1. J A K A R T A - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 8
About This Presentation
Title:

1. J A K A R T A

Description:

Flood in Jakarta has been long history since 1920's. 2. M A S T E R P L A N. ... Based on principal : intercept all rivers before entering Jakarta ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:543
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 9
Provided by: DJO5
Category:
Tags: jakarta

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: 1. J A K A R T A


1
1. J A K A R T A -. Located at Ciliwung
river estuary. -. There are 11 rivers
passing through Jakarta. -. In the year
2000 population is 10 million. -. Flood in
Jakarta has been long history since
1920s. 2. M A S T E R P L A N. 3 MP
have been produced 73 - 91 and 96 -. Based
on principal intercept all rivers before
entering Jakarta MP - 73 Drainage and
Flood Control -. implemented partly due
to budget constraint --. Delay ---gt cost
overrun land acquisition problem .
2
M A S T E R P L A N - 1996
Java Sea
Cengkareng Floodway
City of Tangerang
Eastern Floodway
Sekretaris
Buaran
Grogol
Cakung
Krukut
Pasanggrahan
Angke
Jatikramat
Cipinang
Sunter
Cisadaner
Ciliwung
Ciliwung-Cisadane Floodway
3
-. Fast industry development --gt urbanization
-. City has grown rapidly ---gt leaving
the coverage of 73 MP. -. More waste from
household and industries ---gt 73 MP needs
to be reviewed. MP - 91 Urban Drainage
and Wastewater Disposal. -. Urbanization
extended beyond citys administrative
boundaries. -. Growing satellite towns. -.
Poor watershed -. More occupation of river
bank and flood plain ---gt land value
escalated. -------gt Environment
completely different. MP - 96 -. Covers
larger area ( satellite towns ) --. Covers
major watershed
4
3. MODE OF FLOOD MANAGEMENT 1. Little
attention to flood compare to water use (
utilization ) ( government - financial
institutions WB - ADB ) ---gt budget was
hardly available. Water use from 0 to
Flood to keep not become
negative 2. More physical works than
social approach. More as flood fighting
than flood management. 3. Planning
consulted only to village chief or district
parliament. -. No public consultation nor
announcement to public -. Only
inter-government agencies meeting was
intensive Culture of management was still
more as top-down process 4. Disclosure of MP
? ---gt triggered land speculation. 5.
Decision taken at central level - as
budget source 6. Environmental-social
problems not well addressed within MP
5
4. P A R T I C I P A T I O N 1. For
minor works only - where direct
beneficiaries identified clearly. 2. Urban
character made difficult to define
beneficiaries. 3. Land owner at construction
sites do not see any benefit - sacrifice ? 4.
Priorities were given to protocol roads and
commercial areas 5. Protection of public
facilities is government responsibility 6.
Private company offices - already paid high
land tax 7. Only some real estates
participate for their sales promotion ---gt
Flood fee ? ---gt who are the beneficiaries
? ---gt still under study
6
5. RIVER BANK OCCUPATION Illegal
settlers urbanization - job seekers --gt
Reduce river carrying capacity ---gt
Dangereous for themselves --gt Settlers
struggle for life ---gt ignore regulations
(river right of way) --gt Occupants pay land
tax - get electricity - some water supply
--gt NGOs support them without clear
solutions --gt Law enforcement ? ---gt
financial social consequences ---gt
Resettlement? ---gt away from their income
source - childrens school. --gt They
consciously prepared to pay the cost of
living dangerously. ------gt Remain big
problems
7
6. FUTURE PROSPECT. Water Resources
Policy Reform, based on a).
Democratization b). Decentralization.
Program a). Adjustment of Law Regulations
New Water Resources Law. b). Adjustment
of Institutions. Establishment of Water
Resources Council at National, Coordination
Committee at Provincial and Basin
level c). Improve water resources
management -. Public consultations ---gt
bottom-up process ---gt Expect change
from flood fighting to flood management.
8
7. C O N C L U S S I O N a. Flood
problem is aggravated by fast
urbanization c. Flood victims mostly the
poor. b. Stakeholders (government, society,
financial institutions - WB ADB ) given
unfair attention to flood compared to
utilization and conservation -------gt -.
Lack of community participation. -. Lack of
integration with Spatial and Land Use
Planning -. Lack of public
consultation. -. Difficult to identify the
beneficiaries. RECOMMENDATION Change
the paradigm ---gt give more attention to
water related disaster -----gt See attached
Tables.
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com