[IIS Recap] AAS-in-Asia Conference 2024 Panel Session: Contesting Loss for Indonesian Communities in Climate-Crisis
On July 9th – 11th, 2024, the Association for Asian Studies and Universitas Gadjah Mada organized the AAS-in-Asia Conference 2024 themed Global Asias: Latent Histories, Manifest Impacts in Yogyakarta, Indonesia. At this conference, the Institute of International Studies, Department of International Relations, Universitas Gadjah Mada (IIS UGM), collaborating with Murdoch University and RUJAK Center for Urban Studies, presented a panel session titled “Contesting Loss for Indonesian Communities in Climate-Crisis” on Thursday, 11th July 2024. The panel session was held in Room 310, 3rd Floor of the R. Soegondo Building, Faculty of Cultural Sciences, Universitas Gadjah Mada. It discussed the consortium’s ongoing research project under the KONEKSI-DFAT research grant regarding Indonesia’s Loss and Damage (L&D) framework and how communities can be involved in decision-making.
Dr. Luqman-nul Hakim, the Director of the Institute of International Studies, presented his presentation in the panel session.
The panel session began with a presentation on “L&D and Political-Economy of Sustainable Development in Indonesia” by Dr. Luqman-nul Hakim, the Director of the Institute of International Studies. In his presentation, Dr. Luqman highlighted that ineffective climate governance poses significant threats to the welfare and safety of the Indonesian community. The inadequacy to handle the Loss and Damage issue can be seen through how adaptive approach to climate change still prioritizes economic gains rather than the protection of human rights. In the international sphere, the effectiveness of Indonesia’s climate diplomacy on L&D is compromised when there is a lack of domestic legitimacy and inadequate credibility globally.
Dr. Rebecca Meckelburg delivered her presentation in the panel session.
The second presentation was delivered by Dr. Rebecca Meckelburg, titled “Measuring Loss and Damage: The Significance of Local-Indigenous Relationships in Comprehending Climate Change Impacts.” This presentation is based on ethnographic field-research findings in Banyusidi. One of the major findings underscores the need to develop a ‘common language’ for discussing climate change, as there are specific local terms used by local communities to talk about climate change. Therefore, it is essential to incorporate local knowledge to identify climate change and its impacts.
The panel session continued with the third presentation from the RUJAK Center for Urban Studies by Dr. Dian Tri Irawaty, who explained the “Urban Findings Report” based on field research findings in the Penjaringan sub-district. Dr. Dian underscored that climate change has worsened the economic, socio-political, and environmental problems. The main measurable consequences communities have faced include income reduction and increased expenses. Meanwhile, the non-measurable consequences include physical or mental health, and conflict among community members in Penjaringan.
In the last presentation, Dr. Agung Wardana from Universitas Gadjah Mada presented the L&D in Small Islands with the case study of Pari Island. Dr. Agung narrowed down the focus to the experience of Pari Island, as a sub-national small island whose inhabitants recently launched a climate litigation through the Asmania et al. vs Holcim case. In his presentation, he analyzed the structural factors that have influenced the climate-affected community in the Global South to decide to engage in transnational climate litigation. The panel session was then followed by a Q & A Session.
Written by: Anggita Fitri Ayu Lestari
Editor: Ni Made Diah Apsari Dewi & Nabilah Nur Abiyanti
[IIS Recap] Discussion with the Asia New Zealand Foundation: Contesting Loss for Indonesian Communities in Climate-Crisis
Yogyakarta, 27 June 2024 — The Global Engagement Office (GEO) and the Faculty of Social and Political Sciences (FISIPOL), Universitas Gadjah Mada, in collaboration with the Institute of International Studies, Department of International Relations, Universitas Gadjah Mada (IIS UGM), hosted a discussion with the Asia New Zealand Foundation. The discussion was held in the Dean’s courtroom, 2nd floor of the BB building, FISIPOL, and included several series of activities in a hybrid scheme. It aimed to talk about the main theme of Contesting Loss for Indonesian Communities in Climate-Crisis.
Dr. Fina Itriyati, the Vice Dean of FISIPOL UGM, delivered her welcome speech.
The discussion was moderated by Yulida Nuraini Santoso, M.Sc, the Manager of GEO FISIPOL, and began with the opening remarks from Dr. Luqman-nul Hakim, the Director of the Institute of International Studies, Universitas Gadjah Mada. It continued with a welcome speech from the Vice Dean of FISIPOL UGM, Dr. Fina Itriyati. “It is important to see how communities can participate in policy-making to ensure their voices are heard. Thus, cooperation between universities and think tanks is crucial to create a collective effort against climate change,” said Dr. Fina.
Dr. Jordan King from the Asia New Zealand Foundation delivered his welcome speech.
Furthermore, the Asia New Zealand Foundation’s Representative also delivered a welcome speech. According to Dr. Jordan King, New Zealand and Indonesia share significant similarities, including the presence of strong indigenous communities, their geographical location within the Ring of Fire, a close trading partnership, and a history of colonization. Due to its significant economic expansion and geopolitical influence, it is imperative to visit Indonesia and have a comprehensive understanding of the country.
The discussion with the Asia New Zealand Foundation began with the first presentation from Ms. Elisa Sutanudjaja, the Executive Director of RUJAK Center for Urban Studies. This presentation was based on field research findings in the Penjaringan sub-district. Ms. Elisa highlighted that climate change is not well-identified. As communities experience different conditions, they have different methods to identify climate change. Her findings also suggest that the existing national policy puts communities at more risk since the community is not engaged in the policy-making process. The inadequate leadership and insufficient engagement with the community generate unclear indicators and goals of climate change that endangers the livelihood of the Indonesian community.
The second presentation was delivered by Dr. Agung Wardana from Universitas Gadjah Mada, who explained the loss and damage in Pari Island, Kepulauan Seribu Regency. According to Dr. Agung, Indonesia is highly vulnerable to the effects of climate change, where numerous small islands in the country are in danger. The beauty of Pari Island has led to conflicts over its ownership. The company asserts ownership over 90% of the island, while the government manages the remaining 10% for conservation. Additionally, due to the geographic condition of Pari Island, the area is more prone to face severe problems regarding climate change impacts, such as more frequent coastal flooding. It puts the communities in a vulnerable economic condition as they depend on fishing for their livelihood.
Dr. Luqman-nul Hakim, the Director of the Institute of International Studies, Universitas Gadjah Mada, presented his ongoing research in the discussion.
In the last presentation, Dr. Luqman-nul Hakim presented the Politics of Sustainable Development in an Age of Climate Crisis. Indonesia has been involved in various global climate regimes and tried to adopt the global goals on climate change. However, the implementation of those normative goals in the national development context remains uncertain. “National climate governance strengthens the technocratic approach to deal with the climate crisis, and Indonesia has not sufficiently developed tools related to the Loss and Displacement issue,” emphasized Dr. Luqman. The discussion was then followed by a Q&A and documentation session.
Written by: Anggita Fitri Ayu Lestari
Editor: Albert Nathaniel & Nabilah Nur Abiyanti
[IIS RECAP] Revisiting EU-Asia Pacific Relations through the EUSAAP Conference 2024 with IIS UGM and ICES
Yogyakarta, 21 May 2024 – In order to maintain security, stability, and prosperity in the Asia Pacific region, the European Union continues to strengthen its cooperation framework with countries in the region. It is reflected in the concrete action of the European Union initiated in 2021 through a cooperation map in seven priority sectors of cooperative relations, covering aspects of welfare, green energy transition, maritime governance, digital governance and partnerships, connectedness, security and defense, and human security. Aligning with the objectives of the European Union cooperation policy, the European Union Studies Association (EUSA), in collaboration with the Indonesian Community for European Studies (ICES) and Institute of International Studies, Department of International Relations, Universitas Gadjah Mada (IIS UGM), held the EUSAAP Conference 2024. This conference aims to become a strategic forum for academics to exchange knowledge about innovations, conditions, and observations regarding changes in the foreign policy landscape of the European Union and countries in the Asia Pacific region from interdisciplinary perspectives.
The conference host, Mr. Muhadi Sugiono, delivered his welcoming speech at the opening session in Balai Senat, Universitas Gadjah Mada.
The EUSAAP Conference 2024 began with an opening session at Balai Senat, Universitas Gadjah Mada. This session included opening remarks from Mr. Muhadi Sugiono as the conference host, Prof. Martin Holland as EUSAAP Secretary General, and Prof. Dr. Wening Udasmoro as Vice Rector for Education and Learning of Universitas Gadjah Mada. The keynote speech and presentation were delivered by Mr. Stéphane Mechati, EU Delegation to Indonesia and Brunei Darussalam. The opening session continued with a roundtable discussion, which delved deeper into the main theme of the conference, Revisiting EU-Asia Pacific relations, led by Dr. Luqman Nul Hakim.
According to Prof. Dr. Wening Udasmoro, Vice Rector for Education and Learning of Universitas Gadjah Mada, the EUSAAP Conference 2024 serves as a significant platform for revisiting the European Union and Asia Pacific relations in the context of current urgent concerns. Prof. Dr. Wening Udasmoro emphasized that the conference serves not only to discover new strategies in partnerships but also to continuously evaluate the readiness and dedication to building strong partnerships between the European Union and Asia Pacific.
Reflecting on that urgency, Prof. Dr. Wening Udasmoro stated that the EUSAAP Conference 2024 is an important forum to produce inclusive knowledge for reshaping the global governance order. “As academics, we are crucial in providing nuances and perspectives on global governance. We are the beacon to produce inclusive knowledge that will be used for shaping or reshaping global governance. Hence, your participation in this conference would be highly appreciated,” said Prof. Dr. Wening Udasmoro.
In a short interview with the EUSAAP President, Mr. Muhadi Sugiono highlighted the dynamic relations between the European Union and Asia Pacific. The relationship between the two parties is considered promising because of their mutual interests. Nevertheless, the obstacles are reflected in the need to harmonize the multicultural condition of the European Union and countries in the Asia Pacific region. Therefore, efforts to enhance the relations between the European Union and Asia Pacific are crucial in order to foster security stability and encourage positive growth. “We need to build better communication and understanding that will create better relations. Hence, the real partnership can be achieved meaningfully,” Mr. Muhadi Sugiono explained.
The significance of the EUSAAP Conference 2024 towards the European Union and Asia Pacific relations was also delivered by Prof. Martin Holland, EUSAAP Secretary General. This conference serves as an essential measure to maintain the cooperation between the European Union and countries in the Asia Pacific region, along with the global geopolitical transition. It is interesting to see how experts, diplomats, and young postgraduates discussed their research. Indonesia’s rise as a global economic and cultural center has encouraged the European Union to recognize the diversity of the Asia Pacific region. In this regard, the European Union has attempted to change its approach towards the Asia Pacific region to create better political-economic policies.
In line with Prof. Holland’s statement, the Vice Head of the EU Delegation to Indonesia and Brunei Darussalam, Stéphane Mechati, underscored the importance of a forum to bring together diverse perspectives and interests from Indonesia and the European Union. Not just propaganda from a single party, but the European Union wants to build dialogue and reciprocal relations, establishing mutually advantageous partnerships for the European Union and the Asia Pacific Region.
One of the participants presented their research in the panel presentation and discussion.
Following the end of the opening session of the EUSAAP Conference 2024, the conference proceeded with a panel presentation and discussion held at the Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, UGM. Around 40 academics and researchers, both undergraduate and postgraduate from various countries, attended the panel presentation session. In addition to presenting their research findings, the academics also had the chance to exchange opinions and provide comments on the study related to the interactions between the European Union and Asia Pacific.
Written by: Albert Nathaniel & Anggita Fitri Ayu Lestari
IIS Monograph Series #5 | Damai Pangkal Damai – A Race Against Time : Nonviolent Resistance in Indonesia and the World 2023 [English Version]
What is there to be proud of in 2023? Autocratization became worse, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine endured, the Israeli occupation of Palestine presented the world with live-streamed genocide, right-wing groups continued to emerge and win elections, while the climate crisis remained unaddressed. With those in mind, how are we supposed to be optimistic about 2024, the year where more than half of the world’s citizens cast their votes in general elections?
This fourth edition of Damai Pangkal Damai (DPD)’s annual reflection invites everyone to celebrate those who utilized nonviolent resistance to fight back against the above challenges. As usual, the annual reflection offers four segments, each discussing nonviolent resistance in Indonesia, maximalist movements around the world, a global reformist movement, and a special coverage. The first segment highlights the stagnation of nonviolent resistance in Indonesia. The second segment maps out maximalist movements that emerged, increased in intensity, dwindled, or turned into reformist movements throughout 2023. The third segment analyzes the escalation of the global climate movement. Last but not least, the fourth segment elaborates on the history and dynamics of nonviolent resistance within the Palestinian struggle for liberation.
[RECAP] Cangkir Teh #2: “The Transformation of Indonesia’s South-South Cooperation: From Solidarity to Interests?”
On Friday March 19th, the Institute of International Studies, Universitas Gadjah Mada (IIS UGM), held the second edition of the Cangkir Teh discussion virtually using Zoom Meetings. In this occasion, IIS UGM invited Rizky Alif Alvian, a professor at the International Relations Department, Universitas Gadjah Mada, as a speaker in this discussion–titled “The Transformation of Indonesia’s South-South Cooperation: From Solidarity to Interests?”. Alongside Rizky, IIS UGM also invited Muhammad Indrawan Jatmika, research staff at IIS UGM as the moderator of this discussion.
In this discussion, Rizky explained an article that he wrote with Dr. Poppy S. Winanti, titled “Indonesia’s South-South cooperation: when normative and material interests converged”. The article was published in the International Relations of the Asia Pacific journal in the September 2019 edition. Through this discussion, Rizky invites the participants to discuss the transformation dynamics of Indonesia’s South-South cooperation and the combination between normative and material interests that are involved–influenced by the political dynamic Indonesia experience.
Rizky opened the session by analyzing the definition of the “South” that is often used in the development discourse, where he sees that the majority of the Global South states experience the same fate as postcolonial countries. This can be seen from the actors who are involved in the Bandung Conference. These Global South states then form a cooperation initiative based on two foundations. First, normative interests, based on the shared sense of fate and the will to no longer be an object of the Global North, and material interests, based on each country’s political and economic interests, including Indonesia.
However, over time, South-South cooperation experienced a transformation, including those done by Indonesia. Consequently, the motivation of the cooperation that started with a normative foundation shifted to a convergence between normative and material interests. In this contemporary era, Rizky argues that Indonesia’s foundation of South-South cooperation is a convergence between normative and material goods.
Furthermore, Rizky divided Indonesia’s South-South cooperation into three different phases. During the Old Order, Indonesia’s South-South cooperation was fully based on normative interests grounded on solidarity to make a revolutionary Global South cooperation. In the second phase, under the New Order, Indonesia started to prioritize material goods by prioritizing political and economic gains as the main backdrop in designing South-South cooperation. The last phase, or the third phase, is marked by the convergence between normative and material interests–started during the Reform era and is continually preserved until now.
After the presentation, Rizky invited the participants to discuss together the South-South cooperation Indonesia has done. Moderated by Indrawan, the discussion session went well and was filled with the participants’ enthusiasm.
Writer : Raditya Bomantara
Editor : Mariola Yansverio
[RECAP] Beyond the Great Wall #13: China and Maritime Sovereignty
On Friday (26/02), Institute of International Studies UGM organized the 13th edition of Beyond the Great Wall Forum, titled “China and Maritime Sovereignty”. The forum was held online via Zoom Meeting platform. In this event, BTGW invited Aristyo Rizka Darmawan, a professor and researcher for the Center for Sustainable Ocean Policy in the Faculty of Law of Universitas Indonesia. Aristyo’s presentation was titled “China’s New Coast Guard Law: Illegal and Escalatory”. This forum was moderated by Nur Rachmat Yuliantoro, a professor in the International Relations Department UGM.
Last February, the Chinese government has officially authorized China’s New Coast Guard Law. This legislation allows China’s Coast Guard (CCG) to mobilize all capabilities (including the use of force) against parties that are deemed to be interfering with China’s maritime sovereignty and jurisdiction. According to Aristyo’s presentation, this new legislation violates international law and would in fact, escalate tensions among bordering states. At the beginning of his presentation, Aristyo explained that the CCG has a long history in its development. Since 2013, the CCG Bureau was formed to unify China’s legal maritime entities, titled the “Five Dragons, ” including China Marine Surveillance, Chinese Coast Guard, Chinese Maritime Patrol, China Fisheries Law Enforcement Command, and General Administration of Customs. This effort is part of China’s grand ambition to sustain and protect its territorial integration, especially regarding China’s Nine-Dash Line claim that has provoked conflict with East Asian and Southeast Asian states.
Highlighting this issue from the jurisdiction and international law aspect, Aristyo stated that the CCG law is essentially illegal. The CCG law is highly problematic from the jurisdiction side because it would violate other states’ sovereignty, which is legally guaranteed under international law. In addition to that, China’s Nine-Dash line claim would make any territory under the claim illegal. The new law that would allow the CCG’s use of force against parties deemed to interfere in China’s jurisdiction and maritime sovereignty violates international law that forbids any activity in a disputed territory. Not only that, the new CCG law explicitly violates several international laws and treaties, namely the UNCLOS and the UN Charter. Through its new CCG law, China has violated international instruments that forbid states to employ their military capability in resolving maritime disputes.
Moreover, Aristyo explained the new CCG law’s escalation impact; it would increase tensions between China and its bordering countries. China’s Nine-Dash Line claim has pushed itself into being stuck in several maritime disputes with East Asian and Southeast Asian countries. So far, China shows no hesitation in employing coercive means and threatening these countries, even though there is an ongoing effort to negotiate a Code of Conduct (CoC). The new CCG bill’s authorisation will have sour implications towards the CoC negotiation process, sending a message that Beijing does not take the negotiations seriously. Tensions will escalate not only with states who are directly involved in this dispute, but also with the US—noting that the US also plays a role in this maritime territorial dispute.
At the end of his presentation, Aristyo stated that several international actors could take several actions in regards to China passing the new CCG Law. According to him, other claimant countries or countries concerned with the South China Sea dispute could have shown a more robust response. In this case, the response can be in the form of condemnation or pressure against China to quickly evoke or amend the law. In terms of Indonesia, Aristyo claimed that the Indonesian Ministry of Foreign Affairs had invited the Chinese Ambassador for talks, but the invitation was left unanswered. Aristyo suggested that it is time for Indonesia to send a diplomatic note to Beijing to show a concrete effort of Indonesia’s commitment to ensuring peace in the Southeast Asian region. Nevertheless, he also stresses that Indonesia must be prepared for all possibilities, especially because Indonesian maritime resources are far behind China’s.
Writer : Brigitta Kalina
Editor : Mariola Yansverio
[RECAP] Cangkir Teh #1 : : “Defending Democracy Amidst a Pandemic–Nonviolent resistance in Indonesia and the World 2020.”
The first Cangkir Teh discussion was held on Monday, February 22nd 2021. The discussion was a collaborative effort between the Institute of International Studies, Universitas Gadjah Mada (IIS UGM) and Damai Pangkal Damai Team (DPD). This forum’s main agenda is to discuss and dissect the “Defending Democracy Amidst a Pandemic–Nonviolent resistance in Indonesia and the World 2020” report. On this occasion, IIS invited three speakers, which are: Diah Kusumaningrum, International Relations Professor at Universitas Gadjah Mada and researcher at IIS UGM, Ihsan Ali Fauzi, representative of Centre for the Study of Religion and Democracy (PUSAD) Paramadina, and Puri Kencana Putri, representative of Accenture Malaysia and ex-journalist for KontraS. This session was moderated by Cut Intan Auliannisa Isma, Manager of IIS UGM.
Diah started the discussion by explaining the background of the Damai Pangkal Damai initiative, a project aiming to create a database of nonviolent actions in Indonesia during the Reform era. The team, also involving students’ role, has successfully compiled 14.023 nonviolent actions in Indonesia during the reform era. It is hoped that the database would assist actors who are willing to involve themselves in nonviolent actions, including students, indigenous communities, or even journalists who are eager to learn about peaceful journalism. Additionally, Diah also hopes that the government and the police would learn nonviolent principles and implement those in daily life whilst also strengthening democracy in Indonesia. The DPD team believes that the most crucial culture in democracy is conducting contestations whilst implementing nonviolent principles.
The session is then continued by discussing the report’s content. It is hoped that the report would act as a document that can be used in reflecting and learning about nonviolent actions in Indonesia during the Reform era, as it was launched on World Day of Social Justice. The report is divided into several essential parts, starting with an executive summary. Diah stated that in 2020, nonviolent methods of actions were widely adopted in various movements around the world, starting from Indonesia, the US, Tunisia, Hong Kong, and many others–all of which can be categorized in Gene SHarp’s 198 methods of nonviolent action. This proved that the pandemic does not end the mobilization of nonviolent actions in the world; instead, it makes nonviolent action increasingly more important than before.
The COVID-19 pandemic does not diminish the mobilization of nonviolent actions. Instead, it introduces new actors in nonviolent action, such as KPop fans, middle-class white American women, and even war veterans. Other than that, the intensity of actions in various places are also increasing, and they become objects of solidarity and transnational learning. Unfortunately, in some cases, nonviolent actions are often appropriated by right-wing movements, such as anti-mask and anti-vaccine protests and even white supremacist campaigns. It is also regrettable how in many cases, nonviolent actions also receive repression from the state. In her closing statement, Diah advocates for the normalization of nonviolent actions as a part of democratic culture and it should not be met with repression.
Furthermore, the second speaker continued the session, Ihsan, who articulated his appreciation towards the DPD database. Ihsan stated that the database supports nonviolent studies in Indonesia and is a significant and great output from campus. Ihsan also supports students’ involvement in the research process, and he hopes that other universities in Indonesia would use the database. However, Ihsan also expressed a few challenges that the DPD team will face in the future, including continuity and media partnership. So far, the database has only been used by one media (KOMPAS) as a data resource. Ihsan hopes that the DPD team and IIS could pick an alternative partner other than Kompas in the future.
Lastly, Ihsan expressed his concerns about the shifting of the arena from offline to online. Ihsan emphasized that there is a possibility that those who previously actively participated in nonviolent actions have become disengaged because of the pandemic and state repression. Are the new players in online nonviolent actions stop the participation of previous players? Do the participation of online activists stop at clicking their gadgets, or do they go beyond that? How does civil society respond to the online presence of the state through buzzers and influencers? Lastly, Ihsan also stresses that the report also needs to write about the defeat that nonviolent actions experience.
As the last speaker, Putri also expressed her appreciation for the work the DPD team does, she also hopes that many actors in the society could widely use the output of the DPD team. Besides, Putri presented her materials, titled “Digital Authoritarianism” or “Otoritarianisme Digital”, as an input for the DPD team in conducting their future research. Digital authoritarianism becomes more apparent during the pandemic, marked by the government’s collaboration with right-wing movements. Those right-wing groups often involve themselves in advocating voices that are not in line with civil society’s voices; their involvement also indirectly hinders criticism against the government. Furthermore, cases in the US show that the state also involves espionage, digital surveillance, and even intervention in elections. In practice, the state’s digital authoritarianism threatens freedom of expression in the digital sphere.
The forum is closed with a discussion session that involves both the speakers and the participants, which went very well.
Writer : Raditya Bomantara
Editor : Mariola Yansverio
It’s Time to Rethink Jakarta’s Water Governance
As if the COVID-19 crisis is not enough, Jakarta is now also facing another flood catastrophe. Most recently, flooding affected around 200 neighborhood units (RT) and forced more than 1,000 people to evacuate their homes.
Indonesia is currently facing a series of disasters including floods, landslides, whirlwinds and extreme droughts in some parts of the country. According to the National Disaster Mitigation Agency (BNPB), the number of disasters has nearly tripled in the past five years from around 1,664 in 2015 to 3,023 in 2020.
Of course the usual culprit of these disasters is climate change, which according to Prof. Edvin Aldrian of the Agency for the Assessment and Application of Technology (BPPT) is caused by environmental changes and degradation within and without the country.
While it is not untrue, there is more than meets the eye: it is the failure of urban water planning and governance which has contributed to Jakarta’s persistent flooding. Overlooking the root causes will not only undermine the deeper issue, but also shift the attention to quick and temporary technological fixes that only exacerbate the environmental catastrophe.
The flooding in Jakarta this year was timely as Vox, a US media outlet, published a video report on Jakarta’s environmental crisis, which has caused the city to sink as fast as 25 centimeters annually. The report associates this crisis with Dutch-inherited segregated water infrastructure, massive groundwater exploitation and rapid urban development leading to a proliferation of concrete that prevents rainwater from replenishing water lost from the city’s aquifer layers.
These issues, however, cannot be solved with simple technological fixes. Rather they require a rearrangement of water governance that has proven to have failed to provide equal and sustainable access to the city’s population.
This failure is evident in three aspects: the exclusion of the urban poor from the governance process, the blurry lines between rights and responsibilities of the stakeholders, and the elite-centric decision-making process.
In an effort to do so, we can start by rethinking our water governance approach that currently focuses on the centralized water infrastructure to also incorporate a variety of everyday water practices. These have been chosen by people either because they are excluded from the network or because their access is limited due to the weak water pressure, or the unreliable and low-quality supply of the available network.
The reality of water governance in Jakarta is not reflected in the networked infrastructure that only covers 65 percent of the population with the majority of customers coming from middle to lower income households. Considering service unreliability that is not consistent with constant tariff increases, even those who are connected also fulfill their water needs either from groundwater, rainwater harvesting or bottled water.
According to the report from Amrta Institute, more than 60 percent of the city’s water needs are fulfilled by groundwater, which serves nearly two-thirds of the city’s water consumption, or around 630 million cubic metre out of 1 billion m3/year.
Unfortunately, the discussion on Jakarta’s water governance has been biased toward the centralized infrastructure, which is problematic for three main reasons. First, it reinforces a legacy of the colonial government water development planning, which is socially and geographically fragmented. This has inherently prevented the urban poor, especially those who live in informal settlements, from both accessing the piped water infrastructure and participating in the governance process.
Second, centralized piped water infrastructure is often used as a justification for private sector participation due the government’s lack of capacity to fund capital costs. However, as evident in Jakarta, neither public nor private operators have successfully ensured adequate and sustainable water service provision for the population, even those who adhere to pro-poor initiatives.
Lastly, the focus on centralized infrastructure promotes the development of big-infrastructural projects as a band-aid for the environmental catastrophe while neglecting the underlying issue of water governance failure. For example, the construction of a USD$40 billion giant sea wall to prevent seawater from overflowing into the already sinking city does not address the underlying problems and often comes at a cost of forced eviction of many informal settlements which burdens the already excluded urban poor.
Thus, there is a need to look beyond the networked water infrastructure by considering everyday water practices in which people interact within and outside the centralized infrastructure. Such practices include buying water from neighbors, collecting water from public stand-pipes, purchasing from pushcart vendors and extracting groundwater from shallow or deep wells.
Looking at these everyday practices will allow us to unveil the different manifestations of water inequalities in terms of distribution, recognition and participation. For example, research by Kooy and Furlong in 2018 found that over-abstraction of groundwater in rich neighborhoods has led to salinization of shallow groundwater and land-subsidence in poor neighborhoods, exposing the urban poor to higher risk of flooding and poorer water quality.
Equally important, paying attention to everyday water practices will not only allow us to understand the different manifestations of urban water inequality but also enable us to capture local knowledge and practices that have been filling the gap left by the centralized water infrastructure. This will counter the disempowering image of the urban poor as a passive recipient or victim of Jakarta’s unequal water governance.
This article does not seek to diminish the importance of centralized piped water infrastructure or the urgency for people to be connected to a piped water source, instead it seeks to highlight the need to look beyond the centralized network in order to develop a more holistic understanding of Jakarta’s water governance.
Hopefully, this will lead to the creation of an inclusive and sustainable urban water governance that allows for more equitable access to water, increasing recognition and larger space for participation especially for marginalized communities including the poor in informal settlements, women, migrants and the disabled.
This article has been published by the Jakarta Post and can also be accessed via the following link: https://www.thejakartapost.com/paper/2021/02/26/its-time-to-rethink-jakartas-water-governance.html
Writer : Marwa
Editor : Angganararas Indriyosanti