CONTRIBUTION OF BEDAH KAMPUNG AND RELOCATON PROGRAM TOWARD POVERTY ALLEVIATION – BEST PRACTISES OF SURAKARTA

This research is conducted based on high poverty rates in Indonesia (17,4% in 2003) as well as in Surakarta (14,1% in 2009). This is an urban phenomenon indicating the poverty, where in fact most of urban poors live in slums area, characterized by substandard houses with inadequate infrastructure and urban services. The approach of housing policy has shifted from provision approach to sustainable development and recently to integration with poverty alleviation strategy. Community-based Housing Development is one of Housing Delivery Systems in Indonesia , which is based on Community Empowerment. This is believed to be the instrument for poverty alleviation as housing sector contributes in alleviation of poverty in terms of increasing access to housing and shelter ; increasing access to services and infrastructure; social development and eradication of poverty; Environmental management; Economic development and governance. Objective of this research was to analyze the contribution on CBHD-based programs toward poverty alleviation in Surakarta. Results of the research showed that higher contribution of poverty alleviation of CBHD Programs was access to housing due to higher intervention of the program in housing improvement. Relocation Program had higher contribution to poverty alleviation for the most components had been significantly increased: condition of house construction, land secure tenure, water supply, sanitation condition, even though the program had displaced the people from previous location and increased transportation costs.


INTRODUCTION
Slums are defined as informal settlements within cities that have inadequate housing and squalid, miserable living conditions.They are often overcrowded, with many people crammed into very small living spaces (2014 The Cities Alliance).. Slums are also considered as visual indicator of urban poverty (UN Habitat, 2002).Poverty in third world countries is very high even Millenium Development Goals set poverty and hunger alleviation as its first goal.In Indonesia, the poverty rate was 17.4 % in 2003 and was estimated to become 7, 55%-12,1% in 201555%-12,1% in (Kesra, 2011)).Most of urban poor live in un livable neighborhood.It is seen from the fact That the slum area had reached 57.800 ha in 2009 distributed in not less than 10.000 locations in Indonesia (Kemenpera, 2010).
One of the main obstacles of poverty alleviation is due to the lack of capacity of the poor because organizations and institutions in the community give them less access to social inclusion, empowerment and security (the World Bank, 2002).The development of the community capacity is needed to involve them in the develop-ment, to recognize their own problems and to find solutions of the problems faced.Therefore, model of Sustainable Slum Community Empowerment / PMPKB is necessary (Astuti and Hardiana, 2009) Housing Delivery System in Indonesia has been more concerned on formal system that is the housing development operated according to the government regulations, standards and procedures.While, informal housing development, as commonly known as self-help housing development, self-help housing, incremental housing, Community-based Housing Developmentare less heavily regulated.In fact, formal housing development only contributes about 20% of housing development achievement in Indonesia,the rest (80%) is achieved by community-based housing development (Silas, 2005).According to Turner (1987), three fourth of the whole urban housing in third world countries are built by and for poor in the city, four fifth of poor population have no access for new housing provision by commercial developers or public agencies.New paradigm of housing development has shifted to Poverty Alleviation strategy.From the previous research, it was known that Local Government (case study in Surakarta) gaveless access to funding andcommittment to local government budget because housing sector was less considered as priority (Astuti, et al, 2006 ;Astuti and Hardiana, 2007).However, the obstacle faced by the people in the involvement in housing planning was their lack of ability and community capacity (Astuti and Hardiana, 2011).
Surakarta City Government puts poverty alleviation as the main focus of development.It is due to the high issue of poverty, which in 2009 was amounted to 14.99% of77.970people from 525.505 of the total population (BPS in the PRSP document Surakarta, 2012).One of the efforts is Community-based Housing Development (CBHD), linking residential development with poverty alleviation strategy.The programs include renovation of housing and environment condition (RTLH) and relocation of housing along river banks.To run the program, the government of Surakarta through Perwali established Community Based Organizations (CBOs) in the form of working group (Pokja) and sub-working group (sub-Pokja) that serve as mediator between the government, community and other parties and also as internal communicator with the beneficiary communities.From the results of the study in 2012, it was found that the CBHD system Pucangsawit Relocation, the community capacity was improved seen from the occurrence of inter-organizational networks among the communities, Working Group (Pokja) and other parties, that this would be the potential and opportunity for poverty alleviation (Astuti, 2012).However, in terms of inclusion, the level of community participation was still considered as instrumental participation, where the government's program become instrument for encouraging and increasing people's capability for taking a role in the society's development, in which the participation mentioned in Perwali guideline in 2007 was still the instrument.Participation and empowerment had not become the goal so that it created transformation (transformation participation) (Astuti, 2012).Therefore, further research on the character of Community-based Housing Development in Surakarta and whether CBHD in Surakarta can contribute to the efforts of poverty alleviation and CBHD contribution toward poverty alleviation is needed.

Community-based Housing Development and Poverty Alleviation
As a housing development system which is based on community and increasing community empowerment, CBHD is believed to be an instrument of poverty empowerment and alleviation.According to Moser (1996) urban poverty issues include: 1. Commoditization, in which the urban poor settlers are integrated with cash economy where everything must be calculated with money; 2. Environmental hazard, in which the urban poor settlers are facing the problems caused by environmental problems, such as lack of clean water, sanitation, drainage, the low quality of houses, and illegal land; 3. Social fragmentation, in which the vulnerability in alcohol and involvement in crime are very high.Issues related to the low access to housing affordability, lack of ability to access housing; lack of access to legal land ownership for housing, the low quality of housing and infrastructure.Therefore, the development targets for poverty alleviation are intended to reduce poverty, increase employment opportunities, and increase the infrastructure and city services; including improving access to housing.

Contribution of Housing Sector toward Poverty Alleviation
Poverty alleviation of housing sector is not only increasing access to housing and access to infrastructure services (Moser, 1996 andUN HABITAT, 2001), but also increasing purchasing power to public facilities, improving the management of environment, economic development and governance.Studies of urban poverty put priorities of poverty alleviation goals on: poverty reduction, employment opportunities, and increasing access to basic and social services (Moser, 1996).Several key indicators of urban poverty which are strongly associated with the housing sector are described by Moser (1996) as follows: access to housing, purchasing power to public facilities, purchasing power to water, electricity, garbage, education, health and transportation costs; improvement of environmental Management; economic development (Table 1).
Improved access to proper housing is associated with the number of population.In addition, access to housing involves the quality of the house, including the permanence and the feasibility of space/area of the house that according to Kemenpera is 7.2 m 2 per person.Another important thing is secure housing tenure home/land ownership status.With a clear status, it improves the access of the poor to obtain credit facilities from banks, a decent home, and adequate infrastructures (UN Habitat, 2001).
Besides access to housing, the guarantee of adequate infrastructure availability is an indicator of poverty alleviation including the provision of adequate water supply in quality and quantity, environmental sanitation and waste management (UN HABITAT, 2011).In addition there is an increase in purchasing power of city public facilities, purchasing power of the payment of water, electricity, garbage, education, health and transportation costs; improvement of environmental management; economic development including: creating new jobs opportunities in various sectors of society.Housing production the net number of units produced (units produced minus units demolished) in both the formal and informal sectors per 1,000 population Adequate housing quality and space Floor area per person the median usable floor area per person Permanent dwelling units the percentage of dwelling units likely to last twenty years or more given normal maintenance and repair, taking into account locational and environmental hazards (e.g.floods, typhoons, mudslides, earthquakes) Secure housing tenure Unauthorized housing the percentage of the total housing stock in the urban area which is not in compliance with current regulations Source : Moser, et al, 2006in Astuti, 2015 Growth of the business sector in the form of small, medium, and large enterprises should be supported by providing ease bank credit; and Governance which involves community participation and involvement and improvement of local authorities (UN Habitat, 2004).Concept of sustainable communities has become one of three legs of sustainability concept.This concept has mentioned by H.M Government, in Bramley and Power, 2009 that sustainable cummunities has eight hadings : (1).active,inclusive, and save; (2).well served; (3).Well design and built; (4) well run; (5).environmentally sensitive; (6).Well-connected; (7)thriving and ( 8) fair for everyone.Bramley and Power, 2009 have also stated that there are two issues in the core of the notion of sustainability within the context of area as follows: social equity issues (access to services, facilities and opportunities) and issues of the"sustainability of community "itself.Das, 2015 has also argued that in the neoliberal development, urban poverty alleviation has strong shift toward decentralization, institutional building, and by civil society and private sector, and Community-based and driven development (CBD and CDD).Therefore the urban povety alleviation paradigm has been emerged in slum upgrading as an integrative , synergy and comprehensive as well as collaborative planning tool for providing infrastructure and basic services as well as improving housing condition in the urban poor settlements.

Types of the Research
The type of research was a case study research with the multiple methods of qualitative and quantitative analysis.There were two projects of implementation of program based on CBHD as a part of Slum Clearance Agenda 2015 were selected : 1) Bedah Kampung Program in Danukusuman Surakarta, which was benefitted to 200 low-income households.This program was considered to be on site development program, where the kampung improvement has been occured in the specified previous area; 2) relocation program (resettlement), where it was considered to be off side improvement program, where the program was resettle squatter settlers from riverbank area of Bengawan Solo River in Kelurahan Pucangsawit to Mojosongo.Therefore improvement condition of housing and infrastructure has been occured outsite the previous settlement, which benefitted to 116 low-income households.

Population and Sample
This research was a case study of 2 projects of implementations of CBHD namely Bedah Kampung Program, which was based on on site housing improvement Program, benefitted to 200 HH and Relocation Program from Pucangsawit to Ngemplak Sutan, which was based on off site housing improvement program benefited to 116 HH.Below is the research sampling design (Figure 1): The analysis used in this analysis of the change of condition before and after research for aspects of housing poverty alleviation: access to housing and land tenure; access to infrastructure; affordability of infrastructure and services; and economic development.T test analysis was used in this analysis in order to determine the change conditions of settlement before and after implementation of the program.With the significancy value / P-Value of 0,5% Hypothesis : 1. Ho : there is no significantly different between before and after goverrnment intervention.2. Ha : there is significantly different between before and after goverrnment intervention.
If P-Value > 0,05 ; therefore Ho is rejected and there is no significantly different .it means that there is no environment improvement of the area before intervention and new development area The framework of the analysis is presented in Figure 2 below:

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
This research analysed how the housing sector contribute to sustainability in terms of urban context social equity issues (access to services, facilities and opportunities) and issues of the"sustainability of community "itself (Das, 2015) alleviating poverty.This is partly because the urban poor is mostly associated with Environmental hazard, in which the urban poor settlers are facing the problems caused by environmental problems, such as lack of clean water, sanitation, drainage, the low quality of houses, and illegal land (Moser, 1996).Therefore this research analysed the contributions of the Bedah Kampung Program and Relocation Program in the small area of development to housing poverty alleviation in terms of increasing access to housing and land security of tenure; access to services and social infrastructure; affordability of urban and social services; encouraging environmental management and economic development.This research took the case of Surakarta, a city in the middle lane of Central Java, a city service center for six surrounding regions joined in the fast-growing economic regions Subosukawonosraten (Surakarta, Boyolali, Sukoharjo, Karanganyar, Wonogiri, Sragen and Klaten), with an area of 44.04 km 2 , dominated by built areas with a population of around 600,000 people.The poverty rate in Surakarta is still quite high, around 22% covering 125.600 poor (TKPKD, 2011).One of the most strategic issues in Surakarta is not livable settlements (slums) and squatters who occupy land which is not in accordance with the allotment (squatter settlements).Surakarta City Government declared that in 2006, there were 6612 not livable houses spread in 5 districts of Surakarta.There were 1571 families living in squatter settlements, whether government land, riverbanks and railway tracks.In the previous year's study, it was found that the program more concerned only at economic improvement and had no targets related to access to housing.Locations of the 2 case studies are presented in the picture below (Figure 3): HH spreadly into 7 RT (Figure 4).Bedah Kampung is a program of settlement quality improvement through rearrangement of uninhabitable kampung environment/ slums in urban and rural areas carried out interactively by involving the community through Community-based Organization called POKJA (working group).The program was accommodated in the Regional Development Program, to improve the kampung function in the city or territory system to support the welfare and productivity of the society.Based on Permenpera No. 14 / Permen / M / 2011, the assistance provided in Bedah Kampung program was as stimulant and the management was handled by MBR / KSM, LKM, and the Working Group to set up as a revolving fund or not.
Bedah Kampung Program was addressed to MBR requiring help either clustered or not (preferably clustered), had components: 1) new building (PB) of Rp 10 million per house; 2).Quality improvement (PK) of Rp 5 million per house and 3) PSU whose amount was based on the availability of the funds.Housing Quality Improvement Program (PKP) was intended to solve slum housing (houses and urban infrastructure and services) in a clustered location, had components: 1. Quality improvement fund (PK) of Rp 5 million per house 2. Urban infrastructure of Rp 4 million per house but its usage was constructed together in one group (not used individually) 3. To carry out bedah kampung and PKP, organizations were established: 4. Center Working Group assisted by KMP (Central Management Consultant) and KMW (Regional Management Consultants) 5. Provincial Working Group assisted by Provincial Coordinator 6. local Working Group assisted by facilitator or KMK (District Management Consultant).

Relocation Program
One of the strategic issues in Surakarta 2005 -2010 was the growing squatterson the riverbanks, railway and government lands.Huge flood that hit the city of Surakarta in 2007 had an impact on 12 villages and soak 6368 houses in Surakarta, which were mostly located on the riverbanks (squatter settlement).This showed the lack of capacity of society to gain access to land and secure housing free from hazards and eviction.Relocation program (resettlement program) was one of the Housing Policies which aimed to resettle the people whose houses located in the unsafe area and not appropriate with the spatial plan of the city to the area in accordance with the Spatial Plan of the City.Besides improving access to land ownership and safe houses, relocation program in Surakarta restored the land along the river to its real function.
Pucangsawit settlers along the banks were relocated to six locations in Mojosongo (Figure 5) case studies of the relocation program from Pucangsawit to NgemplakSutan, because the main program was the provision of adequate assistance and the purchase of legal and proper land for housing and residence.Relocation Program has distributed land purchase grant for 12 million rupiah for each households to find more suitable land for residential development with has security of tenure (Table 2).Grant for construction of new housing of 8.5 million rupiah will be distributed to the beneficieries after each household has been obtained a parcel of suitable land.Through Mayor Regulation of Surakarta City 2007, this program was formulated community-based organization namely POKJA (Working Group) to organize community in organizing Government Grant for Government target of housing people to the safer and healthier place to live.The POKJA has also has responsible for reporting the program implementation to the Govermen of Surakarta through Government Unit of Bapermas.Bedah Kampung Program was a program of improvement of Environmental Quality (village) on site (at the existing location), so there was no change of location of residence, so that it did not experience a decrease in purchasing power due to transportation costs.It was found that the aspect changed were the aspect of the wall of the houses, floor of the houses, water services, the cost of water and electricity costs.The physical aspects in the houses and purchasing power were highly changed.On Relocation from Pucang Sawit to Ngemplak Sutan Mojosongo, it was known that almost all aspects were changed except the cost of education.Aspects of the access to infrastructure experienced change compared to the others, but all aspects were changed.It meant that relocation was the best CBDH program seen from the changes in aspects before and after the relocation.
Although from the statistical tests, the level of affordability did not change significantly, but from the FGD was known that Relocation Program slightly lowered affordability due to the increase of transportation cost because this program had moved the occupants from the previous location.Figure 7 shows that Relocation Program of squatter settlements along riverbank area of Pucangsawit to Ngemplak Sutan Mojosongo, eventhough the program has only granted to land purchase and grant for construction of new house, the program has multiplier effect on increasing others indicators of poverty alleviation in terms of housing sector.Through the CBHD approach, the relocation program becomes instrument for poverty alleviation in generating collaboration planning and programs among Government Units in providing access to infrastructure and services.Therefore, eventhough the relocation program has distributed grants for obtaining a parcel of land for new development of 12 million rupiah per HH and construction of new house of 8.5 million rupiah, greatly increased has been indicated also on access of water supply, due to involvement and support of PDAM (Public water supply company) .The usage of toilet and usage of indicated septic tank has also increased.According to the FGD, previously most of the inhabitant was utilized public toilet with the communal septic tank.While in the new area of relocation, social equity has also improved indicated from increasing access to infrastructure and urban services.Whereas slightly improvement has been found in other aspects of housing construction ( floor size, wall, floor nd roof condition) and garbage management.This program has been direct the development program of government unit such as Public Works, National Agrarian Bureau to provide infrastructure and land certicication.Community-based Development Program has encouraged community sustainability, which bring community and CBO into wider networks in the city context.Bedah kampung Program has only lead to increased condition of wall and floor, access to water supply and garbage management.Limited area with high density kampung has restricted the enlargement of houses as the parcel of land owned by resident is very limited too.Vertical development needs more support from the government public budget.In overal, relocation program has more contribution to poverty alleviation , where most aspects found to be significantly different from the previous settlement than Bedah Kampung Program.

CONCLUSIONS
The analysis showed that CBHD on Bedah Kampung Program, which is considered to be on site approach in settlements improvement program has been constrained by limited land availability due to its location in a densely populated settlements area.Therefore there has been slightly improvement of the physical condition of the house (walls and floors) and the environment (water).Community-based Development approach operated in the implementation of the program has encouraged collabortion and interorganisational networks among public-private-civil and community.From the FGD, this expressed the involvement of several government units in the implementation of the program : Bappeda, Bapermas, Social welvare unit, BLUD.However this has not given much contributions in increasing social equity in terms of improvement of infrastructure and services, eventhough physical condition of kampung has been improved by better land arrangement and space, greenery along the riverbank, concrete block paving.Multiplier effects of the program was found in the slightly improvement of economic activity due to better improvement of road and drainage.
Relocation program, which is the off site settlements provision program, gave the higher contribution towards poverty alleviation, many aspects had increased significantly, not only in the condition of the house, the legality of land, but also the water condition, latrines and septic tanks.Social improvement has much changed from status of squatter settelement on the riverbank area with the weak security of land and housing tenure become formal settlers in the residential area conformed to the mas ter plan of the city.It expresses in the great improvement of infrastructure and services (water supply, private toilet, septic tank).The Community-based Approach in housing development program has formulating condition for multiplier effect for improvement of other aspects of housing poverty due to its mechanisms, which generates networking and collaboration with other parties corcerning efforts in housing poverty alleviation

Figure 1 .
Figure 1.The research population and sample Sources : Analysis, 2014 Sampling method used in this research was simple random sampling, with the formula below (Prijana in Huriarto, 2010):

Figure 3 .
Figure 3. .Map of Surakarta and the Locations of the Case Studies Source: Author's Documentation

Figure 4 .
Figure 4. Map of location of Bedah Kampung Program in Danukusuman Source: Field Survey, 2012

Figure 5 .
Figure 5. Location of squatter settlements along riverbank area of Pucangsawit and the Plan Area of Urban Forest Sources : Government of Surakarta City, 2012

Figure 6 .
Figure 6.Map of Location of Relocation Program in NgemplakSutan Source :Field Survey, 2012

Figure 7 .
Figure 7.Comparison of contribution of Bedah Kampung Program of Danukusuman and Relocation Program of Pucangsawit to Ngemplak Sutan toward poverty alleviation

Table 1 .
Key Indicators for Poverty Alleviation on Housing Sector The research was conducted in several stages: 1. Evaluation of Implementation of Bedah Kampung and relocation program in Surakarta as a part of Surakarta Slum Clearance Agenda 2015.This stage was conducted through Interview survey to the parties involved as follows : BAPPEDA (Bureau of Planning and Development); BAPERMAS PP PA and KB (Bureau of Community Empowerment.Woman Empowerment and Family Planning); DTRK (Government Unit of Spatial Planning); BPN (National Agrarian Bureau) and POKJA (Working Group) of Bedah Kampung and Relocation Program.Indeed, regulatory and policy frameworks have also been explored in order to shape the formal context, 2. Evaluation of the Program has also been explored by Focused-Group Discussion involving beneficiaries of the Bedah Kampung program of Kelurahan Danukusuman and Relocation Program of Pucangsawit to Ngemplak Sutan involving all parties in the point (1).Focused-Group Discussion was aimed for obtaining information related to the Goals of the Program in the wider context of Surakarta development targets and Its Influences To Development Achievements; Processes and Mechanism of Community-based Approach in operation of the Program and Outputs, outcomes and Multiplying Effects of the Program Implementation perceived by inhabitants in achieving Housing Poverty Alleviation and sustainability.3. Field survey and questionnaires survey to beneficiaries of the Bedah Kampung Program of Danukusuman and Relocation of Pucangsawit settlers to Ngemplak Sutan Mojosongo.Aspects of Analysis used in the research are concerning housing poverty alleviation indicators as follows : Access to housing and land security of tenure; Access To Services And Social Infrastructure; Affordability Of Urban And Social Services; Environmental Management and Economic Development 4. Analysis of Contribution to poverty alleviation was conducted through T test analysis, which determines the change conditions before and after implementation of the program.

Table 2 .
Location of Relocation sites in Mojosongo

Contribution of Bedah Kampung Program dan Relocation Program toward Housing Poverty Alleviation Results
of T-test analysis indicated contribution of Bedah Kampung Program dan Relocation Program toward Housing Poverty Alleviation shows in Tabel 3 and Table 4 below:

Table 3 .
Contribution of Bedah Kampung Program toward Poverty Alleviation

Table 4 .
Contribution of Relocation Program toward Poverty Alleviation