City govt needs to involve public more

Suhardi Suryadi, Institute for Social and Economic, Research, Education and Information (LP3ES), Jakarta

The controversy over the floods which hit Jakarta have provoked demands that Jakarta Governor Sutiyoso resign, suggestions to review the Pantai Gading Indah Kapuk housing project in North Jakarta and proposals to impose a 700 percent property tax on houses in water reserve areas in the Puncak mountain resort.

Two things were clear following the floods: The absence of a flood prevention and control system, and the fragility of the relationship between the Jakarta public and its administration. During the highly critical situation, the mutual distrust was glaringly obvious.

Instead of initiating measures, the government stigmatized civil organizations that had lodged criticisms. Private initiatives that effectively mobilized public participation became the much-admired phenomenon of a private government.

Low solidarity on the part of the government and its distrust of civil groups in helping the flood victims has led to further marginalization of the city's poor.

Such conditions can stimulate further conflicts. The handling of this disaster was still done mainly on an ad-hoc basis and the approach was mostly aimed at charity. In the long run, public participation in urban management is imperative. The disaster has made many aware of not only the administration's inability to handle floods but also various urban problems.

The government has failed to facilitate the cohesion and common responsibility of various circles in coping with problems, including those left by the flood disaster.

Urban development planning based only on economic interest has had a severely detrimental effect. Officials have been demoralized because of corruption, collusion and nepotism (KKN), the increase in crimes and the prevalence of conflicts.

The urban planning system has neglected people's resources; this has become more obvious since the crisis hit in 1997. The government has not only failed in reducing poverty; its planners have also failed to show a fair attitude in formulating and implementing urban development plans.

Thus, the government's challenge is how to foster cohesiveness, participation, and partnership among various circles in urban development. Interests and aspirations of different groups should be fairly articulated and accommodated.

In the short term this means the need to achieve cooperation in the massive restoration works required after the floods, as an entry point for future urban development. The welfare of a city is seen not merely from the fulfillment of material needs and the people's individual wealth -- but from the perception that people are given an equal chance in the city.