An Analysis on KIP under Kalimantan Urban Development Project

This research deals with issues of community participation in upgrading programs of urban development project in Indonesia. The upgrading programs in squatter/slum settlements was named popularly as KIP (Kampung Improvement Program) which was a major component in urban development projects since 1969. In mid 80s, IUIDP (Integrated Urban Infrastructure Development Program) approach was born as a correction to the first generation of urban development project in Indonesia and shifted urban development approach. Therefore, started from 1985 the second generation of urban development including KIP was launched in the more participative approach. For that matter, in order to know more about significant impacts of the program, the research was conducted in July 2005 in Flamboyan neighbourhood, Municipality of Palangkaraya, Indonesia where provision of urban infrastructures and facilities such as provision of water supply, improvement of footpaths, construction of public toilets and construction of communal septic tank was done through KIP under KUDP (Kalimantan Urban Development Project) started in 1995. The research assessed community participation in the whole process of the KIP’s development under IUIDP approach.

Started with assessment on process of development of KIP, the process was divided into two stages which were process of planning and process of implementation. In process of planning, actors involved were identified. They were divided into two groups which were governmental institution and community. Through analysis on tabulations of interview with key informants in both group, it was identified that the form of community participation was consultation where people are being and informed based on external professional opinions without being involved in decision-making Pretty (1997)[1], Plummer (2000 p.52 )[2]. In process of implementation, participatory approach simply did not happen because all of construction works were done professionally by local contractors.

There were some constraints that hampered the application of IUIDP in the whole stages such as technical problems among the institutions, lack of capability of government’s official, and limitation of opportunity for community to get involved. Therefore the limited form of participation as Taylor defined as the weak or little participation (Taylor, 1987 p.53)[3] came into being as a result of inappropriate approach to encourage community participation.

The limited form of participation, as it was identified as the only consultation, was not appropriate sufficient to encourage sense of ownership in the community to maintain the infrastructures and the facilities. Therefore, it was found that level of maintenance by community was low, and most of the facilities are being deteriorated.

Then if the community participation was limited in the KIP, did it influence impacts and outcomes to the community? The research found that impacts and outcomes are quite significant. Therefore the presence of significant impacts and outcomes by a policy intervention in a squatter settlement might not be related only to the level of participation.
[1] Adapted from Pretty (1997) in Sustainable Development Strategies: A Resource Book (2000 p.180)
[2] Plummer (2000), Element of Participation P.52
[3] Skiner, Taylor and Wegelin 2000 in Shelter Upgrading for the Urban Poor p. 52