Kampung Improvement Program in IndonesiaCase Study: Kampung in Surabaya

1

ANITA DIANINGRUM, ST, MTUrban-Rural Design and Conservation Research GroupStudy Program of Architecture, Faculty of EngineeringUniversitas Sebelas Maret

Wednesday, 6 October 2021

2

Urbanization: become an importantand urgent problem in all countries

90%

Urbanisation brings opportunity:achieved middle-income statuswithout urbanising. But newinfrastructure must be provided

Without adequate services to match demand-> posenew challenges : poor housing, insecure tenure, andinequalities in access to utilities. (Lucci, Bhatkal, Khan,& Berliner, 2015 )

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), Goal 11 : to ‘make cities andhuman settlements inclusive, safe, resilient, and sustainable’ with its firsttarget seeking to ‘ensure access for all to adequate, safe and affordablehousing and basic services, and upgrade slums’ (UN,2015).

Urbanization

Projection : 54% world’s population lives inurban areas, 90% of the increase concentrated inAsia and Africa (UN, 2014)

3

Indonesia

90%Developing Country

Nearly 90% of the concentrated indeveloping countries -> many problemsthat arise in developing countries, noexception in Indonesia.Indonesia -> also still faces many bigproblems

Cities in Indonesia: dominatedby informal settlements and“Kampung”: the word thatcommonly used for informalsettlements in Indonesia(Budiarto (2003) in Ernawati,Santosa, and Setijanti (2013))

Kampung : “unique settlement” (Silas & Ernawati, 2013)which was built through the traditional and informalprocess by the inhabitant (Silas (1992) in Ernawati et al.(2013))

(-) Kampung:• has a low quality of housing• contain a mix of socio-economic

groups with low and middle-income households

• lack of urban facilities andservices (Silas (1992) & Ford, L.R(1993) in Ernawati et al. (2013))

(+) Kampung:• a good alternative for the

sustainability of life in the city(Hanan et al., 2015)

• still survives as the importantdevelopment element of thecity

(Silas & Ernawati, 2013)

Kampung Improvement Programshould be one of the priorities toimprove the environmentalquality of sustainable Kampung.

Negative

Positive

4

Kampung ImprovementProgram: 1920s by the DutchGovernment (KampongVerbetering) (Hanan et al.,2015)

Improvement program:improve public health -> poorhealth of some people-> affectother aspects. (Poerbo, 1978).

Kampong Verbetering

Indonesia:Kampung ImprovementProgram (KIP) wasimplemented (1968) inJakarta and Surabaya (pilotproject) (Silas, 1989)

Jakarta & Surabaya

Kampung ImprovementProgram: globally recognized(UN-Habitat, 2012)arguably the largest leadingimprovement program inseveral countries for overthree decades(Steinberg (1992) & Silas(1992) in A. Das (2015a)) )

Global Program

Activities: integrating the role of the

government and the community inimproving environment (Ernawati &Santosa, 2014)

Main objective: community economicdevelopment and empowerment(Swanendri (2002) in A. Das (2015a)).

Program:• considered very successful in solving

environmental quality problems inan integrated manner (Dhakal, 2002)

• significantly reducing urban poverty(Steinberg (1992) & Silas (1992) in A.Das (2015a))

Activities & Objective

History of Kampung Improvement Program

Surabaya

The first program: “KampongVerbetering”, -> W.R Supratman,World Bank KIP, UNEP and UNICEFprogram. etc

5

Awards: the Aga Khan Award for Architecture (1986),The UNEP Award (1990), and The Habitat Award(1991) (ernawati & santosa, 2014)

Participatory approach: able to explore input from thecommunity, especially target groups that focus on localdemand (Yulius, Setijanti, and Satiawan (2010) in (Butar,2012)).

The success also be more guaranteed, if all communitymembers make a commitment to take part as actors indevelopment ((Siagian (1999) in Butar (2012))

Participatory approach: strategy for sustainable qualityimprovement by empowering local potential (Dhakal (2002) inErnawati et al. (2013)).

Kampung Improvement Program has changed-> still beingimplemented-> proven by the many efforts made by thegovernment and the community in improving the quality oftheir settlements

Kampung improvement program: still being implemented tosupport the Long-Term Development Plan (RPJP) 2005-2025 ->national development targets for 2025 is cities without slums(Cities Without Slums) (Ministry-PPN, 2005).

Surabaya: cities that has a long history and has beensuccessful in implementing the KampungImprovement Program

Success: can be achieved withthe participation of thecommunity.Kampung Improvement Programin Surabaya is still implementedwith a community participationapproach (Setijanti, 2009).

1Program

st

Community participation

• There are two approaches to solve housing problems:

Housing Problem(Housing as a Product Vs Housing as a Process)

6

condition of housing in urban areas: nolonger able to accommodate theincreasing number of new arrivals(Babbie, E.R (1973) in Silas (1989)).

There is no balance between theincreasing demand and provision ofhousing -> housing conditions: gettingdenser and quality decreases (Takahasi,2009).

Housing problems-> became an urgent problem after World War II -> technology and industry dominant role (Asian Development Bank (1983) in Silas (1989)).

Construction was intensivelycarried out and industries beganto be developed -> emergence ofcities and urbanization on a largescale-> housing needs increasedsharply (Takahasi, 2009).

Bottom-up: self-help housing->problem is viewed from the "what itdoes" not "what it is“ framework->Housing is not only a one-timephysical product but a continuousprocess -> related to the socio-economic mobility of residents(Turner, 1976).

Top-down: housing provision->carried out through large-scalehousing development projects->just focuses on quantitativetargets-> mass constructionapproach & modern practices(modern technology, importedmaterials, have similar design(Takahashi, 2009)

Development of Kampung Improvement Program in Surabaya

• At the beginning KampungImprovement Program was initiatedby the community through “gotongroyong”

• Funds of community 60%, localgovernment 40%

• Limited funds and resources from thelocal government

• The funds are used to improve thephysical environment

7

• a new approach developed in theconcept of Kampung Improvement“Kampung development with anintegrated approach"

• Kampung development is seen as aninterrelated process between thesocial, economic, and physicalaspects of the environment

• This should be based on theparticipation of the kampungcommunity in the process

PHYSICAL IMPROVEMENTPHYSICAL, SOSIAL CULTURE&

ECONOMIC IMPROVEMENT

• The previous scheme that has been carried out is successful (community 60%, local government 40%)

• Financial assistance from the World Bank• The government realizes that physical

improvements are not enough-> must be animpact on other aspects such as social &cultural (The program must have multiplayereffect)

• Goal of Kampung Improvement: to improvestandard of people living

PHYSICAL, SOCIAL CULTURALIMPROVEMENT

(Yudohusodo. dkk, 1991) & (Hasan Poerbo, 1978)

Periodization of Kampung Improvement Program in Surabaya

8

KV W.R SUPRATMAN

BANK DUNIA

UNEP UNICEF P2BPK

KIP-K

PLPBK

P2KP

Co-Build

RSDK

NUSSP

PNPM-Mandiri

K.U

1924 1930an 1968 1974 1976 1977 1979 1980 1983 1984 1989 1998 1999 2000 20032001 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2010 2015 2016 2017

Period I

Period II

Period III

Period IV

9

Criteria Period I Period II Period III Period IV

Improvement Aspects 1. Physical improvement aspects

2. Social improvement aspects

3. Economic improvement aspects

Empowerment 4. Application of empowerment

a. Knowledge

b. Statue

c. Resourcing

d. Power Transfer

5. Stage of empowerment

a. Awareness

b. Connecting & Learning

c. Mobilization

d. Contribution

Role 6. Decision-making

a. Heteronomy

b. Autonomy

c. Heteronomy + autonomy

Community Participation 7. Participation level

a. Non participation

b. Degree of tokenism

c. Degree of citizen power

8. Participation Form

10

First period-> focus on physicalaspects improvementinfrastructure: road and drainagechannels, bridge, reservoir publicfacilities improvement

there has been no empowerment ofthe community in programimplementation.

program system is still dominatedby heteronomy/top-down systems->dominant role of the government inthe implementation of the program

Second period : aspects ofimprovement that are addressednot only focus on physicalimprovement aspects-> alreadyconsider the social and economicaspects of the community

Social improvement aspects->toincrease community developmentin implementation programthrough training

Economic aspect: to increasecommunity capacity through loansor working capital assistance from“koperasi” institutions to developcommunity businesses.

Third period: focus of improvementmore comprehensive-> all aspectsof physical, social and economic areequally noticed (known as theconcept of tridaya)

Program objective: to empowerthe community-> community hasdominant role -> people arerequired to be able to mobilizetheir resources independently tobe able to meet the needs that suittheir own

Fourth period: more emphasis on thedevelopment of human resources->because the two aspects of physical andsocial betting are considered to be quitegood in implementing in previousprograms

Scheme of the program is more onincreasing the potential that hasbeen owned by the community with thesupport from the government->community empowerment has thelargest portion compared to previousperiods.

Periodization of Kampung Improvement Program

1 2 3 4

CASE STUDYPHYSICAL IMPROVEMENT

11

RT.10 RW.5, MOROKREMBANGAN, SURABAYA

KAMPOENG SEPOLOH

SURABAYA GREEN AND CLEAN 2015Best of the Best for the advanced category

LOCATION : KAMPUNG

SEPOLOH

TUGU

PAHLAWANPGS

Jl Raya Dupak

Jl Demak

Jl Tembaan

Jl Gresik Gadukan

“KAMPOENG SEPOLOH”

RT.10 RW.5, MOROKREMBANGAN, SURABAYA

LOCATION

The location is in the Bozem Morokrembangan area

14

This Kampung has become a pilot area related to environmental issues. This Kampunghas succeeded in improving the quality of its environment from slums area /low qualityenvironment to high-performing settlements.

Kampoeng Sepoloh

in front of the house

Near the bozem areaPKK park managed by women community

Waste Water Treatment Plant (IPAL), which uses it for watering plants in Kampung Sepoloh, in order to save watering costs.

17

Security & Safety Systems facility.

KAMPUNG NELAYAN KENJERAN

This Kampung is located in the coastal area.

drainage facilities are not in a good condition

a lot of garbage thrown directly into the sea

21

the construction of an environmental road that close to the sea.

CASE STUDYSOCIAL CULTURAL IMPROVEMENT

22

RUSUNAWA DUPAK BANGUNREJO

The flats located in Dupak Village, Bubutan District were built by the Surabaya City Government in 1989 (phase 1) and continued in 1990 (phase II).

• The flat consists of 6 mainbuilding blocks, consisting of 3floors with 150 units, whichstands on an area of 3000 m2.

• The block arrangement followsthe existing plot of land,consisting of residentialbuildings, community buildingsfor meetings, worship, andcommerce, as well assupporting buildings that areused for parking area

SITE PLANNING OF RUSUN DUPAK BANGUNREJO

• The configuration of many unit in phase Iconsists of 9-8-8. In phase II, the design flat isplanned to have more unit on the ground floor,then in phase II it will be 10-8-7

• The stairs at phase 1 are made of steel. So thatthe installation of the stairs in phase II is made ofreinforced concrete which reduces the noise ofpeople going up and down the stairs

RUMAH SUSUN SEWA DUPAK BANGUNREJO – PHASE 1 RUMAH SUSUN SEWA DUPAK BANGUNREJO – PHASE 2

• The basic pattern of the floor plan is ashared sitting room surrounded by flats

• There are windows overlooking thecommon room in each flat.

• Dupak Flat has only one type of unitwith a size of 3x6 meters2

corridor are used by the community as a community space

PUBLIC/ COMMUNITY FACILITIES

CASE STUDYECONOMIC IMPROVEMENT

28

Kampung Tas di Gadukan – Morokrembangan

Kampung Unggulan Program

Kampung Tas di Gadukan – Morokrembangan

there are many local people who work as bag craftsmen.

Kampung Tempe Tenggilis

Kampung Tempe Tenggilis

the craftsmen also receive financial assistance for business development

REFERENCES

• Butar, Debora Catherine Butar. (2012). Penataan Lingkungan Permukiman Kumuh di Wilayah Kecamatan Semampir Kota Surabaya MelaluiPendekatan Partisipasi Masyarakat. JURNAL TEKNIK POMITS, 1(1),1-6.

• Das, Ashok. (2015a). Slum upgrading with community-managed microfinance: Towards progressive planning in Indonesia. HabitatInternational, 47, 256-266. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2015.01.004

• Ernawati, Rita, & Santosa, Happy Ratna. (2014). Community Initiatives in Developing Sustainable Settlements, Case Study Kampung inSurabaya Indonesia. International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT), 3(6), 2242- 2245.

• Ernawati, Rita, Santosa, Happy Ratna, & Setijanti, Purwanita. (2013). Facing urban vulnerability through kampung development, case studyof kampungs in surabaya, indonesia. Humanities and Social Sciences, 1(1), 1-6. doi: 10.11648/j.hss.20130101.11

• Hanan, Ing Ir Himasari, Syamwil, Indra Budiman, Silver, Christopher, Wand, Eku, Sabana, Setiawan, Simatupang, Togar M., . . . Aulia, Astri.(2015). REFLECTIONS ON CREATIVITY: PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT AND THE MAKING OF PLACEIdentification of the Creative Capacity ofKampong's Community towards Sustainable Kampong (Case Studies: Cicadas and Pasundan Kampong, Bandung): A Preliminary Study.Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 184, 144-151. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.05.074

• Kementrian-PPN. (2005). Visi dan Arah Pembangunan Jangka Panjang (PJP) Tahun 2005 - 2025: Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Nasional

• Lucci, Paula, Bhatkal, Tanvi, Khan, Amina, & Berliner, Tom. (2015 ). What works in improving the living conditions of slum dwellers. A reviewof the evidence across four programmes. London

• Peorbo, Hasan. (1981). Pendekatan Terpadu di dalam Pembangunan Daerah Perkampungan dan Permukiman Marjinal, Suatu ActionResearch yang Ditunjang Oleh United Nations Environment Programme di Bandung dan Surabaya, Pada Tahun 1977 - 1980. Paperpresented at the Ceramah Kursus Perencanaan Sosial Pembangunan Kota VII, Sanur, Bali.

• Poerbo, Hasan. (1978). Partisipasi Masyarakat dalam Perbaikan Permukiman Perkotaan : Sebuah Pendekatan yang Sedang Dicobakan diBandung dan Surabaya. Proyek Penelitian dan Pengembangan dengan Bantuan Unite Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). . InstitutTeknologi Bandung. Bandung.

• Setijanti, Purwanita. (2009). Sustainable Concept and Approach in Improvement of Lives for Slum Dwellers : Surabaya's Practices.Journal Architecture and Environment, 8(2), 92-111.

REFERENCES

• Silas, Johan. (1983). Perkembagan Program Perumahan dan Perbaikan Kampung di Surabaya. In J. Silas (Ed.), Program Perbaikan Kampung

• Silas, Johan. (1989). Perumahan Penduduk Kota Berpenghasilan Rendah, Penggalan Sumberdaya dan Pola Pengembangan. Studi Kasus:Perumahan Kota Surabaya. Surabaya.

• Silas, Johan. (1992). Government-Communitty Partnerships in Kampung Improvement Programmes in Surabaya Environment andUrbanization 4(2), 33-41.

• Silas, Johan, & Ernawati, Rita. (2013). Liveability of Settlements by People in the Kampung of Surabaya. Paper presented at the WorldBuilding Congress 2013.

• Surabaya, Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Kota. (2011). Kajian Penataan dan Revitalisasi Kampung di Surabaya

• Takahasi, Kaoko. (2009). Evolution of the Housing Development Paradigms for the Urban Poor: The Post-war Southeast Asian Context. ournalof Asia-Pacific Studies (Waseda University), 67-82.

• Turner, John F.C. (1976). Housing By People Great Britain Marion Boyars Publishers Ltd.

• UN-Habitat. (2012). Sustainable Housing For Sustainable Cities : A policy Framework For Developing Countries. Nairobi.

• UN. (2013 ). World Economic and Social Survey 2013, Sustainable Development Challenges (D. o. E. a. S. Affairs, Trans.)

• UN. (2014). World Urbanization Prospects: The 2014 Revision, Highlights (D. o. E. a. S. A. P. Division, Trans.).

• UN. (2015). Sustainable Development Goals. (https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/topics)

• Yudohusodo, Siswono, Salam, Soearli, & Djoekardi, Djuwanda. (1991). Rumah Untuk Seluruh Rakyat Jakarta INKOPPOL, Unit PercetakanBharakerta

• Yulius, Setijanti, Purwanita, & Satiawan, Putu Rudy. (2010). Upaya Penanganan Kawasan Permukiman Kumuh Nelayan Pulau Baai KotaBengkulu. Paper presented at the Seminar Nasional Perumahan Permukiman dalam Pembangunan Kota 2010

THANK YOUanita.dianingrum@staff.uns.ac.id