Sie sind auf Seite 1von 11

Stakeholders Participation in Flood Mitigation

ASAIHL, Jakarta
2006

Table of Contents
Abstract
Rational
Public Participation in Flood Mitigation
Development of Flood Mitigation Matrix
- General Approaches
- Development Procedures
- Analysis Process
Stakeholders Participation Strategy
Summary of Policy Recommendation Analysis
Policy Recommendation of Stakeholder Participation in Flood
Mitigation

1
2
4
4
5
6
7
8
9

Table of Figures
Figure 1. General Approach Scheme
Figure 2. Development Procedures Scheme

4
6

Appendices
Appendix 1.
Appendix 2.

Dwinanti R. Marthanty
University of Indonesia

Page 1 of 11

Stakeholders Participation in Flood Mitigation

ASAIHL, Jakarta
2006

STAKEHOLDERS PARTICIPATION IN FLOOD MITIGATION


Dwinanti Rika Marthanty
Water Resource Management Post-Graduate Program
Center For Environmental and Water Engineering Research (Center FEWER)
Faculty of Engineering, University of Indonesia

Abstract

This paper introduces new paradigm in flood mitigation based on community approach.
Recently, flood mitigation efforts are still dominated by structural and temporal approach
through top-down direction. This study brought up comprehensive strategy that integrated
structural and non-structural method. Structural method is a physical approach that needs
higher costs like building flood controls. Whereas, non-structural method is a non-technical
approach, for instance increasing public awareness, that usually cost less. These approaches
based on Integrated Water Resource Management philosophies, water resource cannot be
studied without studying humanity and how to course water safely in the rainy season
meanwhile in the same time assuring water yield for the drought season. In assessing social
and community participation as part of studying humanity, this study employed Stakeholder
Analysis Method issued by World Bank in 1998. Flood and drought disaster happens in
causality relationship. If one occurs, another will occur as a consequence. Flood mitigation
is a life cycle process that consists of prevention, intervention and recovery stages. In each
stage, it has project phase and interacts with specific stakeholder. Flood mitigation cycle has
multidimensional aspects; time, space, activities, stakeholders, stage in project process, and
level of involvement. This study tried to identify all of the aspects and its interactions. As
conclusion, the chapter closes with participation strategy design and interaction between
stakeholders and level of involvement in flood mitigation.
Keywords: flood mitigation cycle, integrated water resource management, stakeholder
analysis, participation strategy, level of involvement.

Rational
In Indonesia, flood disaster sudden happens in brief and recurrent. The trend shows it
increasing in frequency and volume every year. Government has been executing many
structural solutions, but it results in unsatisfied resolution. For that reason, flood disaster
mitigation needs more effective approaches and strategies. This is agreed with Kwik Kian
Gie, Chairman of National Planning and Development Board (Bappenas), speech at Flood
Mitigation Workshop in Indonesia (Lokakarya Upaya Penanggulangan Banjir di Indonesia),
19 20 March 2002. He was bringing up the importance of comprehensive strategy of flood
mitigation based on community of which integrating structural and non-structural
approaches. These approaches included urban planning, structural-technical-physical efforts,
public awareness, and emergency responses. In the same time, he also stated that in
autonomous era, development funding was not only endowed from national government but
shared with local government and people as beneficiaries. 1
1

AIR (magazine), ed. May June 2002, p.10-11

Dwinanti R. Marthanty
University of Indonesia

Page 2 of 11

Stakeholders Participation in Flood Mitigation

ASAIHL, Jakarta
2006

Non-structural solutions are commonly implemented as long-term development programs. It


is synergized with physical measures to optimize the resolutions. Public participation
reinforces structural implementation to reach sustainable development in flood mitigation and
management. In supporting public participation, government programs have to be transparent
and accountable. It means that government is sharing roles with public. Therefore, policy
must be taken to promote and accommodate public participation. Hopefully, this policy will
encourage people to be more proactive involving in flood mitigation and management in
specific, and water resource management in general.
As closing, this paper performs participation strategy design and interaction between
stakeholders and level of involvement in flood mitigation.

Public Participation in Flood Mitigation


Flood mitigation approaches based on Integrated Water Resource Management philosophies,
water resource cannot be studied without studying humanity2 and how to course water
safely in the rainy season meanwhile in the same time assuring water yield for the drought
season.
Flood and drought disaster happens in causality relationship. If one occurs, another will occur
as a consequence. Flood mitigation is a life cycle process that consists of prevention,
intervention and recovery stages. In each stage, it has project phase and interacts with specific
stakeholder. Flood mitigation cycle has multidimensional aspects; time, space, activities,
stakeholders, stage in project process, and level of involvement. This study tried to identify
all of the aspects and its interactions.
In assessing social and community participation as part of studying humanity, this study
employed Stakeholder Analysis Method issued by World Bank in 1998.
In solving flood problems, it is divided in two ways, structural and non-structural measures.
Civil works such as dams, levees, dykes, sewer networks, ditches, pumping stations,
canals and reservoirs are then built to protect the settlement system or zone up to a
predetermined risk level (usually in relation to an estimated flood return period). In
general this approach considers only the hydrologic and hydraulic implications of the
problem which is solved by choosing the alternative that maximises the expected net
benefits (Braga, 1998).
More recently other less expensive non-structural measures have been suggested to act
as an alternative or in a complementary way to the above mentioned structural
measures, and also to reduce or minimize flood damage while avoiding high capitalintensive costs of structural options (Lindh, 1985). Non structural measures indeed
involve a number of possibilities varying from flood warning systems to education of
the general public and legal acts (e.g.: land-use regulations) that can control or mitigate
flooding related problems. The advantage of non-structural measures is that in general
they are less expensive, easier to implement and sustainable. However they condition
2

Larry W. Mays, 1996

Dwinanti R. Marthanty
University of Indonesia

Page 3 of 11

Stakeholders Participation in Flood Mitigation

ASAIHL, Jakarta
2006

the active participation of a responsive population and necessitate effective mass


education programs and respective institutional network (Braga, 1998).
Still, according to Lindh (1985), deciding on the best approach (structural vs.
nonstructural)
is complicated because benefits from such actions cannot always be expressed in
monetary units (e.g.: reduced inconveniences, improved aesthetics, increased sense of
security, change in risk perception).
There are several reasons advocating for more community-based strategies for flood
mitigation and management: a) the complex social amplification of disasters, b) the
need for improved local response capacity to disasters and emergencies, as well as c)
the difficulties encountered when designing and implementing public policies at the
State and municipality levels directed to flood mitigation/management, and to
vulnerability reduction.
The involvement of the general public in water-related decision-making processes,
especially with view to implementing integrated water management, no longer is a new
concept, and is being practiced today in many countries, especially in the West. Yet, the
difficult and complex involvement of stakeholders in decision-making processes
addressing to flood control policies and planning, especially at local level, has not be
fully appreciated everywhere by water experts and practitioners. 3

Development of Flood Mitigation Matrix


-

General Approaches

As to present the flow chart of strategy development of public participation in flood


mitigation, the general approach is illustrated in figure 1.

Point of view of
Public Participation
in flood mitigation
(Theoretical/ideal,
Legal Basis, Best
Practice, dll)

Global
Structure of
Information
Display

Information to
Decision Makers
Matrix of Ideal
StakeholderParticipation in
flood mitigation

Matrix of National Policy of


Stakeholder Participation in
flood mitigation

Figure 1. General
Approach Scheme

Matrix of Real Stakeholder


Participation in flood
mitigation in field of study

Unesco, 2001

Dwinanti R. Marthanty
University of Indonesia

Page 4 of 11

Stakeholders Participation in Flood Mitigation

ASAIHL, Jakarta
2006

Firstly, all aspect of public participation is considered from ideal condition theoretically
based on analysis studies and literatures. Then, each activity flood mitigation is litigated its
legal aspect compared to national policy. Afterward, real condition performs culture of local
wise that influence the local policy. All aspects are regarded as consideration that generates
global structure to represent whole information of public participation in flood mitigation.
Hence, matrix is a tool that presents the information to decision makers.
Matrix represents the relation between aspects in flood mitigation and management which are
life cycle, activities, project phase, and stakeholder involvement. Analysis process results in
recommendation policy of public participation in flood mitigation. Developing matrix
procedures is discussed afterward.
-

Development Procedures

All stakeholder activities in basin are identified into flood mitigation aspects that are
specified in time cycle, project phase, the involving process and customs. In figure 2, it is
depicted matrix development procedures for each activity.
LIFE CYCLE FLOOD MITIGATION
Prevention
IWRM

Response/
Intervention

Recovery
Project
Phase

Stakeholders
& Level of
Involvement

Measures

Stakeholders
Analysis

Flood Mitigation
Matrix
Development

Basin/Watershed
Policy

Mapping of
Public
Participation
Regulation in
flood mitigation

Mapping of
Public
Participation
Activities in
flood mitigation

Field Survey

Ideal
Stakeholder
Participation in
flood mitigation

Problems Mapping

Figure 2. Development
Procedures Scheme

Information for
Decision Makers

This procedure identifies general structure of flood mitigation as a mapping tool of various
involvement activities and aspects. The structure base on 3 (three) fundamental concept:
1) life cycle flood mitigation
2) project phase of flood mitigation activity
3) stakeholders and level of involvement
Dwinanti R. Marthanty
University of Indonesia

Page 5 of 11

Stakeholders Participation in Flood Mitigation

ASAIHL, Jakarta
2006

From interaction made by all of activities, connection can be drawn for each aspect and form
the structure. It acts as an ideal/theoretical public participation map of flood mitigation.
General structure above will be compared to legal aspects and real condition (lesson-learned).
The gap between both will be considered as one of information material. It will perform as
mind frame in considering public participation in flood mitigation and basic material
information for Policy Recommendation.
-

Analysis Process

Principally, stakeholder participation maps out public participation dispensed in


multidimensional aspect of flood mitigation. The process are described in:
Certain ideal/theoretical stakeholder participation in flood mitigation derived from
Stakeholder Analysis Method4 is resulted in Matrix of Ideal Stakeholder Participation
in Flood Mitigation.
Definite national legal aspects based on local regulation and wisdom related to
stakeholder participation in flood mitigation is concluded in Matrix of National
Regulation Regarding Stakeholders Participation in Flood Mitigation.
Particular local regulation relevant to stakeholder participation realized in the level of
province is formed in Matrix of Local Regulation Concerning Stakeholder
Participation in Flood Mitigation.
Various lesson-learned from real activities and local wisdom pertaining to
stakeholders participation in flood mitigation is generated from all study field survey
is displayed in Matrix of Stakeholder Participation Practices in Flood Mitigation at
Field Study.
Survey is conducted to generate data and information from field study that represented flood
prone characteristic area in Indonesia. A mixture of data and information as to flood
mitigation is mapped into matrices explained above and resulted in policy recommendation.

Stakeholders Participation Strategy


The process begins with stakeholders participation identification in flood mitigation. In
advance, there is analyzing process of participation for each stakeholder in each project phase
of flood mitigation activity that set in 4 (four) stages; concept (survey, investigation,
planning, and design), development (construction), implementation (operation, and
maintenance), and support (monitoring, and evaluation). All stages are corresponding to
individual component or element of measures of project.
Stakeholder Analysis Method examine stakeholders participation in flood mitigation matrix.
This method is adapted from Participation and Social Assessment: Tools and Techniques,
compiled by Jennifer Rietbergen-McCracken dan Deepa Narayan, and issued by The
International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / THE WORLD BANK in 1998. The
approach is to (1) identify interest, importance, and influence of each stakeholder in flood
mitigation activities, (2) identify local institution and all regarding process, (3) accommodate
basic foundation and strategy of participation.

World Bank, 1998

Dwinanti R. Marthanty
University of Indonesia

Page 6 of 11

Stakeholders Participation in Flood Mitigation

ASAIHL, Jakarta
2006

Identification level of involvement of stakeholder in one activity is measured from level of


interest, influence and importance of stakeholder due to the activity itself. There are four
steps of Stakeholder Analysis:
1. Identify Key Stakeholders, that assess:
a. Who are potential beneficiaries?
b. Who might be adversely impacted?
c. Have vulnerable groups been identified?
d. Have supporters and opponents been identified?
e. What are the relationships among the stakeholders?
2. Assess Stakeholder Interests and the Potential Impact the Project on These
Interests, that assess:
a. What are the stakeholders expectations of the project?
b. What benefits are there likely to be for the stakeholders?
c. What resources might the stakeholder be able and willing to mobilize?
d. What stakeholder interests conflict with project goals?
3. Assess Stakeholder Influence and Importance, that for each stakeholder group,
assess its:
a. power and status (political, social, and economic)
b. degree of organization
c. control of strategic resources
d. informal influence (for example personal connections)
e. power relations with other stakeholders.
4. Outline a Stakeholder Participation Strategy, that plan stakeholder involvement
according to:
a. interests, importance, and influence of each stakeholder group
b. particular efforts needed to involve important stakeholders who lack influence
c. appropriate forms of participation throughout the project cycle.

Summary of Policy Recommendation Analysis


This study is based on project experience conducted in several representative cities in
Indonesia. The survey field is included 3 (three) main area and 8 (eight) comparison area. It
conducted that public participation in flood mitigation was not specifically accommodated by
legal aspect as compared to ideal condition. In several observed activities, there was near to
ideal condition but still not supported by legal aspect. As such in Medan, North Sumatera,
especially for emergency response, practice based on review on survey was run good enough
but there were not accommodated by local regulation. In the other hand, there are legal
products but no implementation on field, as such, (PP RI No. 47/1997: Region Planning and
Design: Ch. III, Part 41, Verse 1; Conceptually, constituent that control rainfall infiltration
area has been written in region planning, nevertheless, yet implemented in construction. (PP
RI NO. 47 TAHUN 1997 TENTANG RENCANA TATA RUANG WILAYAH: Bab III
Pasal 41, ayat 1; secara konsep bagian yang mengatur ruang resapan air hujan sudah tertera
dalam perencanaan tata ruang tata wilayah akan tetapi belum terwujud pelaksanaannya dalam
pembangunan tata ruang tata wilayah.)
From point of view level of involvement, there is limitation in the process. It is clearly
realized that not all of flood mitigation activity or measures need involvement level up to
empowerment or even consensus building. The more involvement, the more interest have to
be accommodated and too many bureaucracy inter-sectors. Therefore, the process of
Dwinanti R. Marthanty
University of Indonesia

Page 7 of 11

Stakeholders Participation in Flood Mitigation

ASAIHL, Jakarta
2006

coordination inter-sectors and development is big possibility retained or even worst,


cancelled. In this edge, influence and importance element of stakeholders must be identified
first so level of involvement can be deliberated.
In early stage, analyzing stakeholder involvement is done after selecting project/policy type.
Afterwards, the process focuses on simplifying characteristic of activity or measure as a
project or policy with regard to flood mitigation in life cycle through Social Assessment.
Then, Stakeholder Analysis take into the process.
Project/policy type, firstly, indirect benefits, direct social cost.
It is classified in structural/physical measures or policy in general, as such, public facility and
utility. The measures act as media for non-structural/physical activity. It takes social cost that
weight stakeholders by using financial scheme, in the mean time, benefit is obtained not
directly and in the long term.
Project/policy type, secondly, large number of beneficiaries and few social costs.
It is classified in non-structural/physical measures that have most heterogeneous stakeholder
and take relatively small effect to social cost. This type is a managerial tool for long term
implementation of flood mitigation.
Project/policy type, thirdly, targeted assistance.
It is classified for clear defined target to help for. This means the target lay on weak position
that needs assistance. They do not have direct access to the resources and require third party
as mediator. In the other side, existing resources lack in coordination amongst sectors and
institution. Hence, assistance can not be distributed for fair.
All of those types can describe interactions between stakeholders and its social attributes into
type measure of flood mitigation. The next step is stakeholder participation assessment for
each type.
Stakeholder participation assessment, including public participation, in off-stream structural
measure, is concluded in the weakness of legal aspects that accommodate public
involvement. For example in Pontianak, Kalimantan Barat, the review showed that there is
coordination between Local Government (Pemda and Bappeda) and public. They coordinated
in problem identification and maintenance financial scheme for drainage system.
Also, it reaches by reasoning that public participation study in Flood Regulation is practiced
long before from the level of local to national government, in spite of this, all existing
regulation is limited to conceptual level. As an illustration in Surabaya, East Java, the review
proved there was public consultation from the team of Surabaya Drainage Master Plan to the
public. The consultation was involving public in the development of regulation regarding
tertiary drainage system management. The team planned to withdraw public fund and human
resources for system maintenance. However, the plan stopped in conception because of lack
of law enforcement.
Flood Emergency Management is planned as part of response measures. There are an
adequate amount of legal aspects that can be used as point of reference, but it is still deficient
in public participation. For example in Medan, the review showed that practices were
accommodated well enough by the concept but still no legal aspect. In the other side,

Dwinanti R. Marthanty
University of Indonesia

Page 8 of 11

Stakeholders Participation in Flood Mitigation

ASAIHL, Jakarta
2006

Bakornas (National Coordination Board) is a significant implementation of stakeholder


participation, except it is not effectively accommodated public participation.
There is possibility that objectivity came in collecting data, therefore deduction might have
less resolution. However, along the process, the objective should befall more focus and
deeper thus the local characteristic is mounted and recommendation is straightway directed
effectively. As such, at East Java Province, flood mitigation is more advance than any other
field studies. it could be chose as the main field study and template for others field in
Indonesia.

Policy Recommendation of Stakeholder Participation in Flood Mitigation


Policy recommendation regarding stakeholder participation in flood mitigation and
management is built based on strategy participation and interaction involving stakeholder.
Building ideal participation strategy will act as a reference that assess legal aspect and lesson
learned. The difference in processing between ideal conditions compared to legal aspect and
lessons learned in field of study could be considered in policy recommendation.
Terminology of public is needed to be restated in the developing stakeholder participation
policy. Public can not explain anyone who is involved and involving in the regarding
activities and also how to proceed their roles in flood mitigation. Therefore, public
participation terminology is turning into stakeholder participation. Stakeholder in this context
means those affected by the outcomenegatively or positivelyor those who can affect the
outcome of a proposed intervention.5Stakeholders can include beneficiaries (inhabitant,
customers, etc.), intermediaries (NGOs, academic institution, etc.), or decision makers
(government, project owner, etc.)
Focusing study in the 3 types of project/policy as pilot analysis states that stakeholder
participation is limited by certain activities supported by policy:
Indirect benefits, direct social cost type, needs a policy that accommodates the
importance from people who might get lost or adverse impact. This rules is very
important to minimize negative impact that influence the mitigation process.
Participation procedures have to be specific in accommodating aspiration. The main
issue is financial scheme and repayment system through subsidence that have to be
transparent and in a proper manner. Based on study, the maximum level of
involvement in ideal condition is limited to collaboration particularly in the concept
and implementation phase, meanwhile in construction phase is limited to consensus
building and agreement level.
Large number of beneficiaries and few social costs type, intention is in the
regulation that manages people who have many different interests. In this case, as a
facilitator, government must be able to attach many different interests. A proper and
effective bureaucracy scheme and integrated planning and construction are the main
issues. Based on study, the maximum level of ideal involvement is up to
empowerment risk sharing in construction and evaluation phase, meanwhile in
concept phase is limited to collaboration (increasing control over decision-making)
and in implementation phase is limited to level of information sharing.
5

The World Bank, 1996, The World Bank Participation Sourcebook, Environmentally Sustainable Development,
Washington, D.C.

Dwinanti R. Marthanty
University of Indonesia

Page 9 of 11

Stakeholders Participation in Flood Mitigation

ASAIHL, Jakarta
2006

Targeted assistance type; stressing focus is to the casualties of the impact. These
people need access that could avoid them from disaster or at least minimizing
damages. Capacity building of human resources is a prior consideration so they can
share thoughts and experience in flood mitigation planning. Based on study, the
maximum level of ideal involvement is through collaboration in implementation
phase, whereas in evaluation phase could reach empowerment and partnership
level.
This statement is still preliminary recommendation and needs an intensive discussion among
decision makers.

Dwinanti R. Marthanty
University of Indonesia

Page 10 of 11

Stakeholders Participation in Flood Mitigation

ASAIHL, Jakarta
2006

References

A Toolkit for Participation in Local Governance. Zonneveld L., Oxfam / Novib, 2000

Earth Summit 2002, Johannesburg, South Africa, www.earthsummit2002.org


Final Report: Data Collection and Analysis Flood Mitigation Policy Study in Indonesia, Center For
Environmental and Water Engineering Research, University of Indonesia, 2004
Global Water Partnership GWP
Institute of Disaster Risk Management IDR

Majalah Air, ed. May-June 2002, p.10-11, 21


Participation and Social Assessment: Tools and Techniques, Jennifer Rietbergen-McCracken dan Deepa
Narayan, The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / THE WORLD BANK, 1998
Public Participation The Design of Local Strategies for Flood Mitigation and Control, B. Affeltranger,
INTERNATIONAL HYDROLOGICAL PROGRAMME, UNESCO, Paris, 2001
Pedoman Penanggulangan Banjir, Dep. Kimpraswil, 1986
RETHINKING GOVERNANCE HANDBOOK An Inventory of Ideas to Enhance Participation, Transparency
and Accountability, Center for Global Studies, 2001
The process of participatory
www.toolkitparticipation.com

governance:

an

analysis

of 40

cases,

Mrs.

C Pamfill,

2002,

The World Bank and Participation, the World Bank-Operations Policy Department, 1994
The World Bank Participation Sourcebook, Environmentally Sustainable Development, The World Bank,
Washington, D.C., 1996
Urban Surface Management, S. G. Walesh, John Wiley & Sons, 1989

Dwinanti R. Marthanty
University of Indonesia

Page 11 of 11