Abstract
This Chapter explores the nexus between the formal planning objectives for Jayapura and the outcomes ‘on the ground’ as reflected in plan implementation. Spatial planning outcomes include the implementation of the Spatial Plan of Jayapura and the Detailed Spatial Plans and their impact on the urban quality of life. The outcomes of spatial planning include the distribution of resources allocated for settlement improvement as indicated in the plans. The implementation of Law No. 21 of 2001 regarding the Special Autonomy for Papua residents in Jayapura provides an opportunity for the local government to modify the planning outputs to be more ‘flexible and responsive’ to local basic urban service needs. Thus, it is observed that the upper level tools of formal governance such as the Spatial Plan of Jayapura and the Detailed Spatial Plans are more rigid, while lower levels are more fluid and responsive to local needs and circumstances. Spatial planning, for example, benefits stakeholders who are directly involved in the planning process and is primarily oriented to residents who live in the planned settlements. On the other hand, development planning benefits a wider range of target groups such as those defined by Law No. 21 of 2001. The development planning process has strong connections to sectoral planning priorities and provides greater flexibility to address the wider needs of marginalized ethnic groups, such as Papuan customary land owners in the unplanned settlements. As a result, a range of self-organized basic urban services have evolved ‘on the ground’ especially in informal settlements.
Keywords
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
As mentioned in Chap. 3, the household surveys show the resident’s perceptions represented by three types of respondents who reside in formal settlements (termed planned settlements by the Spatial Plan of Jayapura 2008), informal settlements (termed unplanned settlements by the Spatial Plan of Jayapura 2008) and from overall settlements. Whereas the interviews reflect the perceptions of community representatives. Furthermore, a typology analysis and map overlays provide spatial perspectives of the outcomes achieved on the ground.
- 2.
There are several features that differentiate the Spatial Plan of Jayapura 2008 and 2014. First, the inclusion of the national and provincial development agenda in the land use plan, such as the ring road of Tobati–Enggros and Railway Line Jayapura–Sarmi. Second is the inclusion of settlements which are considered unplanned areas in the Spatial Plan of Jayapura 2008, to planned settlements in the Spatial Plans of Jayapura 2014. These include locations prone to landslides and flooding and have been inhabited by the community. The settlements are designated as low-density housing in the Spatial Plan of Jayapura 2014.
- 3.
Interviews with stakeholders, 2014.
- 4.
Interviews with stakeholders, 2015.
- 5.
The term ‘useful’ is defined by respondents as being beneficial for the respondents such as increasing development activities in their areas, while ‘effective’ is perceived as having impact on the respondents such as via law enforcement and ensuring clarity on land status.
- 6.
Interviews with stakeholders, 2015.
- 7.
Interviews with stakeholders, 2015.
- 8.
Interviews with stakeholders, 2015.
- 9.
Interviews with stakeholders, 2015; http://bappeda.jayapurakota.go.id/, accessed 9 October 2016.
- 10.
Interviews with stakeholders, 2015.
- 11.
Interviews with stakeholders, 2015.
- 12.
Interviews with stakeholders, 2015.
- 13.
Interviews with stakeholders, 2015.
- 14.
Author’s individual observations, 2003–2015, interviews with stakeholders, 2015.
- 15.
Interviews with stakeholders, 2015.
- 16.
Interviews with stakeholders, 2015.
- 17.
Individual observations, 2003–2016.
- 18.
Interviews with stakeholders, 2015; individual observations, 2003–2015.
- 19.
Interviews with stakeholders, 2015.
- 20.
Interviews with stakeholders, 2015.
- 21.
Interviews with stakeholders, 2015.
- 22.
Individual observations, 2003–2015.
- 23.
Interviews with stakeholders, 2015.
- 24.
Interviews with stakeholders, 2015.
- 25.
Interviews with stakeholders, 2014.
References
APBD Kota Jayapura 2008–2012
Bab E (2015) Laporan Hasil Survey BKPRD Kota Jayapura
Bappeda Kota Jayapura (2009) Renstra Sanitasi Kota Jayapura
Bappeda Kota Jayapura (2014) Laporan Kegiatan Tahunan Bidang Sosial Budaya
DKP Kota Jayapura (2012) Laporan Kinerja Dinas Kebersihan dan Pemakaman Kota Jayapura
EHRA (2012) Laporan Survei EHRA Kota Jayapura 2012
Jones P, Suhartini N (2014) Governance and its complexities: insights from formal and informal urban governance appraches in Jayapura, Papua, Indonesia. Paper presented at the 11th UPE International Conference, La Plata
PDAM Kabupaten Jayapura (2012) Laporan Kinerja PDAM Kabupaten Jayapura
Pemerintah Kota Jayapura (2014) Peraturan Daerah Kota Jayapura Nomor 1 Tahun 2014 tentang Rencana Tata Ruang Wilayah Kota Jayapura
Suhartini N (2014,2015) Household Surveys
Suhartini N (2016) Governing informality: urban basic service provision in informal settlements. Paper presented at the 9th IFOU International Conference Buenos Aires
Youwe M, Bab E (2016) Laporan Hasil Survey BKPRD Kota Jayapura
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Suhartini, N., Jones, P. (2019). Who Gains and Benefits from the Outcomes of Formal Urban Governance for Basic Urban Services. In: Urban Governance and Informal Settlements. The Urban Book Series. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-06094-7_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-06094-7_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-06093-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-06094-7
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)