Shared water resources in decentralized city regions: mixed governance arrangements in Indonesia

Abstract

This paper investigates emerging models of governance for shared water resources in decentralized urban regions in Indonesia and draws on a case of inter-local government collaboration for shared water resources in Cirebon region, Indonesia. The paper points to cooperation practice involving a mixedmodel of governance for sharing water. by identifying a series of requirements for mixed governance. This model suits well not only because of the regional nature of water resource management in general, but also because such a model is likely to strengthen trust, increase transparency, and provide more equal positions among regions or stakeholders involved. Crucially, this model tends to decrease problematic levels of local autonomy and inter-local rivalry, which currently appears as a major challenge for shared water resource cooperation attempts in the decentralizing contexts of Indonesia and beyond.

Governance Arrangements for Water Reuse: Assessing Emerging Trends for Inter-Municipal Cooperation through a Literature Review

“…In addition, cooperation, land use, and spatial characteristics are closely related [18,32,33]. In terms of plant location and transportation, IMC can provide an effective use of land for water management [47]; considering that, the water system and the urban form are important for choosing a service delivery model (IMC or privatisation) [52]. For WCE, infrastructure development for reusing water (treatment, storage, transportation, etc.)…”

“…Remember that land use affects water quality [13]. The water system and urban structure are crucial for choosing a service delivery model (IMC or privatisation) [52].…”

“…-IMC arrangement creates (and has to ensure) a platform for engagement of all actors and stakeholders (public sector, researchers, citizens, and companies) [57,58] -IMC is more collective and transparent, benefiting from shared vision leading to harmonised development of urban infrastructures [50] -Cooperative approach facilitates addressing risks (technical, natural, and social) and trans-boundaries problems (environmental, etc.) [13,52,59] -IMC requires an establishment of: a strong leadership and communication, accompanied by ensuring the stakeholder's engagement, which is shaped based on citizen perception, conflict solution, and problem solving [13,58]; an acknowledgement of risks including risks about institutional uncertainties (allocation of responsibility), transaction costs, and political costs for individual [59]; a high level of knowledge, competence, and commitment of those engaged in the process of delivering and regulating drinking water [59] addressing the challenges of local government such as the small size of municipalities and fiscal shortages [47]; enhancing political willingness to take actions in wastewater treatment introduces cooperative models as a reliable alternative [47] -IMC brings effective use of land for water management, in terms of locating plants and transport [47] -The water system and urban structure are important for choosing a service delivery model (IMC or privatisation) [52]; Service efficiency -IMC is beneficial in terms of administrative, and economic factors; IMC introduces an efficient model to address the local government problems (e.g., waste transportation costs, unclear and unfair pricing formation, etc.) [55] -To define joint goals and well-established institutional settings leading to better results in services provision [54] -To check the quality of services based on citizen perceptions [60] -To consider the size of the municipality population as a determinant factor for the success of the cooperation as it is more preferable for smaller municipalities [53,61]; -To explore and evaluate (viability, cost-efficiency) of different arrangements for public service provisions, regarding the contextual conditions [21,56] -To understand costs and prices of water in different arrangements [62] -To understand the economic and political factors of IA for public services [63];…”

“…-To enhance the governance capacity, build strong leadership, train the local administrative staff, build trust, and increase transparency [50,52] -To ensure the participation of all actors and stakeholders, (public actors, private sectors and developers, citizens, and researchers) [57,58]; -To consider that cooperation is rooted in space [18] and land use and spatial features matter for a successful cooperation [18,32,33,68,69], also, to adopt a cross-boundary approach articulating land use and water resources management [13] -To adopt a co-creation approach to co-find and co-solve the problems [13] -To improve a platform for sharing knowledge and experiences, for communicating and negotiating [13,14] and to establish a joint goal and shared vision [50] -To identify and understand transboundary risks and institutional risks of cooperation [19,59] -To include the citizen perception in the service delivery assessments [60] -To understand the cooperation on a bigger scale and to identify its effect on neighbours [78];…”

Tata kelola sumber daya air berkelanjutan-berkeadilan : Bagaimana Indonesia memperkuat poros maritim?

“…Kelangkaan air dapat menghambat pembangunan ekonomi karena 67% kegiatan ekonomi diproyeksikan berada di wilayah yang mengalami kelangkaan air pada tahun 2045. Indonesia termasuk dalam sepuluh negara konsumen air tanah terbesar (berdasarkan volume pengambilan air tanah), yang mengambil air tanah terutama untuk keperluan rumah tangga (Rahayu et al, 2021). Padahal tren pertumbuhan penduduk Indonesia diproyeksikan berkisar antara 292,5 juta hingga 294,1 juta orang pada tahun 2030, dan 311,6 juta hingga 318,9 juta orang pada tahun 2045 (Maryono et al, 2022).…”