MUNICIPAL JOINT PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT IN INDONESIA The Case of Kartamantul, Jogja Province Wahyudi Kumorotomo, PhD Master in Public Policy and Administration Gadjah Mada University Indonesia International Workshop on Local Co-Creation and Manpower Policy in Asia, Ritsumeikan University, Kyoto, 14 November 2009

Current Issues in Indonesian Municipal Development Planning After decentralization (2001), municipal development plannings are disintegrated by administrative jurisdictions Problems of externalities in public services Many initiatives for cross-border cooperations (Barlingmascakep, Gerbangkertosusila, etc.), limited examples of concrete follow- ups Lack of focus on local issues (transports, waste management, drainage, disaster risk reduction, etc.) Inability to promote community participation.

Kartamantul Area

Mutual learning; surveys, interviews, hearings, information gathering Share visions; views, ideas, values and knowledge Rules and institutions; identify regulations and available options to set up implementing institution Set up common priorities; ecological development, drainage or retention options, recreational options, flood proof housing, flood safety regulations, economic rules etc. Joint design; formulate master plans, feasibility studies, organizational design Implementation; from ideas into actions, distributing responsibilities, carry out tasks Monitoring and evaluation; actions are monitored, indicators are gauged, and results are evaluated. Join Planning Approach

Joint Planning Principles Foresight. Identify and address infrastructure issues according to current and future demands. Responsiveness. To reduce the lengthy process of planning and implementation. Co-ordination. To bring together all the stake-holders and formulate solution for common problems. Judgement. Timely and reasonable decisions, with a sound technical, managerial, financial and contractual considerations. Role Sharing. To share the costs, tasks, experience, and the risks of municipal policies.

Sectoral Cooperation Solid Waste Disposal Management Sewerage System Management Resource Water Management Transport Road Drainage Spatial Integrated Planning.

Philosophy of Cooperation Care ; a sincere comitment on realistic programs and concrete actions Share; willingness to share costs, experience, benefits, and risks Fair; focus on problem solving, “Win-Win Solution”.

Solid Waste Management Cooperation

The Shares of Operational & Maintenance Costs (Rp) TAHUN YOGYAKARTA SLEMAN BANTULTOTAL

AfterBefore Impoving Performance

Sewerage System Management Cooperation

Shares of Operational & Maintenance Costs No Districts Jogja city Sleman Bantul Jogja Province TOTAL COST

Sewerage Pipe Development

Sewerage Aeration Instalation

Water Resource Management Cooperation

Water Resource Management Water Resource Study Institution Building Tarriff Investment Public-Private Partnership 16

Road Management Cooperation

Road Management Synchronize Planning & Budgeting Construction & Rehabilitation Improve quality of Roads & Bridges Improve public utilities 18

Transport Management Cooperation

Transport Management 1.Public Transport Reform 2.Routes 3.Park & Ride 4.Double track railways system 5.Hub Station 6.Rest Area

Drainage Management Cooperation

1.Synchronize Planning & Budgeting 2.Quality of Drainage 3.Dimension 4.Construction 5.Dredging Sediment 6.Flood Treatment Drainage Management

Spatial Management Cooperation

Spatial Management 1.Synchronization of Planning, Budgeting & Controlling 2.Zone Regulation (Recharge, Housing/Settlement, Green Area, Public Space etc) 3.Standardization of Building Permit.

Lesson Learned and Challenges 1.What is the most successful co-operation and co-creation in “Kartamantul”?  Solid Waste Management 2.Next challenge in SWM: Technology (incinerator, bio-gas?) Behavioral change (reduce, reuse, recycle) 3.Continued delivery of functions and roles 4.Long-term institutional capacity 5.Legal & Political Support.

1.Data; No two jurisdiction necessary collect the same information. 2.“Zero-Sum Game”; Local authorities might perceive that benefit goes to an area at the expense of others. 3.Common objectives; It is generally difficult to agree on common objectives. 4.Constituent; No decision-making body has a single constituency. 5.Authority to follow-up agreement; It is difficult to coordinate activities that are not bound by law without sincere mutual agreement. “Problems of Cross-Border Planning in Multi-State Conurbations” (Meyer, 1997):

Terima Kasih Arigato Gozaimas