Circle of Dreams :Making Public Transportation for Urban Economic Patterns

Deni Danial Kesa*PhD Student in Business Program

CYCU Chung Li Taiwang9904608@cycu.edu.tw,denidanialkesa@gmail.com, d.danial@ui.ac.id

Abstract:The main distinctive feature of this paper, is to increase public awareness of issues relating to public transport associated with socioeconomic vulnerability and capacity. Growth and the concentration of economic activity in a big city is not matched by adequate infrastructure. It refers to the close links between policy implementation and development of equitable development of mass transportation. Growth in the deployment process, such as major cities in any country will go according to plan, it is due to government regulation that urban planning is well designed. Major cities like Jakarta, Indonesia should immediately change the city with good transportation management, in order not to lose the sources of economic potential activity. The urban economic structure developed in the long transformation process, which was marked by the integration of some satellite cities in Jakarta. Nowadays, as the result of that historical process and the massive expansion of the capitalist market economy, the big cities in the central area and these areas have big role become the center of the urban development process.

Key word : Public Transportation, Urban Economic Structure, Satellite Cities, Jakarta.

1. INTRODUCTION

Megacity has been growing faster recently, the contemporary world has been

dramatically built and transferring to a new gigantic system of urban development

(Yeung, 2009 p.1). In this new world of today, socioeconomic, and urban planning has

been redefined in terms of global understandings and explanations. The modern city of

Jakarta was initiated by former Indonesian founding fathers who has a strong vision to

build Jakarta in the greatest city possible (Cybriwsky and Ford, 2001). Perspective and

analysis are being developed into a typical example of the simple modern major country,

this implies the massive involvement of Indonesia in international trade, investment, and

production. It is obvious that the political and economic structure of Indonesia has been

affected by global economic. Indonesia facing urban social disparities with economy,

urban system produces more crucial processes going on massive urban economic pattern.

The argument here is that Indonesia’s population is mostly made up by rural-urban

migrants who live in the vast low income neighbourhood (Abeyaskere, 1989).

The urban economic structure is mostly absorbed into the informal sectors of the

economy and the marginal part of the formal sector. They are geographically mobile

within the city following their initial rural to urban areas with commuting. Urban

economic structure in Indonesia can be seen as an economic process functioning as a

major force behind the social changes taking place in Indonesia. Comparative studies

between rural and urban development presented.

Figure 1: Urban and rural populations of the world, 1950 to 2030

Source: Urban and Rural Populations of the World United Nations 2004, p. 4

In this context, we see that Indonesia commuters, are the major actors and reactors

in the city’s transformation. The paper answering the city is made up by the people who

live and work there and through urban economic structure they are transforming the city.

related to public transportation. To answer these questions a sample survey was carried

out in Indonesia, comprise 317 respondents. The paper is divided into four main parts:

the first defining Jakarta spatially demographic, geographical, and economic structure.

The second describing the impact and implications of public transportation. Third,

Integrated public transportation in Jakarta the role of government to embody dream of

Jakarta as Mega city as the fourth.

.

2. METHODOLOGY

The fact that our research questions are formulated in a way that further research

can be conducted also indicates an exploratory approach in our study. Since the purpose

of our study is to provide a better understanding of the topic in order to get insight about

2

it. In general, this paper is primarily descriptive involved an analysis of data obtained

from 317 individual interviewees in Indonesia and all speaking in Indonesian languages .

Aged from 20 to 40, and were commuted . Each interview was conducted for around 3

simple questions. Beginning with easy questions, then moving on to more complicated

and concluding the interview again with comfortable questions, and the request for a

possible follow-up. Study participants were asked a variety of questions related to

commuting purposes, what kind transportation they preferred, and perception on

contributing build economic structure. The interviews consisted of structured questions

as well as ad hoc follow up questions. To encourage the interviewees to freely express

themselves (Neuman, 1997), interviews were conducted in Indonesian languages.

3. FINDINGS

3.1. Demographic Situation

Based on the results of our study, it can be shown that many lower-class

Indonesians have carried out several moves within the city. Seventy-four percent of the

respondents have changed residence more than once. In this context, respondents who

migrated within Indonesia, twice, three and four times constitute twenty-nine, twenty-

four and eight percent respectively. Thirteen percent has moved more than four times. In

contrast, respondents who have carried out an Urban economic structure only once are

comparatively few. This category is represented by twenty-six percent of the total

respondents.Figure 2: Population of Jakarta

Source: DKI Jakarta Province Central Bureau of Statistic, 2010

21082

2062232

2693896

899515

2281945

1645659

0

500000

1000000

1500000

2000000

2500000

3000000

KEPULAUAN SERIB

U

JAKARTA S

ELATA

N

JAKARTA TIM

UR

JAKARTA P

USAT

JAKARTA B

ARAT

JAKARTA U

TARA

Population 2010 on national survey

3

Based on this data, we conclude that the majority of respondents are geographically

mobile. Almost 9.604.329 people based on 2010 national survey data, In the end 2012

the population in Jakarta increase and reach 10.187.595 This is understandable in

relation to Jakarta urban reality, which is characterized by the presence of dramatic

numbers of recent commuter in the urban labor force, country people moved into the city

as labor migrants attracted by the economic growth of Indonesia . A large number with

commuter in Jakarta in 2011 was approximately 5.6 million people every day. (BPS,

2012). Commuting from Jakarta buffer areas, namely Bogor, Depok, Tangerang, and

Bekasi (Bodetabek) experiencing significant population growth. Based on population

statistics, the addition Bodetabek buffer zone residents in about 1.5 million people or

increase more than five times (three hundreds fifty percent) the addition of Jakarta

residents since 2009-2010.

Table.1: Greater Jakarta population

Administrative division(With province)

Area (km²)

Population Population density (/km²)

DKI Jakarta 664 10.187.498 15.343Bogor Municipality

109 952.406 8.737(West Java)Bekasi Municipality

210 2.378.211 9.905(West Java)Tangerang Municipality

164 1.797.715 9.342(Banten)South Tangerang Municipality

151 1.303.569 8.646(Banten)Bogor Regency

2.664 4.779.578 1.791(West Java)Tangerang Regency

960 2.838.621 2.958(Banten)Bekasi Regency

1.270 2.629.551 2.071(West Java)Depok Municipality

200 1.751.696 7.053(West Java)Jabodetabek Region 6.392 28.618.845 4.477

Source: DKI Jakarta Province Central Bureau of Statistic, 2010

This concept has been used to identify the migrant urban labor force, which is

integrated into the urban economy through their carrying out of informal economic

activities. The commuter of Jakarta is highly mobile, according figure 2 with regard to

4

places of work and residence, and also concerning their different kinds of occupations in

large scale of the population. The rapid economic growth of the Jakarta region feared

the increasing number of migrant population. The industrial sector, which is one a

driving factor in economic growth, a pull factor for migrants hoping for a better job

opportunity.

3.2 Geographical scope and direction of urban economic structure

DKI (Daerah Khusus Ibukota) Jakarta, or Jakarta city, is the capital city of

Indonesia. Jakarta consists of five municipalities and lies in the lowland on the north

coast of the western part of Java Island (Fig. 2). The city occupies an area of 640 km2, or

0.03% of the national land area. Jakarta has a flat terrain, and the land gradually rises

from 5 to 50 m above mean sea level.

Figure 3: Map of Jakarta

Source : Adapted from Jakarta in Figures 2012. DKI Jakarta Province Central Bureau of Statistic, 2012

The social geographical scope and direction of urban economic structure is seen in three

indicators. The first is the geographical distance between former neighbourhoods and

place where they are working. The second is the comparative geographical distance from

the Monas square to the old and new residential localities. This is based on the argument

that almost every commuter knows the square. For many people, the square is considered

as the center point of the city because of the national unity monument (150 meters high)

located there. Around the monument are located the presidential palace, central railway

station, offices of ministries, the central Indonesia mosque, and shopping centers etc. The

third is the comparative social and physical conditions of the modern and old

B ot a d e b e k re g io n

DKI Jakarta Province

M o n as

5

communities based on subjective measurements as well as evaluations by individual

actors.

According to the data collected, a large number of respondents carried out

comparatively short-distance commuter (fifty-nine percent), i.e. They commuted from

satellite cities all around Jakarta approximately 5,000 meters away. Included in this

category are some respondents who moved less than 500 meters. Forty one percent of

respondents are made up by the category who migrated distances within Jakarta of more

than 5,000 meters. When we interpret the data in a more inclusive way, included in this

category are about twenty-five percent of the respondents who have commuted more than

10,000 meters.

Figure 4: Distance between place of origin and destination

Source : Authors data collection

This finding leads us to the conclusion that, for many people, short distance

residential movement can be considered as a commuter (the local term for temporary

migration to urban area). Although they move an insignificant degree in distance,

socially they enter a new local environment. In many cases, adjacent communities

separated by busy streets, a large-river or railway-tracks can be considered as different

localities. This is interesting in connection with the findings of previous migration

studies in Jakarta. These studies consider migration to be a comparatively long distance

phenomenon.

6

3.3 Public transportation in Jakarta

Situation of public transportation in Jakarta related to significant economic and

cultural differences generated by their daily life in certain urban spatial niches or

localities. Similarly, working and living conditions are different in so far as they relate to

the established patterns of daily life in certain areas. For instance, they use transportation

and facing conditions in the high congestion of traffic jam . The people have specific

socioeconomic ties with their working places, family, friends, etc. The traffic congestion

in Jakarta related to a high growth rate of vehicle ownership, nine to eleven percent per

year. This situation which is not supported by the growth of road development showing

only less than one percent per year. The development of new roads will never meet the

high growth rate of vehicle ownership. A new highway or a widened road only alleviates

traffic congestion for a short period of time. After a few years, any new highway fills

with traffic that would not have existed if the highway had not been built. Similarly, any

widened road fills with more traffic in just a few months. Such a phenomenon is called

infrastructure impede economic growth. Because of this impede economic growth,

neither building new roads nor widening roads are viable long term solutions to traffic

congestion, and new pattern of the urban economy.

Table 2. Day trip to Jakarta based on originRegion 2011 2012Tangerang 847.750 1.578.663Bekasi 545.310 1.193.099Bogor and Depok 620.702 1.191.295DKI Jakarta 5.302.194 8.384.949Total 20.137.620 23.700.000

Source : Traffic management control, Jakarta metro police department, 2012

Jakarta residents to implement as many ways as possible to alleviate traffic

congestion including mass rapid transportation strategy and building economic

infrastructure . Mass rapid Transportation as the commuting public vehicle system is

another way to reduce commuting by using technologies.

Development of an area, accompanied by the ongoing social and economic level of

the area, directly will lead to very high mobility for meeting the increasing complexity of

their needs. Development of an area will be largely determined by the availability of

existing transportation, because transport plays a role in support of mobility activities

7

communities in the area. The condition requires the availability of better facilities,

particularly with regard to transport infrastructure can support the growth in demand.

Efforts to realize the infrastructure to support increased traffic movements as a result of

the growth of an area should be coupled with careful planning which refers to the

geographical conditions and local topography, traffic conditions, the availability of cost,

and resource potential of existing areas, urban economic infrastructure will be built to

maximize technology and developing transportation system properly.

4. DISCUSSION4.1. Demographic Situation

State of the world’s cities 2012-2013 mention the capital of the Indonesia, Jakarta

is one of the Cities with solid prosperity factors second category. With approximately 10

million inhabitants (UN-Habitat report, 2012). Furthermore, over 28 million people, or

10 per cent of the population of Indonesia, currently live in the wider metropolitan region

of Greater Jakarta, frequently referred to as Jabotabek, which is composed of 6

independent municipalities; Jakarta, Bogor, Tangerang, Bekasi, Depok and South

Tangerang (Turner, 2012). This means, that as the patron city; Jakarta will contend a lot

of potential and management challenges.

4.2 Geographical scope and direction of urban economic structure

The urban structure developed in the long transformation process, which was

marked by the integration of some satellite cities. Nowadays, as the result of that

historical process and the massive expansion of the growth economy, up to this point,

this research analyzes the regional division of labor in the commuter context. Urban

planning treats Jakarta’s urban system as being divided into three areas according to a

spatial division of infrastructure core areas, the semi periphery, and the periphery. In this

connection, the main urban center (central areas) is seen as the core, the secondary urban

centers are considered as semi-periphery regions, and the tertiary urban centers as well as

the rural areas are seen as peripheral regions. The central areas of Jakarta became the

centers of development and place of capital circulation. The core of Jakarta, as the center

of urban economic development, is made up by very modern structures. These areas are

surrounded by the vast area of low and middle class neighbourhoods.

8

The discussion of the geographical distance and what kind transportation can

influence urban economic structure, using public transportation as the orientation point,

suggests the question of what is the general direction of urban economic structure from

rural to urban. Some respondents said that the distance of their workplace is more

convenient if they using public transportation with private vehicle as a variation

(seventeen percent). However, the percentage of respondents reckoning using their

private vehicle to their work place almost in big number (thirty seven percent). Above

all, a majority of respondents considered the public transportation as their new model of

commuting system (forty five percent). These data demonstrate the fact that in most

cases of urban economic structure using public transportation, transportation variety is

the directional pattern characterized by commuters.

Figure .6: Comparative system of transportation used by commuter

Source: author’s data collection

Jakarta development represents both a socially traditional and physically

deteriorated feature of the city’s urban sprawl and historically it does not seem to be

disappearing as part of the modernization process. These areas have become slum behind

the skyscrapers of Jakarta which are one of the clearest symbols of Indonesia’s

involvement in the scaffolding of the world economy.

The economic growth of Jakarta in 2008 was 6.23 percent slower than 2007, when

government raising fuel in 2008 with sub-prime mortgage crisis in the US. The impact

still remained in 2009 the economic growth of Jakarta only 5.02 percentage It was the

lowest in last five years. Middle class workers make up a major segment of the urban

9

commuter labor force to handle the crisis. They usually integrate themselves into the

larger communities and maintain socioeconomic relations.

Figure .7: The economic growth rate Jakarta and Indonesia

Source: DKI Jakarta Province Central Bureau of Statistic, 2012

Investment and economic development in greater Jakarta areas characterized with

local economic potential has not been well emerging. Lack of support for the investment

climate in favor of satellite cities, and low capacity of municipal government officials in

the development and management of the urban economy. Data on GDP at current prices

in 2008-2012 shows that most of the GDP growth was still present in cities of

metropolitan.

Jakarta's GDRP compared to Indonesia's GDP in 2012 was 6.53 percent and it was

a decrease of 0.03 percent from 2010 and 0.20 percent from 2011. Jakarta's contribution

to Indonesia's economy was primarily caused by the dominance of Jakarta in the

financial and business sector as capital of Indonesia. Indonesia's GDP of the financial and

business sector in 2012 was 261,8 trillion rupiahs and Jakarta's GDRP become one of the

largest contributors as 6.53 percent of total Indonesian GDP. Transportation and

communication rank first from overall reach 11,79 percent. Services come as second

sector with 7,58 percent, trade, hotel and restaurant 7,21 percent, Construction 6.85

percent. Most rural characteristic such agriculture and mining sectors of Jakarta only

contributed as low as 0.83 percent % to Indonesia's economy in 2012. These figures

indicate that Jakarta strongly dominates urban sectors in Indonesia's economy. It is also

important to note that there were finance and services of Jakarta's economy that increased

their contributions to Indonesia's economy during period 2010-2012. Manufacturing and

The economic growth rate of DKI Jakarta and National 2007-2012

6.4 6.26.7 6.56.5

5

6.26.56.1

4.5

6.46.1

012345678

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

year

Perc

enta

ge

DKI Jakarta

National

10

construction of Jakarta decreased their contributions to Indonesian GDP. These situations

show that Jakarta began changing from industry city to services megacity. A number of

manufacturing plants in Jakarta have been relocated but most of them were just relocated

to Bogor, Depok, Tangerang, and Bekasi as peripheral areas.

Table 3. Jakarta growth rate of economic sector in 2010-2012 (percent)

Source: DKI Jakarta Province Central Bureau of Statistic, 2012

The rapid growth is due to the increased revenue of the country as a result of the

successful implementation of development programs in various fields, particularly the

manufacturing sector in the form of large-scale manufacturing and export-oriented, the

tourism industry and export crops. Growth in the services sector, trade and non-

manufacturing industries has also increased dramatically following the growth of the

industrial base. Migration to large cities and production centers, it is unavoidable, it has

also increased to meet the demand for labor supply.

This urban economic structure provides a logical consequence of the increasing

demand for the development of physical infrastructure, facilities which in turn has led to

increased demand for a new model of an integrated public transportation system. We

argue, developing integrated public transportation as part of the ideology, It is inevitable

that the developments will carried out, in addition to further spur further growth in the

country's economy and increase the employment. It has also put pressure significantly on

transportation infrastructure and facilities which in most cases, not yet designed properly

or to serve and accommodate the burdens of the additional traffic generated by the

presence of previous implication concept.

11

Industrial origin2010 2011 2012

DKI Jakarta

Indonesia’sGDP

DKI Jakarta

Indonesia’s

GDPDKI

JakartaIndonesia’s

GDPAgriculture 0.84 15,29 0.78 14,70 0.83 14,44Mining and quarrying 1.47 11,16 4.35 11,85 -0.89 11,78Manufacturing 3.61 24,80 2.55 24,33 2.42 23,94Electricity, Gas and water 4.33 0,76 4,70 0,77 4,50 0,79Construction 7.08 10,25 7,20 10,16 6.85 10,45Trade, hotel and restaurants 7.27 13,69 7,40 13,80 7.21 13,90Transportation and Communication 14.73 6,57 13,80 6,62 11.79 6,66Financial, Real estate and business services 4.24 7,24 5.28 7,21 5.35 7,26Services 6.58 10,24 7.05 10,56 7.58 10,78Gross domestic regional product 6,50 100,00 6.73 100,0 6.53 100,0Gross domestic regional product without oil and gas 6.51 92,17 6.73 91,58 6.55 92,27

Although these issues are growing in most urban center in the region, of course, the

problem is particularly being felt also in the national capital, create a center of business

near transportation facilities can be solved, both congestion or employment. The

construction of underground stations and elevated station. Main development often also

refers to business center around the public transportation system facility, although

basically no doubt be able to increase revenue, increased employment, and even

increased opportunities for foreign investment, but it is build an integrated system

proved that such developments will provide significant additional pressure on

environmental carrying capacity, utility and public services also need security for those

implications. Government needs intend to espouse the business and commercial

enthusiasm that basically will no doubt be able to increase revenue, increased

employment, and even increased opportunities for foreign investment, but is a clear proof

that the capacity physical carrying capacity, in particular the existing highway

infrastructure will be unable to meet the level of demand in the private vehicle traffic

generated by future due to new developments.

4.3 Public transportation in Jakarta

Jakarta until 2010 only built 6.866.04 km which includes national roads and

provincial roads. To reach the provincial road length of 6599.91 km while the length of

national roads reached 266.128 km (123, 48 miles are highway and 142.647 km are state

roads). The extensive existing road in Jakarta about 47 million square meters or 0.28

percent of the total area of Jakarta.Figure .8: The number of trips to Jakarta

Source: DKI Jakarta Province Central Bureau of Statistic, 2012

The number of trips To jakarta

1672600

3657138

6633581

2381637

6271556

0

1000000

2000000

3000000

4000000

5000000

6000000

7000000

Business Private workplace shopping school

Destination

trips

per

son/

day

12

The fact that the majority of respondents has used laterally within a public

transportation system. In figure 8 show almost 20, 7 million trips per/day , the highest

number are those who trips to workplaces. It is also understandable in relation to our

previous analysis of geographical distances of urban economic structure. The majority of

commuter continues to use public transportation system to build a center of business

around the core and the important central places of greater Jakarta. It is clear that they

tend to move to new areas close to the facility of the megacity. This is closely connected

to their needs as commuter involved in urban economic activities. Thus, the patterns of

their moves relative to a certain point in the central area of the city reveal a common

tendency. They have daily activity from one place to another in the center related to their

job and economic activity, education, leisure.

A commuter who dwelled in the various satellite city of Jakarta tend to use public

transportation in a circular pattern related to the facility and conveniences. This supports

the argument that, seeing Jakarta as the central part of the humane mega city is

strikingly important. This area is the core of the urban reality of Indonesia, whereas the

other areas support the systems with peripheral zone function

The other aspect of the direction of urban economic structure in Indonesia can be

drawn from subjective comparisons of the economic and physical conditions of public

transportation. The majority of respondents stated that the physical environmental

conditions (quality, safety , affordable etc.) Indicate not satisfied (fifty one percent). It

was also found that thirty five percent of the respondents consider both which means

moderate option. Whereas, the percentage of respondents who say they satisfied using

public transportation according pricing and economic status.

Figure.9: The satisfaction level using public transportation

13

Source: author’s data collection

The data presented can be compared with the respondents' subjective evaluation of

preference choosing public transportation. According to the data collected, it can be

clearly observed that only small numbers of respondents say that they will choose using

their private vehicle, using public transportation becoming one alternative vehicles that

could be used to the workplace (seven percent). The data show that forty four percent of

the respondents will choose a bus as vehicle choice. However, the majority of

respondents prefer to use trains as their transportation (forty-nine percent). All those

preferences will choose by the respondent if public transportation ensure ensure that such

transport systems promote social economic sustainability (Turner, 2012).

Figure .10:Public transportation preference

Source: author’s data collection

14

Based on these data, we conclude that respondents generally willing to use good

public transportation. This reflects the subjective evaluation of respondents of actual

conditions in their common experience. This paper observed the benevolent results of

the urban transformation process, which is characterized by the emergence of many

economic opportunities leading to socioeconomic mobility for creating business center.

4.4 Integrated Public Transportation

According to the data presented in Table 4, we find that the majority of the

respondents have commuting mainly in connection with seeking a better public

transportation with good facility (twenty seven point four percent respectively). The

respondents in this category do consider better public transportation in terms of its

physical and environmental conditions as well as a business location. And create a station

as an enjoyable place while they are waiting for commuting activity. The percentage of

respondents who have based their transportation needs for public transportation in their

life cycle, daily work place, are comparatively almost needing various public

transportation (nineteen percent respectively).

The fact shows that many respondents who use public transport, expecting free

from flooding, which will interfere with daily activities.. (Twenty two point four

percent). Security to be one factor that is needed by the users of public transport

services, the data indicated about eight point two percent. The lowest ticket price of an

option and hope for the users of public transport, and expect any better service with

maximum attention to the public interest. Expected by the users who most of the

workers, there is a good spatial arrangement that can organize the city and transportation

services that can support economic growth and more equitable (sixth point thirteen

percent respectively)

Table 4: Respondents’ expectation of public transportation as part of the urban economic structure

Expectation Population Percent

Various Public transportation 62 19.6

Security 26 8.2

Flooding free 71 22.4

Lower Price 28 8.8

Urban spatial 43 13.6

15

Facility 87 27.4

Total 317 100.0

Source: author’s data collection.

Discussing the various public transportation , we can refer to the urban economic

structure of workers around the greater Jakarta. In recent years, Government as the main

stakeholders take on the role try to implied regulation to reduce congestion with macro

transportation pattern, which is more integrated and efficient. Three macro transportation

pattern including infrastructure development, create more mass rapid transportation and

equipped with regulation.

As a common feature of the old established megacity in the central part of Jakarta,

the physical environments of infrastructures are characterised by severely deteriorated

conditions and improved should be implies. According to master plan Jakarta province.

First, maximize traffic rhythm arrangement with government implementation on

technological area traffic control system (ATCS) . All traffic intersections in the city

could coordinated signalized traffic control set includes one centralized area. Second ,

The structures add new 11 connected roads, two non-toll highways along the 7.66 km,

Antasari-Blok M and Kampung Melayu-Tanah abang. Third, Supported by city toll road

along the 69.77 km, from Semanan to Pulo Gebang and Sunter until Pasar Minggu.

Fourth, providing pedestrian areas which can be safety area to waiting vehicles to come..

Government after a certain period of time, they become more acceptable to new

idea, of integrating public transportation. Jakarta , already has pioneering urban migrants

transportation even develop a wider system of social relations besides existing

transportation such Busway or bus rapid transit (BRT) or a mass transit system built by

Jakarta Provincial Government. Construction of the busway is one of the strategies of the

macro transportation pattern to improve services and provision of transport services that

are safe, integrated, orderly, smooth, comfortable, economical, effective, efficient and

affordable by the community. Busway is in the facilitation of special bus lanes and

infrastructure. Until 2010 the hall has been constructed with the number 10 corridor, bus

fleet reached 545 and 215 stops.

Table 5: Number of buses , passenger and revenue trans Jakarta/Busway

Year Passengers Number of busses Revenues (in rupiah)

2006 38 811 133 159 130 783 673 000

16

2007 61 446 336 339 205 779 784 000

2008 74 619 995 426 248 339 552 000

2009 82 377 690 456 275 317 832 000

2010 86 937 487 404 288 757 425

2011 114 769 431 545 379 138 678 500

Source: Jakarta in figure, 2012

Commuter train, carrying capacity for daily activity still insufficient for migrants

workers or commuter and Jakarta citizen, this situation can lead to their wish to start an

autonomous preference using more bus-way and commuter line train, water-way implied

monorail, MRT dan Sub-way.

Table 6: Number of railway passengers in 2010

No Destination 2008 2009 2010 20111 Inter province 8.447.704 9.115.987 9.136.030 8.325.805

2 Jabodetabek 126.699.747 130.632.466 124.231.056 110.751.052

3 Inside Jakarta 16.356.631 17.318.336 24.424.870 17.407447

Source: Jakarta in figure, 2012

Land transport modes that can also be relied upon in Jakarta is the train, it is seen

from the number of passengers has increased each year. Even in 2011 decrease caused at

that time Indonesian train company (PT.KAI) increase the ticket price and doing the

improvement, the transportation system has been released in several routes. There is now

a KRL Jabodetabek commuter route serving the area in Jakarta, Bogor, Depok,

Tangerang, and Bekasi. There are two classes that serve this pathway are economy class

and class Commuter Line. This Jabodetabek commuter line passes several major stations

such as Jakarta Kota, Gambir, Gondangdia, Jatinegara, Tanah Abang, Pasar Senen, and

Manggarai. In addition, there is also a train Jabodetabek train with a destination outside

the city, which departed from Gambir Station or Station Pasar Senen. Furthermore, the

development of transport systems and networks modern a rail-based mass transit:

Table 7: Jakarta map scheme of railway

17

Urban public transportation station :Business centerTransit oriented developmentSpatial development

Runway :Clearing illegal settlementsDevelopment cheaper public housing

Adding more vehicle

Source: Jakarta, Macro Transportation strategy

To explain the data that many respondents will use alternatives public

transportation, we can refer to the dramatic process of urban transformation going on in

Jakarta during the recent years. The influx of capital, from multi policies into implication

of restructuring and development during the transition between Fauzi Bowo era to Joko

Widodo, has been accompanied by the remarkable increase in demand from the business

sectors, as well as from the state, for urban land, also was a crucial need to appropriate

city land in the central zone of Jakarta to construct office complexes, infrastructure,

Electronic road pricing (ERP), parking and vehicle use limitation, park and ride,

developing integrated zone commercial for business and housing focused on transit

section such station and bus stop.

Figure .11. Urban

economic infrastructure

pattern

18

Planning Item

Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) NetworkNetworking light rail transit (LRT)Loop line and feeder network in the CityNetwork Rail Commuter JabodetabekRailway network traffic towards AirportRailway network supporting the PortImprovement of level crossings between railway and Busway corridorHandling of illegal settlements on railway linesDevelopment of the existing railway line into multitrack

Source: Adaptation from Jakarta, Macro Transportation strategy , Jakarta

Acceleration of infrastructure development has four elements integrated policy that

the national logistics system, the national transportation system, regional development

and information and communication system with integrated vision locally integrated,

connect entirely. National connectivity linking economic centers of local, national and

world (global) effective, efficient and integrated. Therefore, the acceleration of

infrastructure development plays an important role in improve the competitiveness of the

domestic economy, especially with the national economy. The fourth factor is a series of

system elements that have an integrated policy in order to increase the competitiveness of

the domestic economy based on public transportation.

4.5 Government roles

The state wanted to develop and modernize Jakarta, these efforts were intended to

make the city the locus of the modernization process for Indonesia as a whole as well as

to design Jakarta to be the main window for Indonesian international trade and economic

processes. It is obvious that the private sector often functions as the ‘counterpart’ of the

state in building economic structure. In this context, both the state and private business

need urban zones for business near integrated transportation system to realize their

programs of urban development for business. Both the state and private sectors must first

carry out initial scheme and land appropriations and acquisitions in proposed

development project locations. This process is commonly associated with the eviction of

the commuter.

Infrastructure is the wheel of economic growth. sector activities, transportation is

the backbone of the distribution patterns of both goods and passengers. Other

infrastructure such as electricity and urban spatial planning related to the modernization

efforts of the nation and its provision is one of the most important aspects to improve the

productivity of the production sector. Availability of housing and settlement, among

others, water and sanitation, are widely and evenly, and the management of sustainable

technology resources to determine the level of social welfare.

This process also results in the development of local strategies and patterns of

resistance, by consistency from stakeholders, in this step to build regulation process.

19

Lower income groups of Indonesians in greater Jakarta are forced to pay part of the cost

of the development with their loss of local networks of social relations, economic life,

daily routine. In short, build integrated transportation system, will disrupted of greater

Jakarta social life and survival patterns, associated with the public transportation

management, is an example of the effects of this new implication. Integrated public

transportation system and create new concept of economic development distribution , in

this context, is seen as a localized manifestation of the dramatic urbanization process of

Jakarta.. However, resistance to regulation from government to commuter or Jakarta

citizen also reflects local political processes based in Indonesia’s urban communities.

An explanation may be that, although we see a certain degree of relevance of the

definition of urbanization as the economic urban pattern of spatial forms, we must also

consider the specific patterns of local spatial forms. Economic processes through

transportation in Jakarta, like the urban popular development in response to commuter

and citizen Jakarta behaviour, seem to be based mainly on the poor classes’ economic

conditions and on individualistic survival situation which government should give them

transportation subvention. In this sense, we see that every public transportation users

resist and carry out collective actions which are mainly based on hopes of gaining more

compensation with services, rather than organising to achieve institutional changes and

goals which would guarantee and provide them with long term socio-economic access

and gathered benefit as communities. Theories of planning are said occasionally to be

irrelevant to planning practice. Furthermore, diversity of practices in planning and

different types of stakeholders in different contexts complicate the relevance of theories

of planning as common practice.

Table 8: Citizen of Jakarta opinion to government ability

No Government ability Yes(percentage)

No(percentage)

Undecided(percentage)

Number of Respondents

1 Government will provide good transportation system

200(63%)

69(22%)

38(15%)

317

2 Government will muddle through flooding problem

150(47,3%)

157(49,2%)

10(3,5%)

317

3 Government will create jobs and diminish social problem

210(66,2%)

80(25,2%)

27(8,6%)

317

4 Government will overcome security problem

300(94,6%)

10(3,2%)

7(2,2%)

317

5 People believe government caused by leader profile

307(96,8%)

10(3,2%)

--

317

Source: Author data collection

20

The concept of making new Jakarta in Joko widodo and Basuki Tjahya Purnama

era, is not totally new. But the most interesting to be analyze more people of Jakarta

beliefs in their ability to cover every problem in greater Jakarta. Urban development

described through table 8 make plans and implementation of economic development

associated with the transport, would not be separated from the role of government.

In the first place control policies towns and large metropolitan with a focus on the

implementation of urban management include optimization and control land use and

security zones buffer around the downtown core, the city's economic development-

friendly activities environment, as well as the revitalization of the city which includes the

refund function of the area, improving the quality of the physical environment, social,

cultural and realignment of services public facilities, in this term respondent beliefs

government will provide good transportation system (sixty three percent).

Second, development of medium and small cities, the approach needs basic urban

services in accordance with their respective city typology including eradicating flood

(forty seven point three percent) , create jobs and cover social problem (sixty sixth point

two percent) and third, development of urban-rural economic linkages within the urban

economic pattern development that requires the expansion and diversification of

activities economic and trade related to Jakarta satellite cities, influenced by security

problem.

Ninety four point sixth percent respondent belief government could handle this

matter. Urban development policy develop the city as a unified region / area, city as a

driver of national growth and regional as well as the city as a place stay oriented to the

needs of city residents and depending on the consistency of leaders in Jakarta. Fourth,

urban development is to realize the principle of city comfortable, cities that can satisfy

the needs of its citizens will comforts of life, physical, cultural and social environment, a

sustainable city, the city that can address climate change and natural disasters as well as

meet the needs of human life now without ignoring the needs of life human future, fair

city.

According to the data collection almost ninety sixth point eight percent , people of

Jakarta needs leaders profile which can provides space and business life for all segments

of society, and the city as a driver growth that can compete in the global economy with

exploit the potential of the local socio, economy, cultural and creativity created hierarchy

of the market for urban economic pattern. Making plans is quite simple for anybody, but

21

implementing and maintain consistency to make changes for the better in Jakarta is that

not everyone can do. Require a lot of smart and humane cooperation from all

stakeholders, with new government leading the efforts to implement and execute the

plans and support solution for new Jakarta, all the people of Jakarta and all parties can

support a variety of solutions, with all the existing efforts to realize the dream of mega

city Jakarta.

5. CONCLUSIONThis paper research findings challenge the adequacy of the common view that

ignores a significant contribution of the integrated public transportation to urban

economic structure transformation. In this context, we would argue that people in Jakarta

and greater Jakarta share making the city as a result of their high level of mobility within

City bottleneck. First, In this context rapid urbanization in Jakarta must be slowed, one

possible way to reduce urbanization in Jakarta is to redistribute the central functions of

Jakarta to other parts of the areas, and to strengthen other urban agglomerations around

greater Jakarta or even in Indonesia to pull urban growth away from the capital.

Congestion problem in the capital is a major issue that must be resolved Jakarta

Provincial Government together with the central government. One of the important

agenda in an effort to overcome the congestion, to suppress and control the number of

private vehicles and to create integrated public transportation. The second understanding

of the phrase used above is associated with the building of integrated public

transportation as part of strategy by commuter in their choices to using public

transportation. The urban economic structure has as one consequence, the loss of the

former daily system of economic relations in their former urban localities. Hence,

commuters have to develop new social relations, networks, and integrate themselves into

the new behavior. This process is partly associated with the plan of development Jakarta

and relation within greater Jakarta socio economic strategies.

Good urban economic structure will be created and run well when there is

revamping the layout of the city and noticed many public transportation options. Having

regard to the area of the region, because we could not banning people come to Jakarta.

the transport characteristics and users in Jakarta is expected to implement a new

economic development centers spread across the buffer zone Jakarta will be one of

appropriate solution. Integrated solution based on user expectation such various public

22

transportation, with good facilities and safe from disaster should be a consideration in

building public transport infrastructure.

Potential factor by the influence of the government's ability to understand the

aspirations and incorporate to ideal plans in realizing the dream of public transport is an

important element in the creation of the user community economic scheme. Citizen as

user has expectances to government realizing good transportation system. They give their

credence to the management of the public transportation would create more jobs, reduce

social problems existence .

Although various existing policies relative to continue the previous policy. With a

more humane approach and have a fairly high electability, public participation in the

success of various development programs of transportation, will be assist properly.

Government that is trusted by the community and the people who care about the

surrounding circumstances will be able to realize the dream of Jakarta, a reliable form of

public transport and make it as a tool for better society.

Acknowledgement: The author thank Professor Cheng - Wen Lee (CYCU) for her suggestion and comments in on earlier paper writing process.* Lecturer at Vocational Department, finance and banking program, University of Indonesia, Depok, Indonesia and PhD Student at International Business program CYCU Taiwan .ReferencesAbeyasekere, Susan (1989) Indonesia: A History (revised edition). Oxford University

Press, Singapore.Central Board of Statistics (2010) Population of Jakarta: results of 2010 national

population survey. JakartaCentral Board of Statistics DKI Jakarta province (2012) Jakarta in figure 2012.BPS

propinsi Jakarta Cybriwsky, Roman and Ford, Larry R. (2001). City profile: Jakarta. Cities, Vol. 18, No.

3, pp. 199–210Firman, Tommy. (2004). New town development in Jakarta Metropolitan Region: A

perspective of spatial segregation. Habitat International 28(3): 349-368.G.Y.Liu, Z.F.Yang, M.R. Su, B. Chen .(2012)The structure, evolution and sustainability

of urban socio-economic system.ecological informatis, volume 10, july 2012, pages 2-9

Jeff Turner.(2012)Urban mass transit, gender planning protocols and social sustainability: The case of Jakarta.Research in Transportation Economics 34 (2012) 48-53

Murakami, Akinobu, Zain, Alinda Medrial, Takeuchi, Kazuhiko, Tsunekawa, Atsushi, and Yokota, Shigehiro. (2005). Trends in urbanization and patterns of land use in the Asian mega cities Jakarta, Bangkok, and Metro Manila. Landscape and Urban Planning 70: 251-259.

Neuman, W. Lawrence (1997). Social research methods, qualitative and quantitative

23

approaches (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn and BaconProvince of Jakarta. 2012. Macro transportation strategy. File presentation. Pemda

Jakarta. Strategi mengurai kemacetan Jakarta.Tang, Wing-Shing, 2000, "Chinese Urban Planning at Fifty: An Assessment of the

Planning Theory Literature," Journal of Planning Literature, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 347–366.

UN-Habitat report. (2012). State of the World’s Cities Report 2012/2013: Prosperity of Cities. United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-HABITAT) P.O. Box 30030, Nairobi, Kenya

Wheeler, Stephen (2004). "Planning Sustainable and Livable Cities", Routledge; 3rd edition.

Y.-M.Yeung.(2009). Megacities. International encyclopedia of human geography pages.40-47.

Website:Urban and Rural Populations of the World United Nations 2004, p. 4

www.un.org/esa/population/publications/WUP2005/2005WUP_FS1.pdf UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division. http://www.un.org

www.unescap.org/pdd/publications/Disparities/disparities.pdf. Jakarta Metro Police Department website. http://www.tmcmetro.com/

24