aswan Kanazawa Icheon Hangzhou Fabriano Paducah
Design Buenos Aires Berlin Montreal Nagoya Kobe Shenzhen Shanghai Seoul Saint-Étienne Graz Beijing
Media arts Lyon Enghien-les-Bains Sapporo
Gastronomy Popayán Chengdu Östersund Jeonju Zahle
Source: UNESCO-UNDP (2012)
73
APPENDIX II: PROJECT LOCATION MAP IN DAGO POJOK
Source: Google maps, 2014
Legend
Dago Tea House
PKBM
Batik Fractal workshop
Wall paintings
Closest bus stop Source: Google maps, 2014
Main road
River
Kampung Dago Pojok RW03
Formatted: Centered
Formatted: Centered
Formatted: Centered
Formatted: Centered
Formatted: Centered
Formatted: Centered
Formatted: Centered
Formatted: Centered
Formatted: Centered
Formatted: Centered
Formatted: Centered
Formatted: Centered
Formatted: Centered
Formatted: Centered
Formatted: Centered
Formatted: Centered
Formatted: Centered
Formatted: Centered
Formatted: Centered
Formatted: Centered
Formatted: Centered
Formatted: Centered
Formatted: Centered
Formatted: Centered
Formatted: Centered
74
APPENDIX III: KAMPUNG KREATIF IMPLEMENTATION
After a kampung is selected, the socialization process starts. This means kampung
inhabitants agree about the program and their selected potentials. Then
partnering communities are being defined that can support the program. After
that, advocacy and skill-building related to local potentials support the program.
Thereafter, infrastructure is improved and physical facilities are strengthened.
Then, tourism potentials are being mapped and local inhabitants are trained to
maintain the tourism facilities and services. The next step is the creation of a
creative hub. Building a creative space in the kampung, which functions as a place
for gathering and activities. Another interesting development is the creation of a
network of hostels located in each creative area. The following step is forming
local organizations in each kampung that prepare for festivals and further
programs. In the case of Dago Pojok it is Komunitas Taboo. One of the lasts steps
is holding a festival as a celebration for the community’s creativity, promotion of
kampung brands and publication of commitment among kampung citizens. The
very last step is sustainability. There should be a direct benefit for kampung
inhabitants in order to ensure the sustainability of the program.
BCCF (2013)
Formatted: Centered
75