IAP Indonesian Most Livable City Index


Published on

disampaikan oleh Ikatan Ahli Perencanaan (IAP) pada Seminar nasional Kebijakan dan Strategi Perkotaan Nasional (KSPN). Mewujudkan Kota Masa Depan Indonesia. Jakarta 13 Desember 2012

1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

IAP Indonesian Most Livable City Index

  1. 1. + IAP Indonesian Most Livable City Index Bernardus Djonoputro Sekretaris Jenderal – Ikatan Ahli Perencanaan (IAP) Chairman – EAROPH Club Indonesia
  2. 2. + IKATAN AHLI PERENCANAAN INDONESIA• IAP merupakan satu-satunya organisasi profesi bidang perencananaan wilayah dan kota di Indonesia, memiliki cabang di 24 provinsi• Dengan Badan Sertifikasi Perencana yang merupakan lembaga independen untuk sertifikasi profesi• Dengan jumlah planners lebih dari 3000 dan 1,200 orang diantaranya merupakan planners bersertifikat.• Program Utama:a. Penguatan kapasitas planner dalam perencanaan & pembangunan nasional & daerah b. Indonesia Most Livable City Index Affiliated organizations:
  3. 3.  Becoming more self sufficient, Positive cash flow, audited financial statements  Most Liveable City Index 2009, 2011  Active member of EAROPH  Young Planners Asia Pacific Gathering in Yogyakarta  Professional internship exchange: Malaysia, Australia  Climate change and disaster preparedness project START, with  Annual Rakernas and outbound trainings+  Active participant in international events: Earoph, Key Programs IFHP, Isocarp, Habitat Forums, Asean, World Global Water Forum, Global Citie Summit, etc. 2007-today  Joint co-operations with embassies and media organization.
  4. 4. Kota = (Peradaban)+ For the three-quarters of Europe’s population that live in cities and towns, a good urban environment is a precondition for a good quality of life. It seems, in part, that over the last decade, attitudes to living in cities have been changing. People are no longer moving away from cities (or have returned to them), residential sprawl has slowed and, in a third of cities, the population is concentrating in city centres.
  5. 5. Tantangan Kota Masa Kini+Elemen-elemen Lingkungan untuk Kehidupan YangBerkualitasAs the major function of cities is to provide places for people to trade, produce, communicate and live, the urban environment needs to be assessed froma very specific human perspective:  to provide an agreeable place to live while minimising or balancing negative side effects. Quality of life in citiesrelies on a range of components such as social equity, income and welfare, housing, a healthy environment, social relations and education. Theenvironmental elements of good quality of life include good air quality, low noise levels, clean and sufficient water, good urban design with sufficient andhigh-quality public and green spaces, an agreeable local climate or opportunities to adapt, and social equity. However, urban-specific data are patchy inEurope and, due to different timescales and reporting methods, are seldom directly comparable.Tekanan UrbanisasiMany of our cities struggle to cope with social, economic and environmental problems resulting from pressures such as overcrowding or decline,social inequity, pollution and traffic. The environmental impacts of cities also spread well beyond their physical limits as they rely heavily on outsideregions to meet demand for energy and resources and to accommodate waste. A study of Greater London estimates that London has a footprint 300times its geographical area — corresponding to nearly twice the size of the entire UK.
  6. 6. Tantangan KotaMasa Kini + Perubahan Iklim Climate change has the potential to influence almost all components of the urban environment and to raise new, complex challenges for the quality of urban life, health and urban biodiversity. Some cities will experience droughts and higher temperatures. Others will experience floods. Climate change will affect many aspects of urban living from air quality to consumption patterns (e.g. energy for air conditioning). Poor urban design can aggravate the impacts of climate change. Soil sealing, for example, can increase the ‘urban heat island effect’. It may also increase water run-off and lack of drainage during heavy rains leading to floods. However, urban design aimed at tackling climate change could have numerous co-benefits from improved air quality, supporting biodiversity and quality of life. Kesempatan di Kota The proximity of people, businesses and services associated with the very word ‘city’ means there are also huge opportunities and benefits associated with urban living especially in terms of sustainability and resource use. Already, population density in cities means shorter journeys to work and services, greater use of walking, cycling or public transport, and living in apartments of multi-family houses or blocks requiring less heating and less ground space per person. As a result, urban dwellers on average consume less energy and land for living per capita than rural residents.
  7. 7. +  Designing the future Cities are ecosystems: they are open and dynamic systems which consume, transform and release materials and energy; they develop and adapt; and they interact with humans and with other ecosystems. They must therefore be managed and protected like any other type of ecosystem. Through rethinking urban design, architectureMendisain Kota untuk transport and planning, we can turn our cities and urban landscapes into ‘urban ecosystems’ at the forefront of climate change mitigation (e.g.Masa Depan sustainable transport, clean energy and low consumption) and adaptation (e.g. floatingKota adalah sebuah ekosistem houses, vertical gardens).yang harus selalu di kelola dan di Furthermore, better urban planning will improvelindungi seperti ekosistem- quality of life across the board by designingekosistem lainnya. quiet, safe, clean and green urban space. It will also create new employment opportunities byDengan mengembangkan cara enhancing the market for new technologies andlkita merencana dan mendisain green architecture. Cities, due to theirkota, merancang transportasi concentration of people and activities, matter fordengan lebih baik, akan Europe. Also, the problems of cities cannot be solved at the local level alone. Better policymemperbaiki kualitas hidup integration and new governance, involving closerkeseluruhan. partnership and co-ordination at local, national and European level, are required.
  8. 8. Indonesian Cities – The Urbanizing Phenomena • Pada tahun 2008, untuk pertama kalinya dalam sejarah peradaban Indonesia, penduduk perkotaan melebihi pedesaan. • Hari ini, lebih dari 39 perkotaan Indonesia berpenduduk diatas 1 juta. + 2008 2030 30% 51% 65% urban urban urbanDi Indonesia, lebih dari 60% populasi berumur dibawah 39 tahun,menjadikan negara yang potensial produktif. Age 100+ Age 0
  9. 9. + INDONESIA OVERVIEW GDP is estimated to reach approx US$ 1.3 trillion by 2015; will make Indonesia to become the 16th largest economy in G – 20 with GDP per capita of around US$ 5,000. Economic growth will be supported by strong FDI into Indonesia which is estimated to reach approx US$ 15 billion in 2015.% • Indonesia is the third fastest growing economy in Asia and the largest economy in Southeast Asia. • Indonesia’s economy grew by 6.1% last year (2010) and is forecast to climb to 6.5 to 6.9% in 2012. Source: EIU, 24 January 2011
  10. 10. + Poor Infrastructure The Global Competitiveness Report ranked Indonesia 90th among 139 countries due to poor state of various aspects of its infrastructures.Infrastructure quality in selected Asian countries (GlobalCompetitiveness Report, 2010-2011) Philippine Poor infrastructure Poor infrastructureCountry Singapore Malaysia Thailand China Indonesia India s conditions are the conditions are the Roads 6.6 5.7 5.1 4.3 3.5 3.3 2.8 main factor main factor preventing preventing Railroad 5.8 4.7 3.0 4.3 3.0 4.6 1.7 Indonesia’s Indonesia’s Seaport 6.8 5.6 5.0 4.3 3.6 3.9 2.8 economy from economy from Air transport 6.9 5.9 5.9 4.4 4.6 4.6 3.6 growing at its growing at its potential rate of 77-- potential rate of Electricity 6.7 5.7 5.7 5.3 3.6 3.1 3.4Score (out of 7)* 8%. 8%. 6.6 5.5 4.9 4.1 3.7 3.6 3.2* 1 = extremely under-developed; 7 = efficient by international standardsSource: World Economic Forum, Standard Chartered Global Research
  11. 11. USD143bn USD93bn The Gap USD50bn Infrastructure State Budget Funding Investment Needs Gap • The National Development Planning Board (“Bappenas”) has stated that around USD143 billion+ (or 3% of GDP) will be needed for infrastructure development in 2010-2014 in order to meet the country’s economic growth target of 6% - 7% per annum from 2010 - 2014.Source: Government Medium Term Plan 2010-2014 and Bappenas
  12. 12. + JAKARTA AS GLOBAL CITIES : GaWC Survey 2010 ALPHA ++ Alpha ++ World Cities : New York dan London. Alpha + World Cities : Chicago, Dubai, ALPHA Hongkong, Paris, Shanghai, Singapore, + Sydney, Tokyo. Alpha World Cities :This means Jakarta as a mega Amsterdam, Beijing,city has a strategic Brussels, Buenos Aires, ALPHApositioning & influences in Frankfurt, Jakarta, Kualaglobal interaction. Lumpur, Los Angeles, Madrid, Mexico City, Milan, The Globalization and World Cities Study Moscow, Mumbai, San Group, Geographic Faculty, Loughborough Fransisco, Sao Paulo, university, UK, 2010 Seoul, Toronto,
  13. 13. +ota = TidakKNyamanMayoritas kondisi kota-kota besar di Indonesiadinilai tidak nyaman oleh warganya.Berdasarkansurvey yang dilakukan di 15 kota besar, diketahuibahwa nilai rata-rata (mean) indeks kenyamanankota adalah 54,26. Indeks dengan persepsi tingkatkenyamanan tertinggi di Kota Yogyakarta (66,52) danKota Denpasar (63.63). Sedangkan dan persepsikenyamanan warga yang paling rendah adalah KotaMedan (46,67) dan Kota Pontianak (46.92).Kota – kota dengan indeks diatas rata–rata adalah :Yogyakarta, Denpasar, Makassar, Menado, Surabayadan Semarang. Sedangkan kota – kota denganindeks dibawah rata-rata adalah Banjarmasin,Batam, Jayapura, Bandung, Palembang,Palangkaraya, Jakarta, Pontianak dan Medan.IAP Indonesian Most Livable City Index 2009/2011
  14. 14. + LIVABLE CITYLivable City is a term that describe a comfortable environment andatmosphere of the city as a place to live and work, viewed forvarious aspects of both physically (urban facilities, infrastructure,spatial planning, etc.) as well as non-physically (social relations,economic activities, etc.).Principles of Livable City :a. The provision of basic needs (decent housing, water supply, electricity)b. Availability of public facilities and social amenities (public transport, city parks, religious facilities / public health facilities)c. Availability of public space to interact between communitiesd. Securitye. Supports the function of economic, social and cultural of the cityf. Sanitation
  15. 15. + IAP MOST LIVABLE CITY INDEXPerception-based survey of the urban population, about thelivability of their city.The results of this study is a "snapshot“MLCI IAP is the first perception-based survey index of thecity’s livability and planned to be carried out annually andhopefully it will be a benchmark for quality of life in citiesthroughout IndonesiaThis index also act as a feedback to stakeholders in theplanning process and urban development.The advantages of this index: Simple, Actual, Snapshot.
  16. 16. + Physical aspects, including availability of Green  space and quality of urban design  Environmental aspects: polutions, waste management, cleanliness of te city  Transportation: how well the city is served byIAP-MLCI public transport, including quality of your roadsSurveyed Criteria  Public Health: availability and accessibility to health facilitiesand Livabillity  Public Educations: availability and accessibilityfactors: of schools and other educational facilities.  Quality and availability of city infrastructure including utilieits, drinking water, power, and telecommunications.  Economic conditions, availability of work and accessibility from home to work place  Security and safety  Neighborhood interactions, social and cultural interactions
  17. 17. + Average Livability Index of Indonesian Cities in 2009 : 54,17%“Only 54.17% of the population in Indonesian cities surveyed feel comfortable living in their city. This shows that those cities are still not ideal” – IAP – 52,28 59,90 43,65 52,04 52,61 53,86 56,52 51,90 52,52 56,37 53,13 65,34
  18. 18. + Average Livability Index of Indonesian Cities in 2011: 54.26%“45.74% of the population in Indonesian cities surveyed feel ther cities are less livable. 46.67 53 46.92 56,39 58 50.71 53,16 53 58 54.67 54,19 64 56.38 66,52
  19. 19. NO CITY 2009 2011 1 Yogyakarta 65,34 66.52 2 Denpasar 63.63 3 Makasar 56,52 58.46 4 Manado 59,90 56.39 5 Surabaya 53,13 56.38 6 Semarang 52,52 54.63 7 Banjarmasin 52,61 53.16 8 Batam 52.60 9 Jayapura 53,86 52.56 10 Bandung 56,37 52.32 11 Palembang 52.15 12 Palangkaraya 52,04 50.86 13 Jakarta 51,90 50.71 14 Pontianak 43,65 46.92+ 15 Medan 52,28 46.67 MOST LIVABLE CITY INDEX 2009 & 2011
  20. 20. +  But there are 6 cities that are perceived as less livable compared to 2009, namely Manado (1 million), Jayapura (300,000), Bandung (2.5 million), Palangkaraya(400,000), Jakarta (15 million), and Medan (2.1 million)Key Findings:  The following are key areas that the publicCities are perceived as most important aspects instruggling determining livability of their city, namely :  economic(27 ,97 %)Livability index ofIndonesian cities (mean) is at  spatial plan/urban design (19,66 %),54.26, a relatively no change  Availability of education facility (13,29%),compared to the 2009 survey(54.17).  Safety and security (11,08%)  waste management (10,80%)
  21. 21. + Aspect Physical/Urban Perception (%) design 28.63 Environment 34.32 Security & Safety 37.09 Economy 41.84Key Findings: physicalstate of Indonesian cities Social & Cultural 48.91a concern Transportation 49.56 Public utilities 68.18A total of 45% percent of Public Health 71.03respondents living in Indonesian Education 72.63cities today perceived their cities asless livable. Key areas that has thelowest score include: physicalaspect, environmental aspect andsecurity & safety.
  22. 22. +Key findings: some cities isjust gets better.Cities Index Above Average : These cities areYogyakarta (65.34), Manado mostly old and(59.9), Makassar (56.52), traditionally-well-Bandung (56.37) is perceived as preserved cities,most livable cities, more than the strong indigenous ethnic communities,average Indonesian cities. and mostly are known as education/university cities rather than industrialized/comme rcial centers, are more livable than the average Indonesian cities.
  23. 23. +And some otherskeep strugglingPontianak (43,65) and  Pontianak consistenly low in the index (alsoMedan (46,67) is lowest in 2009 survey), mainly are driven byperceived as least its natural setting as a peaty soil (gambut)livable. area, that limits the city planning and infrastructure development.  On the other hand, metropolizing Medan, the 4th largest city in Indonesia with 2.1 miliion population, is struggling from the rapid growth, urbanizations, and limited infrastructure. The security/safety factors is the lowest among all cities, which means public’s perception on security in Medan is very poor.
  24. 24. Mean = 28,63
  25. 25. Mean = 34,32
  26. 26. Mean = 49,56
  27. 27. Mean = 71,03
  28. 28. Mean = 72.63
  29. 29. Mean = 68,18
  30. 30. Mean = 41.84
  31. 31. Mean = 37,69
  32. 32. Mean = 48,91
  33. 33. + Walaupun Indonesia memiliki fenomena ekonomi yang mengagumkan, kota-kota utama diSNAPSHOT IS Indonesia saat ini kesulitan untuk menjadi kota nyaman yang ideal.GOOD Hal ini membutuhkan keberanian bertindak, inovasi dan pemikiran progresif dari para manajer kota, terutama Walikota, untuk mengambil kebijakan-kebijakan yang tegas dalam pembangunan kota.Simple and Actual“Snapshot” of the Pemimpin kota harus memilki visi, kepemimpinan dan dukungan kuatperceptions of urban warga untuk merealisasikanpopulations described identitas kota masa depanin this index shows: Indonesia: Kota yang Nyaman.
  34. 34. +  Kenyaman (Livability) kota adalah hak semua warga. Para manajer kota dan pemerintah harus segera mengadopsiSNAPSHOT IS kebijakan dan opendekatan yang benar dan mumpuni.GOOD  Mandat politik di era demokrasi baru ini merupakan kesempatan emas untuk merencana, membangun dan mengendalikan/mengawasi pembangunan.  Pada saat bersamaan, para warga kotaSimple and Actual harus beradaptasi dengan pola hidup urban (bukan kampung), untuk“Snapshot” of the menjadikan kota lebih nyaman.perceptions of urban  Masa depan kota-kota Indonesia akanpopulations described menghadapi tantangan lebih besar:in this index shows: perlunya membangun infrastruktur dan bertumbuh nya demokrasi di level lokal.
  36. 36. + Dampak Lingkungan Pelayanan PublikPerencanaan Kota Produk CITIZEN CHARTER RencanaBerbasis Stakeholder Ruang Perkotaan1. Pengelolaan Pertumbuhan Design Dampak (Growth Management), bukan Teknis Sosial ‘Pembangunan’ biasa. Engineering2. Basis Perencanaan Fungsional adalah Megalopolitan3. Pergeseran Dari Livability harus merupakan landasan Discretionary System Ke ukur sebagai bagian dari Citizen Regulatory System Charter, dengan ber fokus komitment manajer kota untuk melayani warga nya.
  37. 37. +2013 MLCI Survey – Partnership OpportunityTo further enhanced the impact of this Index, IAP is puttingforward a proposal for partnership in the 2013 survey andbeyond.Improvement to the Index includes application of morecomprehensive survey methodology in more cities.The 2013 research will see an increase of sample in eachcities, and add the number of cities to 24.The analysis will include ordinal utility of main aspects of thesurvey. Further analysis will also connects the priority ofeach aspect with attribute of respondents, ie. Younger/olderage group, gender, income group, etc.Preliminary discussion to support the survey: Embassy ofDenmark, Embassy of Sweden, Austrade, KementrianLingkungan Hidup.
  38. 38. Terima Kasih
  39. 39. Urban community perception for all aspects: > 5 Juta Jiwa 1 – 5 Juta Jiwa 100 rb – 500 rb jiwa