4th International Seminar of HATHI, 6-8 September 2013, Yogyakarta

CASE STUDY PAPER

FLOOD RESILIENCY STRATEGY, CASE STUDY OF KAMPUNG

RATMAKAN, CODE RIVERSIDE SETTLEMENT, YOGYAKARTA

Rr. Vicky Ariyanti, ST, M.Sc, M.Eng,1 Andie Arif Wicaksono, ST, MT 2
1
Indonesian Ministry of Public Works, General Directorate of Water Resources,
Serayu Opak River Basin Organization
2
Faculty of Science and Technology, University of Technology Yogyakarta

INTRODUCTION

Overview of Kampung Ratmakan

Ratmakan as Code Riverside settlement has been around since the formation of
Yogyakarta Sultanage (Kraton) era. It was formed due to housing soldiers of the
Sultan (Zaim, 2004). Located in the heart of Yogyakarta, the area has been
flourished with different other functions throughout the history. Now, this
particular Kampung (settlement) is no longer filled with soldiers or their
descendants anymore. It is filled with mainly workers, vendors, and new comers
of the city.

Though several of the plots of land are given certificate, the lowest areas of the
river are all illegal housing (Yossi & Sajor, 2006). The government has been
trying to relocate them into rental apartment nearby, however this still lacks
interest from the common inhabitants of Ratmakan. Most of the inhabitants
choose to live by the riverside because of its strategic location in the heart of
Yogyakarta with low rent or illegal settlement ownership (Ariyanti, 2008). This
Kampungs inhabitants are also the meeting place of many new comers into the
city, which made it a unique melting pot of Indonesian archipelago.

However, due to its topographic, the Kampung also inherited flood as annual
problem. However, they still choose to live in the area. This study would like to
seek the reasons and how they live side by side with this threat.

1
4th International Seminar of HATHI, 6-8 September 2013, Yogyakarta

Literature Study

Disaster Mitigation Assessment Framework

In addition, to scrutinize more about the progression of how hazard became a

disaster, the Pressure and Release (PAR) Framework by Wisner et. al (2004:51) in
Birkmann (2006) is used to scrutinize the conditions of Kampung and will be
elaborately described. This framework views disaster as the intersection of two
major forces: those processes generating vulnerability, on the one hand, and on
the other, the natural hazard event. Since the main topic is on flood, so it will be
the focus of hazards that being thoroughly investigated, neglecting the rest of
other hazard.

Figure 1. Pressure and Release Framework

(Wisner.et.al, 2004 and Birkmann, 2006)

This framework will help to understand the strategy that has been used by the
indigenous to in terms of their resiliency towards flood. Each aspect of
vulnerability is explored and assessed in detailed indicators to get a complete
overview. The formula stated that Risk = Hazard x Vulnerability

The following definitions are listed to explain each of the terms that used to
describe the items in the formula.

Hazards are natural processes or phenomena occurring in the biosphere that may
constitute a damaging event UNDP-BCPR (2004), in this context the natural

2
4th International Seminar of HATHI, 6-8 September 2013, Yogyakarta

hazard would be flood. In this context the natural hazard would be flood,
consequently the latent danger would be the capacity of water in the river related
to the blockage of water ways (cleanliness of the river) during rainy season, which
in the site connected to the water channel of Code River from upstream to
downstream (north to south). In this respect data on annual precipitation up to
2,750 mm for Code Riverside (BWRMP, 20010) is used as follows:

Figure 2. Annual Precipitation (BWRMP, 2010)

Vulnerability is the degree of loss to a given element risk or set of such elements
resulting from the occurrence of a natural phenomenon of a given magnitude and
expressed on a scale from 0 (no damage) to 1 (total loss). On the other hand,
vulnerability may be understood, in general terms, as an internal risk factor,
mathematically expressed in terms of the feasibility that the exposed subject or
system will be affected by the phenomenon that characterizes the hazard
vulnerability (Cardona, 2003). Given the characteristic of the site, its degraded
environmental condition is created through progression of vulnerability. It is the
results of socio-economic and institutional conditions. Vulnerability in this
context is seen as the degree of safety in the existing condition seen through the
above mentioned conditions related directly to flood.

3
4th International Seminar of HATHI, 6-8 September 2013, Yogyakarta

Risk is the potential loss to the exposed subject or system, resulting from the
convolution of hazard and vulnerability (Cardona, 2003). The exposed
conditions of Kampung Ratmakan to Code River have magnified its risk towards
annual flood.

To illustrate the flood condition in relation to the building conditions of Kampung

Ratmakan based on field observation, annual precipitation data topographic map,
the following map is used.

Figure 3. Kampung Ratmakan Building Condition (Ariyanti, 2008)

4
4th International Seminar of HATHI, 6-8 September 2013, Yogyakarta

Methodology of Study

The methodology used in this paper is qualitative method, using samples of

interviews to inhabitants, experts on housing management, and visitors (short term
inhabitants). After data from interviews are collected, they will be combined with
field study and observation.

Each of the data in this study will use several parameters to simplify and quantify
each aspect explored and together this data would be analyzed using PAR
framework.

In this respect, the aspects that needed to be analyzed are in the Unsafe
Conditions using the framework above, which are Physical Environment, Social
Relations, Public Actions and Institutions, and Local Economy.

The following parameters are used for:

1. Physical Environment; Land Use, Infrastructure, Building Conditions,

Access

2. Social Relations; Social Networks, Communal Behaviour

3. Public Actions and Institutions; Existing Institutions, Public Actions

Engagement

4. Local Economy; Sector of Economy, Economic Activities

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Discussions

Based on the parameters that were presented earlier, summed using PAR
framework on Kampung Ratmakan condition, potencies and lessons learned from
the site are valuated into points, +1 when contribute safety related to flood, 0
when does not contribute anything to flood condition and -1 when contributing
more flood risks.

5
4th International Seminar of HATHI, 6-8 September 2013, Yogyakarta

1. Physical Environment

Parameters Point Remarks

Land Use -1 Not appropriate for housing, which lived right by the
river is floodplain area with average 1m topographic
depth.
Infrastructure -1 Creates more risks when it is not thoroughly studied
and designed, because some of the wells are built on
the side of the river, which will be contaminated with
mud and other solid waste during flood times.
Building Condition -1 Settlements are built on flood plain, flood could easily
happened. Second storey is usually needed by
commercial activities or on some cases: boarding
houses.
Access -1 Narrow access adds more troubles on evacuation
process, especially those in the midst of Kampung.
Total -4 Physical condition is not favourable when flood
happens

Table 1. Physical Environment Analysis (Writers, 2013)

2. Social Relations

Parameters Point Remarks

Social Networks +1 Available networks are good chance to communicate
informally and more effectively in Kampung
community, especially pengajian network (muslim
masses) that most inhabitants are members of. This
network communicates through the Mosque sirens and
loudspeaker. On flood occasions, the loudspeaker is
used to inform other inhabitants of the hazard.
Communal -1 Some of inhabitants behaviours may resulted in
Behaviour ineffectiveness on evacuation, such as apathy towards
governments warning on living by the riverside and
their attachment to the site as most live there more than
10 years would proven to be difficult during evacuation
process or future eviction procedure.
Total 0

Table 2. Social Relations Analysis (Writers, 2013)

3. Institutions and Public Actions

Parameters Point Remarks

Institutions 0 So far pengajian (muslim masses), Karang Taruna
(youth group), ronda (neighbourhood night watch
group) are available, with each member also
intertwined between one to the other. However, there
seems to be lack of coordination between these existing
institutions.
Public Actions +1 On communal spirit to improve the kampung condition,
i.e. community awareness, which used kentongan
(traditional musical instrument made of wood) as early
warning system, gotong royong (volunteering work)

6
4th International Seminar of HATHI, 6-8 September 2013, Yogyakarta

spirit as the stem of its communitys heart.

Total +1 Communal spirit is seen as a potential towards
participatory planning and actions

Table 3. Institution & Public Action Analysis (Writers, 2013)

4. Local Economy

Parameters Point Remarks

Sectors of 0 Most are working on informal sector, however this
Economy does not give any influence towards flood
preparedness.
Economic +1 Lively Kampung created more awareness during flood
Activities time, since economic activities are alive 24 hours a day.
For example business hours for shops from 8 a.m. to 5
p.m. continued with food stalls from 7 p.m to 3 a.m,
while there are also 24 hours kiosks for cigarettes,
gasoline, and motor cycles mechanic.
Total +1 Alert most of the time during because of its undying
economic activities.

Table 4. Local Economy Analysis (Writers, 2013)

Results

The following table summarizes the results of the analysis:

+ 0 -
Public Actions Social Relations Physical Environment
Local Economy

Table 5. Summarized Analysis Results (Writers, 2013)

The matrix shows that possible way to increase the sense of flood awareness and
to mitigate flood risks for the inhabitants is by using social relations e.g.
communal spirit to empower existing public actions and local economy to
improve the physical environment in order to cope with annual flood. Their
preparedness in facing the reality of annual flood and even cold lava flood or
debris flow is what a resilient community is about. The indigenous does know that
living on the riverside exposed themselves to flood risk, but so far since they still
feel their need to stay there is higher than their risk facing the flood. This
understanding should be reorientated towards a better future, away from hazard
zones such as what their dwellings are situated now. The role of civic
engangement and community participation are more significant than of physical
environment.

7
4th International Seminar of HATHI, 6-8 September 2013, Yogyakarta

There are also lessons learned from local responses and knowledge on Kampung
Ratmakan flood:

24 hours economic activity helps to keep watch the river during rainy
seasons
Traditional warning systems; the using of kentongan
Community networks; through pengajian and loudspeaker as early
warning networks and information system
Indigenous flood preparedness strategies; move before flood raised to
higher grounds or second level, build 2nd storey
There is no means of economic adjustments to flooding

The fact that many discussions and conflicts on the landuse for riverside area have
still arisen, but disaster risk can still be mitigated if all riverside community have
the same preparedness as our case study.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

The study concludes that resiliency and social economic condition of the
community hold stronger views than of ecological aspects. Indigenous ways in
using kenthongan and the mosque sound system for early warning system are also
proven to be effective.

Riverside communities are recommended to prepare their own ways of conducts

toward flood preparedness as the result mutual understanding and agreement.
These conducts also include flood proofing to existing buildings, i.e.:

8
4th International Seminar of HATHI, 6-8 September 2013, Yogyakarta

Figure 4. Flood Proofing to Building (Wicaksono, 2013)

The figure above explained that in order to proof the building against flood, items
in the construction need to be installed and water proofed, such as door guards in
the door opening, flood sacks to help maintain door guards on certain position,
covering air bricks, covering pipes and drains during flood which later can be
used to pumped flood water when flood is lowered, windows pane completed with
water proof cover, TV and hifi, also electric sockets need to be placed above the
ground, shelving needed to save important items during flood, water proofing the
flooring materials and wall, placing kitchen units and appliances above annual
flood water rise.

Furthermore, future strategies that need to be added are:

1. Moving strategy out of riverside; best practice from Kampung Tirtonadi

bus terminal in Surakarta is a good example, where local government acts
as facilitator in providing the exchange land and housing for the evicted
inhabitants of Bengawan Solo riverside.

2. Develop green spaces and riparian zones to areas where the settlement area
was in order to create buffer zone and free settlement flood plain.

9
4th International Seminar of HATHI, 6-8 September 2013, Yogyakarta

3. Strengthening riverbanks and hazard zoning map of riverside as ways to

mitigate risk vulnerability using PP No. 38/2011 (Indonesian Government
Decree) as base to delineate the floodplain.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Writers express gratitude to Serayu Opak River Basin Organization and

University of Technology Yogyakarta for supporting the participation in this
international seminar.

REFERENCES

Book:

Ariyanti, Vicky (2008): Living with Flood; Disaster Mitigation Assessment at

Kampung Ratmakan, Code Riverside Settlement, Yogyakarta. Bauhaus
University, Weimar, Germany and Tongji University, Shanghai, China.

Birkmann, Jrn (2006): Conceptual Frameworks and Definitions in Measuring

Vulnerability to Promote Disaster-Resilient Societies. Tokyo, New York,
Paris: United Nations University Press (p. 29-31).

Setiawan, Bhakti, (1998): Urban Dynamics of Code Riverside Settlements,

Yogyakarta, Indonesia. University of British Columbia, USA: unpublished
Ph.D dissertation.

Thywissen, Katharina (2006): Core terminology of disaster reduction: A

comparative glossary in Measuring Vulnerability to Promote Disaster-
Resilient Societies. Tokyo, New York, Paris: United Nations University
Press (p. 448496)

Zaim, Zaflis (2004): Perubahan Pemanfaatan Ruang Kawasan Perumahan Tepian

Sungai, Studi Kasus Ruas Sungai Code Kota Yogyakarta. Gadjah Mada
university, Yogyakarta, Indonesia: unpublished thesis.

10
4th International Seminar of HATHI, 6-8 September 2013, Yogyakarta

Website:

UNDP/BCPR (2004): Reducing disaster risk. A Challenge for Development,

UNDP/Bureau for Crisis Prevention and Recovery, New York,
http://www.undp.org/bcpr/disred/rdr.htm.

Yossi, Briandara & Sajor, Edsel E. (2006): Development of Riverside Kampungs

and Management of Rivers in Yogyakarta, Indonesia: Issues of Policy
Coherence and Relevance of Socio-Economic Characteristics of River Bank
Communities. Pathumthani, Thailand: Urban Environmental Management
Field of Study School of Environment, Resources and Development, Asian
Institute of Technology. http://www.sea-
uema.ait.ac.th/ARL/Conf_Nov06_WSS/UWS_TECHNICAL_SESSIONS/T
echnical_session_VII.pdf

11