Proceedings of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol. 5, pp.

2308 - 2319, 2005

PARTICIPATORY PLANNING TOWARD AN INTEGRATED

TRANSPORTATION MASTERPLAN FOR JABODETABEK
Dail Umamil Asri
Section Chief for Road Infrastructure Directorate of Transportation
National Development Planning Agency the Republic of Indonesia
Jl. Taman Surapati No. 2 Jakarta Pusat
10310 INDONESIA
Fax: +62-21-314-8550
E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract: In 1999, the Government of Indonesia passed legislation effectively transferring

control of many central government activities to regional level government who can now
independently of each other planning and developing their own strategic transport
infrastructure facility and capability. The question now arise as to how to coordinate and
strengthen the capacity of regional level government to formulate transport policy, undertake
sectoral development planning, formulate budget based on development needs and monitor
sectoral performance and development problem. Because provincial and local government
have considerable autonomy, conflicts are likely to arise. Therefore, it is essential that a
mechanism be established to resolve any development conflicts efforts.

In response to the request for appropriate planning approach in the new era of decentralization
and regional autonomy in Indonesia. Participatory planning activity had been chiefly carried
out at sub-regional or Kota/Kabupaten’s local government level through a series of
stakeholder meetings. Major objective of the stakeholder meeting was to identify problems
and examine problem-solving measures through participation of various stakeholders in order
to build sense of ownership of and commitment to transportation planning.

Keywords; Participatory Planning, Masterplan, Jabodetabek

1. INTRODUCTION

Jabodetabek, a large-scale metropolitan area with a population of 21 million, consists of

Daerah Khusus Ibukota/DKI (Capital Special Region) Jakarta, as the capital city of Indonesia,
which is the center of politics, economy and social activities, and 7 local governments in the
surrounding areas covering Kota (city district) Bogor, Kabupaten (rural district) Bogor, Kota
Depok, Kota Bekasi, Kabupaten Bekasi, Kota Tangerang, and Kabupaten Tangerang. Its
gross regional domestic product amounted to Rp. 351,000 billion in 2002, or 22% of the
national gross domestic product; thus Jabodetabek is strategically the most important region
of the nation.

The current condition of the urban structure and some previous studies give some lessons in
identifying how to solve the transportation problems in the Jabodetabek region by explaining
not only how the physical development of the transportation network should evolve but also
how to ensure the required funds. Many studies have also already explored some issues such
sharing of responsibility, regulatory reform, institutional rearrangement, and consensus
building among the stakeholders. As a result, participatory planning approach has been

2308
Proceedings of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol. 5, pp. 2308 - 2319, 2005

preferred as one approach to establish and accompany an Integrated Urban Transportation

Master plan for Jabodetabek region.

The objective of this paper will explore the lessons learnt from activities during developing
integrated transportation master plan for Jabodetabek and reveal some problems and obstacles
based on the latest information and previous studies. The paper will identify characteristic of
the existing urban structure, (ii) urban transportation problems and the effects of those on the
Jabodetabek region. This paper will also elaborate the role of participatory planning approach
during discussion on (iii) anticipation of future urban growth and urban structure alternatives,
and (iv) the implementation mechanism that is also of great importance in order to establish
the transportation master plan because mere preparation of the master plan would not solve
problems.

2. JABODETABEK URBAN STRUCTURE

2.1 Population Growth and Urbanization

The total population size in Jakarta-Bogor-Depok-Tangerang-Bekasi (Jabodetabek)

Metropolitan area amounted in 2000 to round 21 million people. The population size in
Jakarta and Bogor-Depok-Tangerang-Bekasi (Bodetabek) was recorded at 8.4 million and 12
million people respectively, while average household sizes in DKI Jakarta and in Bodetabek
were calculated at 3.74 and 3.84 respectively. Urbanization in Bodetabek between 1990 to
2000 was 3.7 percent per annum while the growth in Jakarta was merely 0.2 percent per
annum, where the distribution of population density is shown by following Figures.

Figure 1. Population Density 1990 Figure 2. Population Density 2000

Source : SITRAMP 2004 Source SITRAMP 2004

This implies that suburbanization has rapidly preceded and population has spread oat in
Bodetabek area to seek better life quality, housing circumstance and environment and/or look
for cheaper place of housing due to increasing land price in DKI Jakarta. The population
movement toward suburban area has generated longer trips between residence and workplace
and given much burden on existing transport infrastructure and environment. Based on the
latest population census, University of Indonesia provides the latest population projection of
about 26 million in the region in the year 2020.

2309
Proceedings of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol. 5, pp. 2308 - 2319, 2005

2.2 Concentration of Economic Activities in Jakarta

Figure 3. Increase of Commuting Trips to Jakarta
The development of urban centers in from Surrounding Areas: 1985-2002
Bodetabek has been emphasized for a long
time. Although the populations in Kotas
and Kabupatens have been increasing
rapidly, the functions of urban centers are
still limited to merely serving the
neighborhood population. The centers
provide neither sufficient job opportunities
nor urban services for the residents. On any
given day, around 700,000 people are on
the road from Bodetabek to Jakarta shown
by Figure 3. If this trend of relying on
Jakarta continues, coupled with an increase Source : SITRAMP 2004
in private car use, road development will not be able to catch up with the increasing traffic
demand.

The rapid population, economic growth and subsequent growth of travel demand in
Jabodetabek have inevitably brought about various urban transport problems, which have
become increasingly serious over the last few decades. As the consequences, the needs for
transportation facilities in Jabodetabek have increased tremendously. Transportation issues
are very complex because various social, economic and cultural aspects are involved and
inconsistency between transportation plan and land-use plan also creates more problems to the
transportations in Jabodetabek. Meanwhile, the government seems fall short to catch up with
the demands.

2.3 Past Plans and Studies Related To Jabodetabek Transportation System Development

During the last few decades, a variety of plans and studies related to the Jabotabek
transportation system have been carried out. In the 1970s, it was recognized that urban
planning within a limited administrative boundary could not effectively cope with urban
problems, particularly in DKI Jakarta. Therefore, Presidential Instruction No. 13/1976 was
issued to establish a comprehensive Jabotabek Metropolitan Development Plan (JMDP) 2005,
that begun with the preparation of the Jabotabek Regional Planning in 1975 which was
revised several times before the final version was completed in 1985. Development directions
and strategies proposed by the JMDP are reflected in a broad sense in the structure plan of
DKI Jakarta. However, structure plans prepared by the local governments of Botabek are
inconsistent not only among themselves but also with the JMDP’s land use and development
zoning

2.4 Needs for Planning Coordination

In order to foster coordination on infrastructure development in the Jabotabek region, BKSP

(Development Coordination Agency) Jabotabek was established in 1976 by the joint decree of
two governors, DKI Jakarta and West Java when the first Jabotabek Metropolitan
Development Plan was prepared. Later, it was reinforced by Ministerial Decree of Ministry
of Home Affairs No. 29/1980 and then State Ministry of National Development Planning
Agency No.125/1984. BKSP’s main task is to prepare and determine a cooperation policy
and an implementation plan and to support the realization of integrated regional development.

2310
Proceedings of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol. 5, pp. 2308 - 2319, 2005

Its other tasks include establishing development planning policies for all sectors within the
Jabodetabek region, resolving economic, social and spatial development issues raised by one
of the local governments and acting as facilitator to arbitrate disputes among local
governments.

BKSP Jabotabek has not fully realized its function at present. The function of BKSP has
remained almost unchanged and focuses on planning coordination among local governments,
especially between DKI Jakarta and the West Java provinces. BKSP does not have enough
planning personnel and most of the role of BKSP is that of a secretariat rather than a technical
coordinator, with little capacity, authority and funds for planning and coordination.
Nevertheless, BKSP contributes to providing opportunities, as required by the local
governments concerned, to discuss, for instance, problems on mini-bus operation across
administrative boundaries, and domestic and industrial waste disposals.

3. DECENTRALIZATION AND LOCAL GOVERNANCE

Since its independence, Indonesia has had a highly centralized but multi-tiered unitary state,
with the central government at the top of the hierarchy. Provincial governments belong in the
second tier and local governments the third tier.Indonesia. Local governments consist of two
categories: city districts (kota) and rural districts (kabupaten). Within them are sub-districts
or (kecamatan), which are smaller administrative government units; these sub-districts are
further divided into villages. Villages in rural areas, called desa, are referred to as kelurahan
in urban areas. Apart from historical factors that led to the establishment of a unitary state, a
centralized authority was considered necessary to unify the fourth most populous country in
the world.

3.1 The Regional Governance Law

Indonesia is now undertaking what may be one of history’s most sweeping and rapid
decentralization efforts, powered by the regional political strength. Law 22/1999 on Regional
Governance and Law 25/1999 on Fiscal Balance between the Central Government and the
Regions (provinces and local governments) changed the organization of and relationship
between central, provincial and local governments in Indonesia in several fundamental ways.
Both laws are founded on the principles of democracy, community participation and
empowerment, equity and justice, recognition of the potential and diversity within regions,
and the need to strengthen local legislatures. When fully implemented, the two laws will
transform intergovernmental relations in Indonesia.

The end of the hierarchical relationship between the provinces and the local governments has
led local governments to position themselves as direct subordinates to the central government.
As a result, provincial and district assemblies have issued conflicting and/or confusing local
legislation and regulations on the same subject. There is a need for a clear set of guidelines
outlining the relationship between various layers of government on functions, such as land,
transport, communications, statistics, and family planning.

3.2 Problem Rises in Regional Governance

In 1999, the Government of Indonesia passed legislation effectively transferring control of

many central government activities to regional level government who can now independently

2311
Proceedings of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol. 5, pp. 2308 - 2319, 2005

of each other planning and developing their own strategic transport infrastructure and facility
and capability the question now arise as to how to strengthen the capacity of regional level
government to formulate transport policy, undertake sectoral development planning,
formulate budget based on development needs and monitor sectoral performance and
development problem. Because provincial and local government have considerable autonomy,
conflicts are likely to arise. Therefore, it is essential that a mechanism be established to
resolved any development conflicts efforts.

To do this, central level ministries should know reconsider the nature of their relationship
with the provincial and kabupaten/kota government agencies especially when this regional
government are developing their expenditure investment plan and program. In many cases the
focus for development will extend across more that one administrative boundary. Because
provincial and local government have considerable autonomy, conflicts are likely to arise.
Therefore, it is essential that a mechanism be established to resolve any development conflicts
efforts.

One of the problems now facing central government is fragmentation of the centralized
coordinated planning process. Regions are able to act independently in their formulation and
financing of their development strategies. Because there is currently no regional planning,
consultation and coordination mechanism in place devolution of many of the central
government responsibilities is likely to lead to an efficient allocation of resources both and
between sectors. The likely outcome will be that infrastructure investment will not always be
based on the needs of the user, but on other less efficient methods of resources allocation.

3.3 Current Position of BKSP Jabodetabek

After the decentralization embarked in 2001, the institution faces a new era of its existence
and challenges in both administrative and technical ways. As the governmental
decentralization progresses, the necessity of BKSP Jabotabek or its function is growing more
importantly to coordinate urban and regional development plans that should be prepared
across administrative boundaries. To make this organization function as expected, a strong
power and mechanism that empowers BKSP to become a decisive and responsible leader
would have to be legally established. Institutional and legal aspects on planning and project
execution entity in such an area of inter-governmental jurisdictions should be examined more
carefully. This issue is one of the most essential conditions to seek for the integrated
transportation master plan in Jabodetabek.

Law No.22/1999 concerning Regional Administration states that, a joint agreement and/or an
establishment of regional cooperation body involving more than two local governments must
obtain an approval from respective local legislature (local assembly) first to ratify an
agreement and/or corroborate with other local administrations. Concerning a current move on
democratization and complex conflicts on interest groups, in particular, taking into account
gaining powerful authority than ever after the dawn of decentralization, it is becoming more
difficult and time consuming to reach a unanimous agreement at local assembly. Therefore,
even after a few years elapsed already, a new joint agreement has not yet been endorsed by
newly joined local governments, districts and municipalities.

BKSP has been attempting to expand its legal basis by incorporating seven local governments
in its joint agreement due mainly to the effect of decentralization. At the same time, BKSP
seeks more powerful legal basis on the presidential decree. The endorsement by the

2312
Proceedings of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol. 5, pp. 2308 - 2319, 2005

presidential decree gives BKSP more rational and legal backbone to act as a cross-regional
agency in the Jabodetabek region and enable it to impose a wide range of development
policies and decisions.

3.4 Coordination among Government Agencies

Urban transportation and land use development problems often spread beyond the boundaries
of the Kota/Kabupaten into the neighboring local authorities. Therefore, transportation
planning could not be confined only within the administrative boundary of a particular Kota
or Kabupaten. Overlapping or unconnected transportation network plans are consequences of
a too inward looking planning. Formal arrangements to coordinate the transportation
development planning through the formation of conurbation planning coordination
committees are therefore required. One way of doing so could be by empowering BKSP,
which is currently suffering from lack of power and resources. Discrepancies between plans
occur not only between neighboring local governments but also between plans initiated from
central government and the local plans. Due considerations should be given to resolve the
matter.

In order to strengthen the coordination function for region-wide planning, it is imperative to

institute an organization that has a strong leadership supported by technical capability,
authority and funds for planning up to the implementation. Under the decentralization policy
and its relevant laws, the administrative hierarchy between Provincial and Kota/Kabupaten
governments was diminished and leveled equally. Therefore, the coordination among these
local governments became more difficult but is more importantly required to pursue the
effective and equitable development of the Jabodetabek region. Even stronger power and
capability will have to be delegated to a new coordination body, such as Jabodetabek
Development Authority, that is under the direct jurisdiction of the Cabinet.

3.5 Coordination among Local Governments in Transportation System Development

For a conurbation area like the Jabodetabek region, where various conflicts occur, there is a
strong need to strengthen the transportation system through a coordinated manner. The
development of transportation plan will involve many agencies at local and central
government level and thus close cooperation will be required.

The Government of Indonesia is pursuing a policy of decentralization which will increase

local governments’ responsibilities with regard to land use and transportation policy matters.
The guiding statutory documents for the urban plan in Jabodetabek area are the respective
spatial plans established by each local government which define long-term land use and
transportation plans. The crucial issue is how to ensure that the strategies and policies
stipulated based on these individual spatial plans are mutually consistent and well coordinated
at the metropolitan (i.e. Jabodetabek) level.

Almost all local governments in Jabodetabek have included some sort of toll road
development in their transportation plan. Some of the plans are follow-up of the previous toll
road network plan established by the Department of Public Works, but it is also of importance
to note the emergence of new toll road plans from local governments which is not always
consistent with the previous plans.

2313
Proceedings of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol. 5, pp. 2308 - 2319, 2005

Little progress has been seen regarding the demarcation of the role of road development and
management among the central, provincial and local governments. Four committees,
however, were set up in Department of Public Works to expedite the progress of primary
issues of road development and management, 1) road law and regulation as a whole, 2)
regulation on specific topics, 3) toll roads and 4) road funds, respectively.

Considering the role sharing in road administration, the central government is mostly
responsible for policymaking, the provision of technical standards (specifications) and
guidelines, and evaluation of road administration and development, while local governments
are responsible for road development, operation and maintenance in their jurisdiction.
Department of Public Works, in particular, should take the initiative to comprehensively
dialogue with local governments and to incorporate their aspirations and needs, in order to
overcome their technical, financial and human resource constraints.

With regard to the institutional aspect of transportation management in the Jabodetabek

region, it is anticipated to clearly define the rationale of the establishment and conceptual
structure of a transportation authority in accordance with the forthcoming need of
metropolitan-wide transportation management to deal with an integrated transportation master
plan to be recommended by the Study Team. There are various alternatives to set up such
institutions, such as 1) strengthening an existing institution, 2) establishing a metropolitan-
wide transportation authority and 3) establishing a metropolitan region transportation
planning commission. The first alternative is to strengthen an existing institution to
encompass the function and authority to take the responsibility to oversee transportation
management. At present, the leading institution might be the BKSP. The second alternative
is to establish a new institution, namely, a Jabodetabek metropolitan transportation authority
embracing all local governments, to manage transportation as a whole, including
policymaking, fund raising, physical infrastructure development, operation & maintenance
and transportation management. In such case, various transportation policies could be
executed metropolitan-wide, such as road pricing, an earmarked fuel tax and reciprocal
transportation system. The third alternative is to establish a metropolitan-wide transportation
planning commission, whose main functions are to expedite metropolitan transportation
planning, i.e. planning, research and coordination consisting of the central and local
governments, academic institutes, transportation society, etc.

4. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT AND PARTICIPATORY PLANNING

The idea of participatory planning activity initially was in response to the request of technical
and steering committee of SITRAMP for appropriate planning approach in the new era of
decentralization and regional autonomy. In the SITRAMP, participatory planning activity
had been experimented at sub-regional level, namely, at the level of Kabupaten/Kota’s local
government. Major tool of the activity was stakeholder meeting. In addition, inter-sub-
regional workshop was held to share the outcome of stakeholder meetings and to encourage
dialogue on the common issues of transportation planning among local governments.

However, it seemed that some local governments did not show positive interest in this activity.
It is not easy to establish participatory approach in planning process of local governments.
Lessons learnt from the participatory planning activity of SITRAMP revealed some problems
and obstacles that restrict local government full implementation of participatory planning.
These findings are summarized below followed by recommendation for further practice.

2314
Proceedings of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol. 5, pp. 2308 - 2319, 2005

4.1 Public Involvement

The role of the regional “community” in the planning process is taking on an ever more
natopnal govermentns rteform their public sector organization an dadopt democraycy decision
making process. The empowerment of the community or stakeholders in the planning process
has the effect of ensuring that the interest of individuals, communities, and organization that
may benefit or be adversely affected by an investment decision are recognized and dealt with
in an equitable manner in the planning process. Empowerment of stakeholders can be
achieved through open community participation mechanism A consultative process would
ensure that affected communities on their representatives are fully involved in the project
planning and decision making process.

When participatory planning activity had started, JICA Study Team and local facilitators
encouraged local governments to involve non-governmental stakeholders into the activity.
However, local government officials were reluctant to do so although they realize that the
public is well aware of their right and claims transparency and accountability from the
government much more than before. It seems to be simply because local governments are not
yet prepared themselves to accept public involvement in institutional, financial and mental
terms.

At the level of local transportation issue, in fact, public involvement is, to some extent,
already put into practice. For instance, from this year, Kabupaten Bogor government started
to hold public consultation meeting when implementing development project such as road
construction and improvement. Meeting participants include representative of village
committee, village chief, sub-district chief, NGO, and informal public leaders. The
government side explains project plan and participants promise commitment to the project
after discussion and consensus building. Kota Bogor also had carried out wider public
involvement practice recently with assistance of UNDP. Various activities from grass-roots
to city-wide including stakeholder meetings at community level and open public forum were
executed. As a result, it seems, public awareness had grown faster and larger than capacity
and preparedness of the local government.

4.2 Institutionalization and Legitimization

Each local government was expected to form backup team, which was supposed to consist of
officials from concerned agencies, for sub-regional transportation planning. The key role of
the team would be to undertake stakeholder meeting and incorporate its result into sub-
regional transportation planning. Instead of forming backup team, some local governments,
such as Kota Depok and Kota Tangerang preferred to empower existing Bakorlantas (Badan
Koordinasi Lalu Lintas: Traffic coordinating board). At present, Bakorlantas is place to bring
about inter-agency coordination to handle particular traffic problems at certain time and spot
or to consider short-term solution to transport problems. However, empowerment of existing
Bakorlantas seems reasonable in terms of efficient resource use because forming new
taskforce such as backup team must accompany with additional resource mobilization.

Through activities in SITRAMP, it was noticed that ad hoc taskforce would not function
sufficiently. Backup team, in the end, could not evolve as a sustainable inter-agency
committee to work on transportation planning and implementation with holistic and
medium/long-term perspective. Therefore, committee or working group exclusively

2315
Proceedings of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol. 5, pp. 2308 - 2319, 2005

responsible for participatory planning should be institutionalized and legitimized on routine

basis at Kabupaten/Kota level.

4.3 Institutional Coordination

Coordination includes two meanings: inter-agency coordination within Kota/Kabupaten and

inter-regional coordination within Jabodetabek area. First, wider stakeholder involvement and
inter-agency coordination is required within Kota/Kabupaten. In the stakeholder meetings,
for example, some local governments invited agencies which were not directly responsible for
transportation issues. They were Dinas Tata Kota (Spatial Planning Agency), Dinas
Pemukiman (Settlement Agency), Dinas Cipta Karya dan Lingkungan Hidup (Public Works
and Environmental Agency) and others. In fact, transportation issues are very complex
because various social, economic and cultural aspects are involved and inconsistency between
land use plan and transportation plan is also one of the problem causes. Therefore, the
stakeholder meeting provided good opportunity for various agencies to discuss together.
According to some local officials, there have ever been many opportunities for different
agencies to exchange opinions and information (in general, such opportunities are frequently
stated as “coordination”). However, strictly speaking, these opportunities have never
produced practical actions toward holistic planning and implementation.

Second, most of local governments are aware of necessity of coordination and cooperation
among relevant Kota/Kabupaten, provincial and central government for planning,
implementation and monitoring process. In the inter-sub-regional workshop, participants from
each Kota/Kabupaten’s backup team, relevant agencies of provincial and central government
raised several issues required coordination: management of intercity bus, development of toll
road and railway network, and new seaport, and development of inter-regional bus terminal.
In order to promote such coordination, one suggestion was brought from the group discussion
in the workshop that was assigned to examine institutional issues for transportation planning.
It was named, for the time being, “Jabodetabek Transport Forum”. According to the proposal,
it would be a communication forum among Kota/Kabupatens in Jabodetabek area and DKI
Jakarta with regular meeting, rotating host, and financed on cost-sharing basis. Right now,
first Jabodetabek Transport Forum is under preparation hosted by DKI Jakarta with technical
assistance of Center for Transport Studies, University of Indonesia.

4.4 Top-Down vs. Bottom-up Approach

In most local governments, backup team was formally established and supposed to play a key
role to encourage active participation of stakeholders and coordination of relevant agencies in
order to grow sense of ownership of planning process. In fact, only a few of backup team
members took part in the activities. Some of local government stakeholders seemed to feel
that this participatory planning activity was based on top-down initiative.

Meanwhile, the local governments appreciated that they invited officials represented of sub-
district or Kecamatan to the stakeholder meetings. It was, to some extent, bottom-up
approach to involve local level stakeholders who have direct interests in day-to-day
transportation problems. However, this approach had also weakness. Some local government
officials expressed that stakeholder meeting was good tool to exchange various opinions from
different stakeholders but not so effective to examine sub-regional transportation system and
network because sub-district representatives only concerned their own problems limited to
their own area.

2316
Proceedings of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol. 5, pp. 2308 - 2319, 2005

4.5 Supporting Resources

Participatory planning in sub-regional level requires support of local resource such as human
resources, financial, and legal support. Commitment of top decision makers to mobilize their
resources – in particular budget – to support the planning process is an important point.
However, budget allocation will depend on related fiscal year, so necessary budget should be
included in the local budget plan prior to the certain fiscal year. In the case of SITRAMP,
some of Kota/Kabupaten cannot provide enough budgets to support the participatory planning
activity since the budgets were already fixed for on-going fiscal year. Finance is one of the
important factors in determining success and failure of the activities since mobilization of
local human resources, supporting facilities for stakeholder meeting, necessary data collection,
consultations, and coordination among related agencies will surely generate expenses.

4.6 Planning and Development Management Challenges

Planning responsibilities among the three tiers of government (central, provincial, and
kota/kabupaten) in Jabodetabek are still not clearly defined. The involvement of two different
provinces and seven kotas/kabupatens and with their (still) different regional perspectives, the
role played by national agencies, the diverse range and scope of development programs, and
the limitations of the existing programming and budgeting procedures all hamper the planning
and implementation of concerted development efforts.

There is a clear need for improved channels of communication, for more clearly stated
development policies, principles, and criteria, and for an overall, coordinating perspective on
the region's development planning. A single agency is needed that is capable of (a) providing
a forum for the joint preparation of programs by the national, provincial, and local agencies
involved, (b) undertaking independent and objective evaluations of alternative development
options, and (c) maintaining and translating an overall development strategy into basic
guiding policies, principles, and criteria for sector development. That agency should be
charged with the coordination of all infrastructure development planning in Jabodetabek as a
whole and empowered to make choices between alternative sectors. One key to improving the
coordination and integration of plans and efforts in Jabodetabek lies mainly in strengthening
institutional arrangements for planning and programming.

The inevitable and foremost imperative institutional issue in the transportation sector is
insignificant coordination and communications among central ministries, the former Ministry
of Settlement and Regional Infrastructure (Kimpraswil), Ministry of Communication (MoC),
National Development Planning Agency (Bappenas), Ministry of Home Affair (MoHA), and
local government agencies. Not only vertical discrepancy but also a lack of consensus on
regional planning across each local government’s jurisdiction makes it more difficult to
formulate an integrated transportation system development plan in the region. The existing
Development Coordination Agency (BKSP) for Jabodetabek should be the main player to
coordinate among local administrations; however, insufficient resources and overlapping
responsibilities with central and provincial agencies make it difficult for BKSP to perform its
duties with proficiency. Taking into account its current legal ground and functions, a legally
and administratively independent and more flexible new institution should be considered.

Establishment of a new agency, Jabodetabek Transportation Authority, is strongly

recommended to make consistent a metropolitan-wide transportation system development
plan and to manage transportation demand in the region. However, if it needs time to

2317
Proceedings of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol. 5, pp. 2308 - 2319, 2005

establish such a new agency, a planning commission is to be established to pursue the tasks in
short term. Therefore SITRAMP recommends to establish a transportation authority for the
region in early stage of the master plan period and to envisage the next step to be an
establishment of an urban development authority.

(a) Jabodetabek Transportation Planning Commission

The Jabodetabek Transportation Planning Commission is set up under the direction of

the central ministries, consisting of transport-related personnel from sub-national
governments. This executive body shall consist of heads of respective provincial and
local governments, as well as representatives from the ministries, such as Kimpraswil,
MoC, MoHA and Bappenas. Its main functions are to: 1) coordinate respective
transportation planning at local governments into an incorporated regional transportation
plan, 2) conduct research and survey for transportation planning, 3) coordinate studies in
the region to be utilized for an integrated transportation planning, and 4) manage the
data collected through the Study particularly the surveys to be used for academic
research, planning purpose, and so on. A permanent secretariat is established to support
the commission and carry out daily operations. Funding for the commission and
secretariat shall in the form of contribution by the commission members.

(b) Jabodetabek Transportation Authority

The Jabodetabek Transportation Authority (JTA) is established as an independent public

corporation, which has main accountability to the public, not only to the central or sub-
national governments. The authority would be endorsed by either presidential decree or
government law to stand as an independent public corporation. It oversees all land
transportation issues and has main responsibilities to: 1) formulate regional
transportation policy, 2) formulate integrated transportation planning, including road
network development, railway (MRT, LRT and subway) development, traffic
management and public transportation system management, 3) implement the integrated
transportation planning and programs, 4) issue licenses and control public transportation
with bus route license, public transport business license, bus terminal development
permission, and so on, 5) regulate public transport services, such as trunk bus, MRT,
LRT and so on, 6) support development of inter-Kota or inter-Kabupaten highway
network, and 7) carry out traffic management measures, such as road pricing, park and
ride, and park and bus ride.

The authority would be operated by the revenue from road pricing and surcharge on fuel
tax and financial contribution or subsidy from DKI Jakarta and the relevant local
governments. As an independent corporation, however, its primary task is to be
financially sovereign and it should be underlined that a disclosure of financial status is
one of the most important aspects to secure its position as a public corporation offering
public services to users in the region. As a public corporation, it could also raise fund
from the capital market by issuing corporate bond.

5. CONCLUSION

The current condition of the urban structure and some previous studies give some lesson in
identifying how to solve the transportation problems in the Jabodetabek region by explaining

2318
Proceedings of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol. 5, pp. 2308 - 2319, 2005

not only how the physical development of the transportation network should evolve but also
how to ensure the required funds including sharing of responsibility, regulatory reform,
institutional rearrangement, and consensus building among the stakeholders. It also indicates
failures in planning coordination in a region-wide context and what should be done now to
make the master plan materialize. Therefore, establishment of a new agency or organization
with a strong power for authorization of region-wide plans that covers multiple local
governments, supported by sufficient technical staff and funds, is strongly recommended to
make consistent a metropolitan-wide transportation system development plan and to manage
transportation demand in the region.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

Special acknowledgment to Prof. Akimasa Fujiwara, who generously donated their excellent
hospitality and collaboration to the paper. Furthermore, I would also like to thank Mr.
Tomokazu Wachi as JICA Study Team Leader for the great assistance and detail data to the
paper.

REFERENCES

a) Books and Books Chapter:

JICA and National Development Planning Agency (BAPPENAS). 2004. The Study on
Integrated Transportation Master Plan (SITRAMP) for the Jabodetabek Phase 2. Final
Report. PCI and ALMEC Corporation. Jakarta. Republic of Indonesia.
Kunarjo. 2003. Government Budget in Regional Autonomy Era (in Bahasa Indonesia). Institut
for Small and Medium Enterprise Empowerment (ISMEE). Jakarta. Indonesia
The World Bank. 2004. INDONESIA : Averting an Infrastructure Crisis : A Framework for
Policy and Action Urban Development Working Paper. East Asia Infrastructure
Department: City in Transition. Urban Sector Review in an Era of Decentralization in
Indonesia. Working Paper No. 7. Washington DC 20433. USA.
The World Bank. 2003. Urban Development Working Paper. East Asia Infrastructure
Department: City in Transition. Urban Sector Review in an Era of Decentralization in
Indonesia. Working Paper No. 7. Washington DC 20433. USA.

b) Journal Articles:

Asri, D. U. 2003. Current Transportation Issues In Jakarta Metropolitan Area. Discussion

Paper Series. Presented in the COE Special Seminar. Hiroshima University (October 28,
2003). Japan
Dikun, S. 2003. Transportation in New Global Era : Linking Asia Through Better
Transportation. Keynote Speech of 5th EASTS International Conference. Fukuoka. Japan
(October 29, 2003)
ITB. 2004. Toll Road Development in Transportation in Regional Autonomy Era (in Bahasa
Indonesia). Lembaga Penelitian dan Pengembangan Masyarakat (LPPM). Jakarta (April
29, 2004)

2319