Floods in Jakarta: when the extreme reveals daily structural constraints and mismanagement

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to analyze the root causes of disaster vulnerability in Jakarta, to highlight the strategies and implications of official policies, and to consider alternatives for vulnerability mitigation. The February 2007 floods which struck Jakarta emphasized the extreme vulnerability of informal poor communities and the inefficiency of the disaster management policy set up by the Indonesian government.Design/methodology/approachDetailed field investigations were undertaken before, during and after the February 2007 flood event in several informal districts of Jakarta to collect secondary data and conduct interviews with the population and some stakeholders of the disaster management scene.FindingsHuman factors are dominant in explaining the magnitude of the 2007 flooding episode. Urbanization is partially responsible for the extent of the flooding by waterproofing the soils. Yet floods do not strike the inhabitants of formal and informal settlements in the same way. People from the poor illegal areas are the most affected. Their behaviour and coping strategies during the crisis are not due to a low perception of risk, but rather to some daily and non‐hazard‐related constraints which are not taken into account by the government.Practical implicationsTo prevent increasing vulnerability among these communities, it is essential to refocus disaster management strategies on a daily pattern and to integrate them within a global development framework, to de‐marginalize them in terms of access to resources (public services, economic values), and to favoir empowerment.Originality/valueIt is imperative to focus on poverty reduction and to develop economic projects aimed at treating the causes of vulnerability.

Assessing the vulnerability of pumping stations to trash blockage in coastal mega-cities of developing nations

“…As a result, excess wastes are often dumped in unauthorized areas near or within water bodies, potentially leading to undesirable outcomes such as polluted rivers and flooding during the monsoon season (Pasang et al, 2007). In a previous study, by Texier (2008), dumping of solid waste in rivers was reported as the second cause of Jakarta floods after rainfall from upstream, followed by the encroachment of squatter settlements on river banks. When excessive waste accumulates within the drainage network (Fig.…”

“…In responding to this problem, the government's first objective is to fight floods by using structural measures such as pumps and floodgates to control the flow of waters from surrounding hills and mountains, through the city towards the Java Sea (Akmalah and Grigg, 2011;Hartono et al, 2010;Texier, 2008). Constrained by the shortage of funding, this approach deemphasises the socio-economic support for the poorest communities who are considered by the government to be living illegally in slums (Texier, 2008).…”

“…Constrained by the shortage of funding, this approach deemphasises the socio-economic support for the poorest communities who are considered by the government to be living illegally in slums (Texier, 2008). To some, this approach of prioritising the technical measures over the people is considered a fight of flood hazards, by fighting the poorest and most disadvantaged people (Texier, 2008).…”

River flood risk in Jakarta under scenarios of future change

“…As in most parts of the world, flood management in Jakarta has traditionally focused on technical protection measures, in order to lower the probability of the flood hazard through dikes and levees (Texier, 2008). Given the increasing impacts of flooding, and the importance of both physical and socio-economic drivers on risk, recent years have seen a shift towards a more flood-risk-management-based approach in Jakarta (Ward et al, 2013b).…”

Assessment of the effects of climate and land cover changes on river discharge and sediment yield, and an adaptive spatial planning in the Jakarta region

“…However, flood disaster impacts appear to have become more severe over the last few decades. For example, the city suffered major floods in both 2002 and 2007, the latter causing at least 58 deaths (Texier 2008) and direct economic damages of US$453 million (Steinberg 2007).…”