City govt needs to involve public more
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.