Sunarharum, T M; Sloan, M and Susilawati, C (2014) Re-framing planning decision-making: Increasing flood resilience in Jakarta. International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, 5(3), pp. 230-242. ISSN 1759-5916
Abstract
Purpose – Thepurpose of this paper is to re-frame planning decision-making to address risks offloodingandto increase community resilience. Rapid urbanisation, fragmented governance and recurrent flooding complicate resolution of DKI Jakarta’s chronic housing shortage. Failure to effectively implement planning decision-making processes poses potential human rights violations. Contemporary planning policy requires the relocation of households living in floodplains within 15 m of DKI Jakarta’s main watercourses, further constraining land availability and potentially requiring increased densification.; Design/methodology/approach – This paper presents a preliminary scoping study for a technologically enhanced participatory planning method, incorporating synthesis of existing information on urbanisation, governance and flood risk management in Jakarta.; Findings – Responsibility for flood risk management in DKI Jakarta is fragmented both within and across administrative boundaries. Decision-making is further complicated by: limited availability of land use data; uncertainty as to the delineated extent of watercourses, floodplains and flood modelling; unclear risk and liability for infrastructure investments; and technical literacy of both public and government participants.; Practical implications – This research provides information to facilitate consultation with government entities tasked with re-framing planning processes to increase public participation.; Social implications – Potential increased opportunities for collaborative decision-making and consequent reduction in risk exposure amongst DKI Jakarta’s most vulnerable populations can help to address issues of social justice.; Originality/value – This paper synthesises information from a range of sources not available in English, and offers insights into a complex system of governance and modes for improving decision-making.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | infrastructure management; natural disasters participatory approaches; resilience; risk management; urban planning |
| Index terms: | urbanization, planning process, community resilience, infrastructure management, planning method, governance, decision-making process, densification, infrastructure investment, complex system, household, risk management, modelling, land, planning policy, resolution, natural disaster, Jakarta, participatory approach, liability, social justice, flooding, flood risk management, framing, land use, relocation, decision-making, methodology, population, human rights, public participation, exposure, urban planning, housing, violation, boundaries |
| Subjects: | property law, conceptual models, participation process, economic analysis, analytical methods, urban planning, real estate economics, public policy, criminal law, construction type, risk assessment, data collection methods, business, regulatory law, systems engineering, liability law, environmental hazards, project controls, market analysis, conflict resolution, demography, sociology, decision analysis, Geography, infrastructure engineering, financial risk, urban design, social equity, public and environmental health, research methods |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Geographical Context, Engineering Principles, Cost Management, Health and Safety, Procurement, Construction Technology, Sustainability, Governance, Risk Management, Stakeholder Management, Ethics, Legal Issues, Urban Studies, Time Control |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here