1. MUNICIPAL JOINT PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT IN INDONESIA The Case of Kartamantul, Jogja Province Wahyudi Kumorotomo, PhD kumoro@map.ugm.ac.id 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

2. 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.

3. Kartamantul Area

4. 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

5. 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.

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

7. 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”.

8. Solid Waste Management Cooperation

9. The Shares of Operational & Maintenance Costs (Rp) TAHUN YOGYAKARTA SLEMAN BANTULTOTAL 2001 599.315.100 100.923.900 42.620.600 742.859.600 2002 738.743.348 124.403.380 52.536.149 915.682.877 2003 895.340.064 150.774.056 74.882.580 1.120.996.700 2004 1.035.636.080 174.399.716 86.616.364 1.296.652.160 2005 1.281.383.021 215.784.182 107.171.697 1.604.338.900 2006 1.571.617.344 264.659.480 131.446.176 1.967.723.000 20071.789.138.080301.289.850149.639.0702.240.067.000 20081.853.113.821355.260.163153.626.0162.362.000.000 20091.934.115.000547.563.000121.222.0002.602.900.000

10. AfterBefore Impoving Performance

11. Sewerage System Management Cooperation

12. Shares of Operational & Maintenance Costs No Districts 20052006200720082009 1 Jogja city 125.000.000 2Sleman10.000.000 20.000.000 3Bantul10.000.000 20.000.000 4Jogja Province 650.000.000777.000.000849.890.0001.000.000.0001.300.000.000 TOTAL COST795.000.000922.000.000994.890.0001.185.000.0001.485.000.000

13. Sewerage Pipe Development

14. Sewerage Aeration Instalation

15. Water Resource Management Cooperation

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

17. Road Management Cooperation

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

19. Transport Management Cooperation

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

21. Drainage Management Cooperation

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

23. Spatial Management Cooperation

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

25. 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.

27. 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):

28. Terima Kasih Arigato Gozaimas