21st October

2019

INTEGRATED TOURISM MASTER PLAN FOR BOROBUDUR – YOGYAKARTA - PRAMBANAN

.

Prepared on Behalf of Center of Strategic Region Development Regional Infrastructure Development Agency (RIDA) Ministry of Public Works & Housing

Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

in association with www.tourismdev.com

BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Contents

Page No

1. Introduction ...... 1 1.1. BYP and the Tourism Area Life Cycle ...... 2 1.2. Key Issues affecting tourism in Borobudur-Yogyakarta-Prambanan ...... 2 1.3. Methodology for determining visitor forecasts and impacts ...... 3 2. Growth Projections ...... 9 2.1. Population projections ...... 9 2.2. Visitor arrivals projections ...... 11 2.3. The significance of domestic tourists ...... 15 2.4. Implications for Accommodation Provision ...... 16 2.5. Economic impact projections ...... 17 3. Development Scenarios ...... 26 3.1. Vision for Borobudur-Yogyakarta-Prambanan...... 26 3.2. Growth Options for BYP ...... 28 4. Proposed Planning, Space and Design Standards ...... 43 4.1. Planning spatial layers ...... 43 4.2. Proposed Design Guidelines ...... 46 5. Evaluation ...... 48 5.1. Evaluation criteria ...... 48 5.2. Conclusion ...... 49 6. GIS-Based Decision-Making Tool ...... 50 6.1. Introduction ...... 50 6.2. GIS Exclusion Layer...... 50 6.3. GIS Attraction Layer ...... 53 6.4. Stakeholder Engagement, Weighting of Parameters...... 54 6.5. Evaluation, Presentation ...... 54 6.6. Representation of Development Scenarios ...... 54 6.7. Availability of GIS Data ...... 56 6.8. Conclusion ...... 57

Appendices

Appendix 1: Supporting information for Section 1.3 (Methodology) ...... 58 Appendix 2: Map of ‘Metro Yogyakarta’ ...... 66 Appendix 3: Indexed figures for economic impacts on GRDP ...... 67 Appendix 4: Indicative List of Stakeholder meetings July-October 2019 ...... 70

BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

List of Tables

Table 1.1: Growth forecasts for international visits ...... 5 Table 1.2: Cost of creating jobs in tourism (direct and indirect) ...... 7 Table 1.3: Estimate of spend according to economic sector (Malaysia example) ...... 7 Table 2.1: Population Projections ...... 9 Table 2.2: Visitor growth (domestic and international) – ‘Business as Usual’ Scenario ...... 13 Table 2.3: Visitor growth (domestic and international) – ‘Best Case’ Scenario ...... 13 Table 2.4: Expected Visitor Nights in Destination - ‘Business as Usual’ Scenario ...... 14 Table 2.5: Expected Visitor Nights in Destination - ‘Best Case’ Scenario ...... 14 Table 2.6: Growth in International Arrivals as Proportion of Total Visitors ...... 14 Table 2.7: Additional rooms required (Business as Usual) ...... 17 Table 2.8: Additional rooms required (Best Case) ...... 17 Table 2.9: Forecast expected expenditure by all visitors (Business as Usual) ...... 18 Table 2.10: Forecast expected expenditure by all visitors (Best Case) ...... 19 Table 2.11: Forecast Tourism Sector Contribution to GRDP of Central Java and DI Yogyakarta (Business as Usual) ...... 20 Table 2.12: Forecast Tourism Sector Contribution to GRDP of Central Java and DI Yogyakarta (Best Case)...... 21 Table 2.13: Central Java and DI Yogyakarta GRDP (based on current prices) ...... 22 Table 2.14: Tourism Sector Economic Impacts on other sectors (Central Java and DI Yogyakarta) Business as Usual scenario (USD million) ...... 23 Table 2.15: Tourism Sector Economic Impacts on other sectors (Central Java and DI Yogyakarta) Best Case scenario (USD million) ...... 23 Table 2.16: Estimated job creation through visitor spend ...... 24 Table 2.17 Tourism Sector’s Impact on Employment - Business as usual scenario (in $ million) ...... 24 Table 2.18 Tourism Sector’s Impact on Employment - Best case scenario ...... 25 Table 3.1: Development Scenario Options ...... 34 Table 4.1: Proposed Tourism Spatial Layer Planning Standards ...... 44 Table 4.2: Proposed Design Guidelines ...... 46 Table 5.1: Evaluation of Options A, B, and C ...... 49 Table 6.1: GIS Base Layers...... 57 Table A1.1: Distribution of International arrivals by source market country ...... 58 Table A1.2: Approximate numbers of visitors from ‘other’ countries ...... 58 Table A1.3: Accommodation supply data (baseline) ...... 59 Table A1.4: Growth rates for ‘Business as Usual’ scenario...... 61 Table A1.5: Growth rates for Best Case Scenario growth, 2023-45 ...... 62 Table A1.6: Inputs to Phase 4 modelling ...... 63 Table A1.7: Average Daily Spend by Market Category ...... 64 Table A1.8: Percentage Increase in Average Spend (Real Terms per annum) ...... 65 Table A3.1: Index Figures for tourism’s contribution to the C Java and DIY Economy (Business as Usual) ...... 67 Table A3.2: Index Figures for tourism’s contribution to the C Java and DIY Economy (Business as Usual) ...... 68 Table A3.3: Historical Inflation Rates for Central Java ...... 69

BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

List of Figures

Figure 1.1: Process of arriving at Development Options ...... 1 Figure 1.2: Tourism Area Life Cycle (TALC) ...... 2 Figure 2.1: Overall total population growth for Central Java/DI Yogyakarta ...... 10 Figure 2.2: International arrivals to Indonesia 1995-2018 ...... 11 Figure 2.3: Growth in International Arrivals as Proportion of Total Visitors ...... 15 Figure 3.1 : The Sphere of Tourism Resilience ...... 27 Figure 3.2 : ‘Hub and Spoke’ Option ...... 29 Figure 3.3: ‘Cluster and Disperse’ Option ...... 30 Figure 3.4 : ‘Heart of Java’ Option ...... 31 Figure 6.1: Borobudur TDA, Disaster Risk Analysis ...... 51 Figure 6.2: Borobudur TDA, Land Valuation ...... 52 Figure 6.3, Borobudur TDA, Preliminary Exclusion Assessment ...... 53 Figure 6.4: RTRW Kapubaten Magelang ...... 55

BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

1. Introduction

Borobudur-Yogyakarta-Prambanan (BYP) is a well-established destination which already attracts significant numbers of visitors, especially domestic tourists and day visitors. The destination is less well known internationally, with only around 3% of total arrivals coming from abroad. While domestic growth rates have been encouraging and relatively stable in recent years, there are indications that the international market is beginning to stagnate – especially as far as visits to the WHS of Borobudur and Prambanan are concerned - and therefore needs to be energized through an appropriate development strategy.

This report is divided into four principal sections: Introduction and Key Issues, Growth Projections, Development Scenarios, and Evaluation. The process is illustrated in the figure below.

Figure 1.1: Process of arriving at Development Options

1 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

1.1. BYP and the Tourism Area Life Cycle

Considering the present position of the destination in the context of Butler’s 1980 Tourism Area Life Cycle Model (Figure 1), it seems probable that BYP tourism is towards the end of the consolidation phase and beginning to enter the stagnation phase, mainly because of over-reliance on a narrow product offer. In such cases there are generally two broad scenarios: either the destination will decline, both in quality of the product offer and quantity of visitors, or it can be rejuvenated. In the case of BYP, particularly in the light of President Joko Widodo’s aspiration of seeing 2 million arrivals of foreign tourists per year at the destination, this means considerable planning in order to revitalise BYP and move into a rejuvenation phase.

Figure 1.2: Tourism Area Life Cycle (TALC)

BYP

Source: Butler 19801

1.2. Key Issues affecting tourism in Borobudur-Yogyakarta-Prambanan

In order to plan appropriate interventions which will achieve renewal, a thorough understanding of the area is needed. A Baseline Analysis conducted during 2018-19 identified the principal barriers to a more successful tourism system for BYP as:

1. Narrow tourism product offer 2. Over-reliance on cultural tourism 3. Overtourism at Borobudur Temple Compounds World Heritage Site (WHS) 4. Weak appreciation of preserving heritage values and heritage economics 5. Over-reliance on domestic market 6. Low international standard of attractions and interpretation 7. Poor access in terms of the volume of existing / forecast arrivals 8. Inadequate services infrastructure 9. Deteriorating environmental conditions, including air pollution and depletion of groundwater 10. Weak ability of local communities to take advantage of economic opportunities, partly through skills and training gaps 11. Weak institutional frameworks and enforcement 12. Inadequate coordination and planning

1 Butler, R. (1980) The concept of a tourist Area Cycle of Evolution: Implication for Management of Resources. Canadian Geographer, 24(1), pp.5-20

2 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Strong initiatives will be required to secure growth and avoid long-term decline, and the options for development scenarios presented in this report and in the separate Visitor Management Plan for Borobudur are designed to address these.

Before moving on to discuss the development scenarios, likely growth scenarios for domestic population, international and domestic visitor numbers, increased demand for accommodation, and economic growth projections for tourism earnings and contribution to the economy will be presented in the next section. The methodology for calculating the arrivals growth scenarios, which drive increased demand for accommodation and the economic impact of tourism, is shown in Section 1.3, with additional material in Appendix 1.

1.3. Methodology for determining visitor forecasts and impacts

Providing the forecasts of visitor numbers and the demand for additional hotel rooms and other facilities involved developing a five-phase model. Several data sources were used for this but, as explained in earlier reports, the baseline of data that we have been able to access is poor, with limited trend data and gaps. In a number of places, we have had to make assumptions based on our own experience and from comparable examples outside the study area.

The five-phase model was developed as follows:

Phase 1: Identifying the baseline data for visitor arrivals Phase 2: Identifying the baseline of accommodation supply and performance Phase 3: Modelling two scenarios of visitor growth to 2045 Phase 4: Modelling how visitor growth might translate into hotel rooms Phase 5: Modelling the potential economic impacts of visitor growth

1.3.1. Phase 1: Identifying Arrivals Baseline

Visitors to Borobudur-Yogyakarta-Prambanan were divided into four groups.

1. Domestic leisure visitors – staying in commercial accommodation. 2. Domestic business (MICE) visitors - staying in commercial accommodation. 3. International visitors – staying in commercial accommodation. These were further split by main country of origin. 4. Domestic day and VFR visitors2.

Figures for the first three categories of staying visitors were drawn from the Baseline report (Chapter 4) and are based on DI Yogyakarta data. There was a variety of reasons for using this data:

• it was the most recent available • the majority of available accommodation (93%) is in DI Yogyakarta • the model assumed that a trip to the area would generally include a visit to Yogyakarta, so that using data for Borobudur and Prambanan from a different source could lead to double counting of visitors.

2 Drawn from Horwath HTL (2016) Borobudur-Yogyakarta-Prambanan: Baseline Supply & Demand, Market Demand Forecasts, and Investment Needs

3 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

The split between leisure and business visitors (80:20) is based on data in Horwath HTL (2016), while the split of international visitors (398,000) by country is based on DI Yogyakarta Tourism Office Statistics 2017. The distribution split into individual countries is shown in Appendix 1.

1.3.2. Phase 2: Identifying Accommodation Baseline

Phase 2 involved identifying the current accommodation supply and performance across the area. This included identifying:

• The supply of rooms for four areas – (1) Borobudur, (2) Prambanan, (3) City of Yogyakarta and (4) DI Yogyakarta, excluding the City of Yogya. Accommodation was split into star and non- star hotel accommodation, and homestay accommodation.3 • Average Length of Stay (ALOS). For hotels, data was available for international and domestic ALOS. For Yogyakarta available data on this was also split by star and non-star accommodation. Estimates of ALOS were available for homestays in Borobudur, and it was assumed (in the absence of other data) that homestays in other areas would perform in a similar way. • Room occupancy by area and star/non-star accommodation. Occupancies varied across the four areas – they were much higher in the City of Yogyakarta and DI Yogyakarta. • Average guests per room. Available occupancy data related to rooms, rather than bed-spaces, and the number of guests per room was required to translate arrivals (identified in Phase 1) into room nights. A figure of 1.9 guests per room was used.4 • International and domestic guest splits by accommodation type.

Tables detailing these data and assumptions are shown in Appendix 1.

1.3.3. Phase 3: modelling Visitor Growth Projections

The third phase of the model involved estimating future growth of visitor numbers. Different ‘drivers’ were used for different market groups and forecasts were made for each period to 2045.

• Domestic staying visitors: the driver used to model future growth for domestic staying visitors was the Horwath 2017 ‘Business as Usual’ and ‘Best Case Scenarios’. • International visitors: the driver for international visitors was historic performance. An annual growth rate was calculated for the main international source markets based on their relative historic performance from 2011 (based on BPS data). Different markets grew at different rates. This CAGR was then applied to future years, with the assumption that growth rates would slow as the destination matures and the base of international visitors grows. The model looks at two different scenarios with different international growth rates. • Domestic day and VFR visitors: the driver used was, again, the Horwath 2017 ‘Business as Usual’ and ‘Best Case Scenarios’.

3 No data was available on homestays in Yogyakarta and Prambanan. The supply figures used in the model were an assumption based on the same ratio of homestays to hotels as in Borobudur. 4 BPS Provinsi Jawa Tengah (2018) Statistik Tingkat Penghunian Kamar Hotel Provinsi Jawa Tengah 2017, Semarang: Badan Pusat Statistik

4 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Detailed rates of growth for the ‘Business as Usual’ and ‘Best Case’ scenarios are given in Appendix 1. In summary, the CAGR for International arrivals to 2045 is 4.1%, and for all visitors to 2045 is 3.0% under the Business as Usual Scenario. Under the Best Case scenario, CAGR for international arrivals is 6.13%, and for all visitors is 3.11%.

Government growth forecasts for international arrivals to Indonesia to 2045 are as shown below:

Table 1.1: Growth forecasts for international visits 2017 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 International Tourists (mn) 14.0 21.6 31.8 42.8 57.5 65.1 73.6 CAGR (per 5 years) 15.5% 8.04% 6.12% 6.08% 2.51% 2.54%

CAGR (2020-2045) 6.1% Source: Bappenas (2019)

As a comparison, WTTC estimates that the total contribution of Travel & Tourism to GDP in Indonesia (including wider effects from investment, the supply chain and induced income impacts) will increase by 6.4% per annum to 2028.5 Thus, all estimates of growth appear to be reasonably consistent.

Having said that, these growth rates should be regarded as illustrative scenarios, since the baseline of available tourism data and performance is far from perfect, and future visitor numbers will be influenced by a complex range of factors that are impossible to quantify at this stage. These include potential interventions in product development, marketing and infrastructure, economic performance in source market countries, performance and development of competitor destinations, climate change and its impacts on air travel, costs, and propensity to travel, and other global events and trends such as wars and other forms of political instability.

1.3.4. Phase 4: Modelling Accommodation Projections

The fourth phase of the model translated the visitor growth projections into potential room nights. The model had five potential areas for accommodation growth (Borobudur, Prambanan, City of Yogyakarta, Metro Yogyakarta,6 and the rest of Joglosemar).

The model provided projections of hotel rooms for five-year periods to 2038 and then a seven-year period through to 2045. Through these periods, the model makes assumptions about a number of variables. These include:

• Average length of stay (ALOS). ALOS was split for domestic and international visitors. It was initially based on the baseline data (Phase 2) with the assumption as that it would gradually increase as the product offer developed to reach an average of 2.8 days for international visitors and 2.1 days for domestic visitors by 2045. • Room occupancy. This was also based on the baseline data and was assumed to gradually increase to reach 70% room occupancy across the whole area by 2045.

5 WTTC (2018) Travel & Tourism Economic Impact 2018 Indonesia 6 ‘Metro Yogya’ consists of the most developed kecamatan around the periphery of the City of Yogyakarta, i.e. Kec. Sleman, Kec. Ngaglik, Kec. Ngemplak, Kec. Depok, Kec. Kalasan, Kec. Mlati in Kab. Sleman; Kec. Gamping, Kec. Kasihan, Kec. Sewon, Kec. Banguntapan in Kab. Bantul (see also map in Appendix 2).

5 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

• The percentage of staying visits in hotels. Some staying visits are in homestay accommodation. A level for this was calculated in the baseline analysis (Phase 2). This varied slightly by area but typically around 90% of staying visits to the area were in hotels. The model assumed that this level would remain constant moving forward to 2045. • Number of guests per room. Based on the baseline data, the model assumed this would remain constant. • Distribution of visits across the five different areas (outlined above). Phase 3 of the model identified the number of staying visits that the area may attract in the future. Staying visits are not currently distributed evenly and the model made assumptions on where room-nights (and therefore) rooms would be distributed in the future. This was initially based on the baseline distribution of room nights (from Phase 2). Through time, the model assumed that some room-nights would shift to other areas outside the Borobudur-Yogyakarta-Prambanan area as infrastructure developed. These were a relatively small proportion – 5.95% of nights in 2023 rising to 12% in 2045.

The inputs for the Phase 4 analysis are summarised in Appendix 1.

Using these variables, the model translated visits (from Phase 3) to new rooms required. New rooms required was based on subtracting existing bedstock from overall rooms required (NB this applied only to Borobudur, Prambanan, City of Yogyakarta, and Metro Yogyakarta. For other areas growth in visits was assumed to translate to new rooms – i.e. there was no ‘soak up’ from existing bedstock).

1.3.5. Phase 5: Modelling Impacts

The final phase of the model is to translate the growth of visitors into direct and indirect spend and potential employment impacts.

The process is as follows:

• Phase 4 of the model produces estimates of visitor nights (which are then translated into rooms) for domestic and international visitors. These are broken down further (since different groups have different spend levels). Domestic visitors are split into leisure trips and business trips. The assumption has been that this ratio will stay unchanged from the baseline (i.e. 80% leisure / 20% business). International nights are broken into areas on the basis of arrivals (derived from Phase 3). The assumption (in the absence of other data) is that ALOS will be the same across all international markets. • Nights by market groups (domestic leisure/business, international by area) are then multiplied by a figure of spend per day. The model assumes a modest increase in spend per visitor night over the period of the plan. The percentage increases are shown in Appendix 1.

In terms of spend, available figures would again benefit from improvements and consistent data collection by BPS. For example, they are not broken down by categories of visitor spend.

The model assumes a modest increase in spend per visitor night (shown in Appendix 1), while multiplying visitor nights by spend per night provides an overall direct spend figure. We are not aware of the existence of specific multipliers for the tourism sector for the study area. As such, direct spend is translated into an estimate of indirect and induced spend by the application of a ratio derived from the WTTC Travel and Tourism Economic Impact 2018 Indonesia report which highlights that 33% of tourism spend is direct, 45.1% is indirect and 21.9% is induced. Therefore, for every $1 spent directly, $2.03 are spent indirectly/induced.

6 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Similarly, the absence of spend breakdowns into discrete economic sectors and associated turnover and employment cost for those sectors makes employment estimates difficult. Again, the model applies a spend-to-employment ratio to the direct spend figures in order to provide an estimate of direct employment in the sector, and to direct, indirect and induced spend to provide an estimate of total employment.7 This gives a total ‘cost’ of USD 4,546 per job created, as shown in Table 1.2.

Table 1.2: Cost of creating jobs in tourism (direct and indirect) Total direct contribution to GDP 2017 (IDR bn): 259,583.00 Total direct employment in tourism 2017 4,585,000 ‘Cost' per job (direct) (IDR) 56,615,703 ‘Cost’ per job (direct) (USD) 4,000

Total direct and indirect contribution to GDP (IDR bn) 787,100.00 Total direct/indirect employment 12,241,500 Cost' per job (IDR) 64,297,676 Cost per job ($) 4,546

It is likely that through time, the nominal 'cost' per job will increase as labour costs increase and businesses introduce greater operational efficiencies. Based on the growth projections in the WTTC report (to 2028), the model assumes that jobs grow at half the rate of expenditure.

Finally, the model provides an estimate of spend by broad economic sector. No comprehensive data was available on the economic sectors in which visitors spend within the study area. As such, data is drawn from the Malaysian Tourism Satellite Account 2018 (on the basis that Malaysia has a roughly equivalent tourism economy). These are as shown in the table below:

Table 1.3: Estimate of spend according to economic sector (Malaysia example) % share of spend

International Domestic Domestic Day Shopping 33.5% 42.0% 42.0%

Accommodation 24.7% 9.5% Transport 18.0% 7.0% 7.0% Food and 13.4% 15.5% 15.5% beverage Travel Agents 4.4%

Fuel 16.6% 16.6% Other 6.0% 9.4% 18.9% Source: Department of Statistics, Malaysia

7 The ratio is based on WTTC (2018) op. cit.

7 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

1.3.6. Stakeholder engagement

In addition to the preparation of a model for forecasting growth and estimating impacts, the Consultant carried out a wide range of consultative meetings with stakeholders in the ITMP. While during the first stages of the programme, meetings were concerned primarily with collecting data on the BYP area, later meetings have focused on sharing initial concepts and other information with stakeholder bodies and refining the concepts in the light of feedback received. Stakeholder bodies consulted in this way include:

• Bappenas • Ministry of Tourism • Pemda Jawa Tengah • Bappeda DIY • Bappeda Kab. Magelang • Bappeda Kota Yogkarta • Bappeda Kab. Klaten • Dinas Pariwisata Kota Yogyakarta • Dinas Pariwisata Kab. Sleman • Dinas Pariwisata Kab. Magelang • LitBangDa Magelang • Geology Department UGM • Kecamatan and Tourism representatives from Borobudur, Yogyakarta and Prambanan KTAs • Dinas PUP ESDM, DI Yogyakarta • Dinas Pertanahan dan Tata Ruang, DI Yogyakarta • Cipta Karya • DLH Magelang • PDM Magelang • TPS (Tim Pembangunan Prioritas) DI Yogyakarta • BCO (Borobudur Conservation Office) • BPCB • BOB (Badan Otorita Borobudur) • UNESCO

Further meetings with stakeholders were requested, but in some cases, responses proved impossible to obtain, or when the Consultant arrived at the specified time the stakeholder had been called away to another meeting. A further challenge has been the frequent change of personnel in Indonesian government departments (as noted in the Baseline Analysis Report).

An indicative list, with dates of meetings, is included in Appendix 3.

8 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

2. Growth Projections

2.1. Population projections

The resident population in Central Java and DI Yogyakarta is forecast to grow steadily on an annual basis in line with population growth generally in Indonesia (Table 2.1).

Table 2.1: Population Projections Population 2018 2023 2028 2033 2038 2045 Kec. Kotagede 33,508 35,213 36,719 38,011 39,084 42,205 Kec. Kraton 17,575 18,469 19,259 19,937 19,500 21,088 Kec. Danurejan 19,128 20,101 20,961 21,699 22,311 22,951 Kec. Gondomanan 13,697 14,394 15,010 15,538 15,976 16,435 Kec. Ngampilan 17,031 17,898 18,663 19,320 19,865 20,435 Kec. Gedongtengen 18,388 19,324 20,150 20,859 21,488 22,063 Total KTA Yogyakarta 119,327 125,399 130,762 135,364 139,224 145,177 Kota/TDA Yogyakarta 419,185 440,515 459,359 475,518 497,968 502,969 Kab. Kulon Progo 425,744 472,930 518,353 560,992 599,839 642,545 Kab. Bantul 1,006,226 1,057,429 1,102,661 1,141,448 1,173,679 1,207,347 Kab. Gunung Kidul 704,026 739,852 810,910 862,701 887,058 912,509 Kab. Sleman 1,207,134 1,268,561 1,322,824 1,369,355 1,408,022 1,448,412 Total DI Yogyakarta 3,762,315 3,979,287 4,214,107 4,410,014 4,566,566 4,713,782 Kec. Prambanan-Sleman 53,090 55,792 58,178 60,225 61,925 63,701 Kec. Prambanan-Klaten 51,133 53,159 55,433 57,383 59,003 60,280 Total KTA/TDA 104,223 108,951 113,611 117,608 120,928 123,981 Prambanan Kab. Klaten 1,180,259 1,240,318 1,293,373 1,338,868 1,376,674 1,416,164 Kab. Magelang 1,274,881 1,339,755 1,386,266 1,446,207 1,487,043 1,529,700 Kab. Boyolali 985,313 1,035452 1,079,744 1,117,725 1,149,286 1,182,254 Kab. Sukoharjo 888,048 933,238 973,158 1,007,389 1,035,835 1,065,548 Kab. Semarang 1,038,806 1,091,667 1,138,364 1,178,406 1,211,681 1,246,438 Kab. Temanggung 767,489 806,544 841,044 870,628 895,212 920,892 Kota Magelang 122,812 129,061 134,582 139,316 143,250 147,359 Kota Surakarta 521,786 548,338 571,794 591,907 608,620 626,079 Kota Salatiga 191,009 200,729 209,315 216,678 222,796 229,187 Kota Semarang 1,777,045 1,867,472 1,947,355 2,015,854 2,072,775 2,132,234 Total Joglosemar 12,156,482 12,776,287 13,319,917 13,840,126 14,278,140 14,720,226 Total Central Java 34,635,181 36,397,647 37,954,575 39,289,648 40,399,059 41,557,933 Kec. Borobudur 59,476 62,503 68,506 72,881 74,939 77,089 Kec. Mungkid 75,933 79,797 87,461 93,047 95,674 98,419 Total KTA Borobudur 135,409 142,300 155,967 165,928 170,613 175,508 Kec. Tempuran 49,109 51,608 56,565 60,177 61,876 63,652 Kec. Mertoyudan 113,526 119,303 130,761 139,113 143,040 147,144 Kec. Muntilan 78,258 82,240 90,139 95,896 98,603 101,433 Total TDA Borobudur 376,302 395,451 433,432 461,114 474,133 487,737 Source: BPS Indonesia population statistics and World Bank Population Estimates and Projections8

8 https://datacatalog.worldbank.org/dataset/population-estimates-and-projections

9 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

It should be noted that there are slight differences between the figures shown in the Baseline Analysis Report and the current report because of differences in how statistics are collected by different government bodies. Overall, the population of the two provinces where BYP is located is expected to grow by a total of approximately 7,874,219 between 2018 and 2045 (Figure 2.1).9

Figure 2.1: Overall total population growth for Central Java/DI Yogyakarta

As established in the Baseline study, in both DI Yogyakarta and Central Java the proportion of residents aged over 65 is higher than in other provinces of Indonesia and this proportion will increase over time. At the same time household sizes are gradually declining in both provinces due to declining birth-rates and possibly to out-migration.

Notwithstanding the higher than average proportion of people aged over 65, the majority of the population in the three TDAs is aged 39 or younger, thus ensuring a ready labour supply in the foreseeable future. Interventions to stimulate tourism growth will help to provide work for people in the productive age-range and will help to counter a tendency towards out-migration. Any growth in tourism will thus alleviate unemployment, and the declining unemployment rate will enhance GRDP. Also, the tourism opportunities offered at community level may help to counter population decline due to rural out-migration, especially from peripheral areas such as Gunung Kidul.

It is often a concern that tourism developments will create a ‘magnet effect’, drawing people from outside the area who may place greater strain on water and other environmental resources and develop the available entrepreneurial opportunities in the place of local people who may have less experience. In the case of Central Java and DI Yogyakarta, however, the resident population has proved to be capable of taking advantage of tourism-related opportunities, at least on a small scale and catering to domestic tourists. This is evidenced by successful initiatives such as the Breksi Cliff attraction in Kec. Prambanan-Sleman and the Twin Temples Fesitval at Plaosan in Kec. Prambanan- Klaten. The Desa Wisata of Kampoeng Mataram in Kec. Sewon, Kab. Bantul; Candirejo in Kec. Borobudur; and Penting Sari in Kec. Cangkringan, Kab. Sleman, are also good examples of where the communities have themselves created products which appeal to different market segments (mainly domestic, although with some interest from foreign tourists too).

9 The SUPAS 2018 report, based on a 2015 survey, has a different set of figures. Unfortunately the SUPAS figures could not be used as they are only available at province level, whereas a greater degree of granularity is required for the ITMP.

10 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

In addition, local communities have competently responded to the demand for ‘Instagramable’ attractions, for instance by developing numerous ‘selfie spots’ throughout the region, including ‘sunrise spots’ and ‘sunset spots’ in the hills around the Borobudur Temple World Heritage Site (WHS).

2.2. Visitor arrivals projections

Forecasts for tourist arrivals to the TDAs and surrounding areas are based upon historical growth rates and the following assumptions:

• Growth rates in Indonesian tourism have been particularly high over the period 2010-18 compared with the previous decade, when there was considerable socio-political-economic disruption early in the decade followed by the Bali bombings in 2002 and 2005 (see Figure 2.2).

Figure 2.2: International arrivals to Indonesia 1995-2018

18,000,000 16,000,000 14,000,000 12,000,000 10,000,000 8,000,000 6,000,000 4,000,000 2,000,000

0

1996 1999 2002 2005 2008 2011 2014 2017 1995 1997 1998 2000 2001 2003 2004 2006 2007 2009 2010 2012 2013 2015 2016 2018

Source: Baseline Analysis Report

• It is expected that future growth rates will be lower than during the period 2010-18 because of factors affecting the international economy, including the slowdown in growth rates of the Chinese and Indian economies; the trade war between the US and China; and shifting trading linkages as countries review their alliances (for example the UK’s exit from the European Union).

• Other countries also see tourism as an important contributor to their foreign exchange earnings, which will result in significant competition for market share.

• International propensity to travel by air, in particular long-haul, may decline due to rising costs of air fares because of the internalization of the environmental costs of travel, and because of the growing awareness of the contribution of air travel to climate change.

11 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

• Indonesia’s programme of emphasizing tourism as an engine of growth in many parts of the country (in particular through ITMP programmes in ten areas, including BYP) means that all of these areas will be competing for international market share.

• The BYP area has some strong attractions which can compete on a global scale, in particular the WHS of Borobudur, Prambanan and Sangiran and – potentially, if better managed – the historic cities of Yogyakarta and Surakarta and their associated intangible cultural heritage. However, many of its other existing and potential attractions (beach resort tourism, lakes, activity and ecotourism opportunities, folk culture) compare less favourably on an international scale with attractions elsewhere in Southeast Asia and the rest of the world and are more likely to appeal to a domestic market.

• Indonesia is fortunate in having a robust and expanding domestic market, reflecting the healthy state of the national economy. This indicates that the domestic market for BYP will continue to be strong, which provides an extremely positive way of supporting employment and redistributing wealth from ‘core’ urban and industrialised areas to ‘peripheral’ rural and underdeveloped areas.

The Consultant is aware that there are considerable aspirations for the contribution to Indonesia’s international tourism arrivals and foreign exchange earnings from the BYP and other ITMPs. However, the team advises a cautious approach because of the above factors. The tables below reflect this realistic approach.

Tables 2.2-2.4 show the projected visitor growth in numbers from the principal markets, based on data from the 2017 ‘Demand Assessment’ by Horwath HTL.10 For this, our assumption is that the ‘Business as Usual’ scenario is based on organic market growth with no significant interventions. This is slightly more positive than the Horwath assumption, which is that growth will gradually slow down due to lack of capacity in the destination and the slowing down of the domestic population growth rate. The ‘Best Case’ scenario assumes that growth in international markets will be strong as infrastructure, services and products at the market gradually improve through public and private sector investment.

10 Horwath HTL (2017) Lombok/Borobudur-Yogyakarta-Prambanan/Lake Toba Baseline Supply and Demand, market demand forecasts, and investment needs (hereafter: ‘Demand Assessment’, as per MPWH Environmental and Social Management Framework)

12 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Table 2.2: Visitor growth (domestic and international) – ‘Business as Usual’ Scenario 2018 2023 2028 2033 2038 2045 Total staying 5,229,298 6,692,055 7,432,722 7,995,316 8,523,029 9,327,938 visitors Domestic (staying 4,831,347 6,113,195 6,683,549 7,094,303 7,530,300 8,186,078 hotels/guesthouses) Leisure and culture 3,861,854 4,886,477 5,342,380 5,670,708 6,019,215 6,543,400 MICE 969,493 1,226,718 1,341,170 1,423,595 1,511,085 1,642,678 Day visits / VFR 7,000,000 7,883,137 8,244,321 8,494,637 8,752,552 9,126,843 International 397,951 578,860 749,173 901,013 992,728 1,141,860 Europe, USA & 203,303 299,912 385,694 458,045 499,963 565,679 Australia ASEAN 117,554 149,506 173,922 192,495 202,571 217,578 Other Asia & MENA 77,094 129,442 189,173 250,473 290,194 358,603

Table 2.3: Visitor growth (domestic and international) – ‘Best Case’ Scenario 2018 2023 2028 2033 2038 2045 Total staying 5,229,298 7,076,355 8,322,671 9,532,127 10,897,816 12,865,382 visitors Domestic (staying 4,831,347 6,474,467 7,469,317 8,368,721 9,376,424 10,994,277 hotels/ guesthouses) Leisure and culture 3,861,854 5,175,253 5,970,469 6,689,392 7,494,882 8,788,085 MICE 969,493 1,299,214 1,498,848 1,679,329 1,881,542 2,206,192 Day visits / VFR 7,000,000 8,117,854 9,184,607 10,140,548 11,195,984 12,425,806 International 397,951 601,888 853,354 1,163,407 1,521,392 1,871,104 Europe, USA & 203,303 299,913 398,586 498,259 493,558 672,508 Australia ASEAN 117,554 149,506 177,407 202,347 223,983 240,589 Other Asia & MENA 77,094 152,469 277,361 462,801 703,851 958,007 Source: Consultant’s calculation based on Baseline Report, Horwath HTL op. cit., UNWTO11

The tables above indicate that numbers of foreign tourists are expected to increase from the current total of just under 400,000 per annum to reach 1.14 million by 2045 through organic growth (Business as Usual) if nothing is done to stimulate further arrivals, or 1.87 million with appropriate interventions and increasing market interest under the Best Case scenario. The strongest growth is likely to come from ASEAN and other Asian markets, especially China and India, rather than from the more mature European, North American and Australian markets.

Meanwhile, domestic staying tourists are expected to increase from the current 4.8 million to 8.16 million under an organic growth scenario, and 10.99 million under the Best Case scenario. For domestic visitors, we calculate that 20% are MICE visitors, on the basis of our research for the Baseline Analysis Report (Yogyakarta is a popular city for conferences because of the high number of Higher Education Institutions located there).

11 UNWTO/GTERC (2014) Asia Tourism Trends. Madrid: UNWTO

13 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

In addition, we see significant growth amongst day-visitors and the VFR category as the population of Joglosemar becomes increasingly prosperous and aspirational in terms of seeking recreational opportunities, and as people travel more widely to visit friends and relatives, from an estimated 7 million per year to 9.1 million under the Business as Usual scenario and 12.4 million under the Best Case scenario. The importance of the domestic markets is explained in Section 2.1.2 below.

Tables 2.4 and 2.5 take the above growth scenario projections forward into the number of nights expected to be spent in the destination by staying visitors. This is based on the assumption that the Average Length of Stay (ALOS) will show no growth in the ‘Business as Usual’ scenario, at 1.4 days in Borobudur and Prambanan (the lowest in the destination) and 2.3 in Yogyakarta (the highest in the destination), while in the Best Case scenario the average number of nights will increase for foreign visitors from 1.4 days in Borobudur and Prambanan, 2.1 days in Metro Yogyakarta and the rest of Joglosemar, and 2.3 days in Kota Yogyakarta to 2.8 days across the destination.

Meanwhile, ALOS for domestic visitors is again expected to remain static in the Business as Usual scenario, at 1.4 in Borobudur and Prambanan KTAs, 1.6 in Kota Yogyakarta, and 2 in the rest of Joglosemar. In the Best Case scenario, ALOS is expected to increase for domestic visitors at a slower rate than for international visitors to 2.1 across the destination by 2045.

The increases in ALOS for both foreign and domestic markets will be due to the expected interventions, that will encourage people to stay longer because there is more to do, while the greater rate of increase for international visitors will be largely due to the expansion in air access due to YIA (Yogyakarta International Airport), and to increased promotion of the opportunities in Joglosemar linked with expansion of the product offer.

Table 2.4: Expected Visitor Nights in Destination - ‘Business as Usual’ Scenario Baseline 2023 2028 2033 2038 2045 Total Staying Visitors 9,899,938 11,516,964 14,042,228 15,880,590 17,943,935 20,387,972 Domestic Staying 9,003,550 10,259,501 12,278,074 13,621,815 15,296,778 17,190,763 International Staying 896,388 1,257,462 1,764,075 2,258,468 2,646,848 3,197,208

Table 2.5: Expected Visitor Nights in Destination - ‘Best Case’ Scenario Baseline 2023 2028 2033 2038 2045 Total Staying Visitors 9,899,938 12,173,293 15,731,090 18,985,445 23,103,774 28,327,075 Domestic Overnight 9,003,550 10,865,808 13,721,655 16,068,866 19,046,819 23,087,982 International Overnight 896,388 1,307,485 2,009,487 2,916,520 4,056,794 5,239,093 Source: Consultant’s calculation

Table 2.6: Growth in International Arrivals as Proportion of Total Visitors 2018 2023 2028 2033 2038 2045 Business as usual 7.60% 8.60% 10.10% 11.30% 11.60% 12.20% Best Case 7.60% 8.50% 10.30% 12.20% 14.00% 14.50%

14 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Figure 2.3: Growth in International Arrivals as Proportion of Total Visitors 16% 14% 12% 10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% 2018 2023 2028 2033 2038 2045

Business as usual Best Case

The implications of visitor growth are illustrated in Table 2.6 and Figure 2.3 above. We expect the number of foreign visitor arrivals as a proportion of total arrivals to increase from 7.6% currently to 12.2% under the ‘Business as Usual’ scenario, although with a levelling off towards the end of the period due to the failure to rejuvenate the destination, as predicted by the Tourism Area Life Cycle model described earlier in this report. Under the Best Case Scenario, international arrivals are expected to increase to 14.5% as a proportion of the total. This is the logical course as the destination becomes better known in international markets.

2.3. The significance of domestic tourists

We include here a reminder of the importance of domestic tourists to the visitor economy.

The role of domestic tourists – especially the youth market – in spearheading tourism development should not be underestimated, especially where more remote areas or peripheral areas are concerned. The worth of international backpackers in this regard has been recognised for many years, with destinations ‘discovered’ by them later taken up and developed for wealthier and more formally organised visitor categories. Nowadays, in an increasingly wealthy country such as Indonesia, it is aspirational young professionals and students – often with their own means of transport – who perform this role. In Yogyakarta and its immediate surroundings there are approximately 400,000 students, who are often pioneers of up-and-coming destinations.

In the BYP area and surroundings, for example, attractions such as Kali Biru (Kab. Kulon Progo), Punthuk Sethumbu (Kec. Borobudur), Gereja Sayidan (Kec. Gondomanan, Kota Yogyakarta), and Mt. Nglanggeran (Kab. Gunung Kidul) have come to prominence thanks to the energy of young people keen to explore new areas. Not only does this help to stimulate local entrepreneurial responses, but it gives local people a non-formal type of experiential, on-the-job learning in tourism which they can later put to good use in catering to a more demanding international market.

15 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Domestic demand and supply is also responsible for developing not just small-scale attractions and resorts but some reasonably large-scale initiatives. For instance, domestic tourists from Yogyakarta now flock in considerable numbers at weekends to the beaches at the southern end of the Gunung Sewu Geopark (south of Wonosari), where the yellow sands and rocky outcrops form pretty, sheltered bays.

A further important factor in providing a varied product which appeals to the domestic market is to retain the value of local spend by encouraging Indonesians not to travel abroad to spend their disposable income but instead take ‘staycations’ within their own country – thus reducing the amount of Indonesia-earned income which leaves the national economy, and helping to reduce the current account deficit.

2.4. Implications for Accommodation Provision

Growth in visitor arrivals will stimulate an increase in the number of hotel and guesthouse rooms required. We have attempted to quantify the projected additional rooms required under the growth scenarios outlined above, although as stated in the Baseline Analysis Report, this is challenging due to the weakness of tourism-related data collected by the public sector in terms of its thoroughness and consistency, and to the fact that much of the commercial accommodation used – especially by domestic tourists – is unregistered, principally under the ‘kost’ system of informal guesthouses.

To carry out our calculations we assume that the ALOS will gradually increase (as discussed above in the Methodology section), and that occupancy rates in hotels and guesthouses will also increase. Annual occupancy levels are currently low, at around 40%-65%, with the lowest levels in Borobudur and Prambanan and the highest in star-rated hotels in the City of Yogyakarta. The variation is due to the fact that accommodation in the Borobudur and Prambanan KTAs is mainly used at weekends, while in Yogyakarta there is less variation in occupancy across the week because of greater use by business visitors and because of the MICE sector, with hotels often using these markets to fill rooms on weekdays. Homestay-style accommodation shows extremely low rates, sometimes as low as 15%, which is a reflection of how village-based accommodation does not meet the standard expected by either foreign or domestic markets.

Tables 2.7 and 2.8 show the additional rooms required in both star-rated and non-star-rated hotels and guesthouses combined. For 2023 in the ‘Business as Usual’ scenario, a negative figure appears overall because we expect occupancy rates to increase over the period, while in the first 5 years or so there will be no rooms required overall in BYP because of existing over-capacity in Yogyakarta. Under the Best Case scenario hotels and guesthouses will more quickly achieve better occupancy rates and more investment will be needed to build more accommodation.

Our calculations show that under the Business as Usual scenario, an additional 8,321 rooms will be needed by 2045 throughout BYP to cope with an organic growth in the visitor market, while under the Best Case scenario an additional 21,240 rooms would be needed. These calculations do not take account of probable take-up of room capacity in other parts of Joglosemar, especially Solo and Magelang, which are the cities closest to BYP.

16 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Table 2.7: Additional rooms required (Business as Usual) Additional Accommodation Required (Rooms) Borobudur Prambanan City of Metro Total TDA TDA Yogyakarta Yogyakarta Baseline n/a 2023 415 352 109 122 (168)* 2028 3,277 758 240 1,498 781 2033 4,132 1,084 335 2,037 676 2038 4,919 1,442 426 2,427 624 2045 8,321 1,825 497 4,871 1,128 *This figure is negative because of current low occupancy levels in the immediate area around the City of Yogya; we expect increased arrivals to take up some of this spare capacity.

Table 2.8: Additional rooms required (Best Case) Additional Accommodation Required (Rooms) City of Metro Total Borobudur Prambanan Yogyakarta Yogyakarta Baseline n/a 2023 1,853 480 135 1,076 163 2028 6,654 1,074 309 3,683 1,588 2033 9,815 1,659 465 5,720 1,972 2038 13,479 2,378 640 7,953 2,508 2045 21,240 3,245 816 13,302 3,876

2.5. Economic impact projections

In planning for both international and domestic tourists, our approach is based on an increased length of stay and visitor spend in both categories. An increased length of stay will result in greater spend per trip, therefore contributing greater economic benefits to the region. This also has the benefit of reducing the environmental impacts of tourism because the major environmental costs of tourism are normally incurred in travelling to and from a destination.

The tables below also take into account the strength and diversity of the Indonesian economy, which means that the great majority of goods and services needed to supply the tourism sector can be sourced within the country. This results in relatively low leakages and a significant multiplier effect because of indirect and induced spending as well as direct spending by tourists: for instance, the WTTC estimates that just 12% of travel and tourism spending leaks out of the economy through imports.12 Here again, the domestic market is as significant as the international market – indeed probably more so, as local visitors may have less demand for imported goods and more interest in purchasing locally- made souvenirs and local food.

12 WTTC (2017) Indonesia Travel & Tourism Benchmarking Report

17 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

There are two sources of information on expenditure for domestic visitors – the Horwath HTL report already referred to (pg. 29), and the Baseline Report for the ITMP, which draws data from Statistics of Domestic Tourist Profile 2016 (BPS) and from the Visitor Behaviour Survey carried out for the study. The BPS data has been used for Overnight visits since it has been judged to be more accurate than the Horwath data (although the values are relatively close), while data from the Visitor Behaviour Survey data has been used for day visits since, again, it is judged to be more realistic than the Horwath data (although, again, the values are relatively close).

No spend figures exist for MICE visitors. We have assumed spend to be similar to domestic overnight visitors but have increased accommodation and food & beverage spend. Average spend per day for international visitors is taken from the BPS Passenger Exit Survey (2016). We are not aware of the existence of specific multipliers for the tourism sector for the study area, and so direct spend has been translated into an estimate of indirect and induced spend by applying a ratio derived from the WTTC Travel and Tourism Economic Impact 2018 Indonesia report (pg. 6) which highlights the following spend breakdown:

• Direct: 33% • Indirect: 45.10% • Induced: 21.90%

Therefore, every $1 spent directly in the local economy creates a further value of $2.03 in indirect and induced spend.

2.5.1. Visitor Expenditure Forecasts

Tables 2.9 and 2.10 illustrate the expected forecast expenditure by all visitors (international and domestic, overnight and day/VFR visitors) in terms of direct expenditure and in terms of indirect and induced expenditure. These calculations show that under the Business as Usual scenario, the tourism sector is likely to contribute a total of USD 4,157 million per annum to the economy of Central Java and DI Yogyakarta by 2045, while according to the Best Case scenario, tourism should generate USD 6,100 million for the economy (direct, indirect and induced spend).

Table 2.9: Forecast expected expenditure by all visitors (Business as Usual) Spend ($m) 2018 2023 2028 2033 2038 2045 Direct spend 432 586 794 985 1,172 1,372 Domestic Overnight 231 297 392 469 553 621 International Overnight 87 144 234 330 417 540 Day Visitors/VFR 115 145 168 186 202 210 Total Spend (direct, indirect 1,311 1,777 2,406 2,986 3,551 4,157 and induced ) Domestic Overnight 701 899 1,188 1,420 1,676 1,883 International Overnight 262 437 709 1,001 1,264 1,637 Day Visitors/VFR 347 441 509 565 612 638 Note: Some figures appear not to add up exactly because input figures have been rounded up or down.

18 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Table 2.10: Forecast expected expenditure by all visitors (Best Case) Spend ($m) 2018 2023 2028 2033 2038 2045 Direct spend 432 614 892 1,204 1,590 2,013 Domestic Overnight 231 314 438 553 689 835 International Overnight 87 150 267 429 643 892 Day Visitors/VFR 115 150 187 222 258 287 Total Spend direct, 1,311 1,861 2,704 3,648 4,818 6,100 indirect and induced ) Domestic Overnight 701 952 1,328 1,675 2,086 2,529 International Overnight 262 455 810 1,299 1,949 2,703 Day Visitors/VFR 347 454 567 674 782 868

2.5.2. Contribution of tourism to Gross Regional Domestic Product (GRDP)

From the visitor spend figures, we can predict approximately the contribution of the tourism sector to GRDP in Central Java and DI Yogyakarta. We forecast a total contribution (direct, indirect and induced) of USD 3,659 million by 2045, with the proportionate contribution of the sector to rise from the current level of 0.38% to 0.47% by 2045 under the Business as Usual scenario. Under the Best Case scenario, a total contribution of USD 5,363 million, with a proportionate contribution of the sector of 0.69%.

These figures appear relatively low as a proportion of GRDP because of the strength of other sectors in the Central Java and DI Yogyakarta economy (the proportionate contribution of the same number of visitor arrivals in many other parts of Indonesia could be much higher where the economy is less strong and diversified). The figures are expressed in more detail in Tables 2.11 and 2.12 below. In the business-as-usual scenario, the GRDP growth will be 3.83% constant from 2023 to 2045.

19 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Table 2.11: Forecast Tourism Sector Contribution to GRDP of Central Java and DI Yogyakarta (Business as Usual) 2018 2023 2028 2033 2038 2045 Total GRDP (in $ m) 99,898 120,523 145,406 175,425 211,643 275,245 GRDP growth (yoy %) 3.83% 3.83% 3.83% 3.83% 3.83% Total tourism spend staying in the economy 1,311 1,777 2,406 2,986 3,551 4,157 Direct 432 586 794 985 1,172 1,372 Domestic 231 297 392 469 553 621 International 87 144 234 330 417 540 Day/VFR 115 145 168 186 202 210 Indirect 878 1,190 1,612 2,001 2,379 2,785 Domestic 469 602 796 951 1,123 1,262 International 176 293 475 671 847 1,096 Day/VFR 233 295 341 378 410 427 % Share of GRDP Total tourism spend staying in the economy 1.31% 1.47% 1.65% 1.70% 1.68% 1.51% Direct contribution of tourism to GRDP 0.43% 0.49% 0.55% 0.56% 0.55% 0.50% Domestic 0.23% 0.25% 0.27% 0.27% 0.26% 0.23% International 0.09% 0.12% 0.16% 0.19% 0.20% 0.20% Day/VFR 0.11% 0.12% 0.12% 0.11% 0.10% 0.08% Indirect & induced contribution of tourism to GRDP 0.88% 0.99% 1.11% 1.14% 1.12% 1.01% Domestic 0.47% 0.50% 0.55% 0.54% 0.53% 0.46% International 0.18% 0.24% 0.33% 0.38% 0.40% 0.40% Day/VFR 0.23% 0.24% 0.23% 0.22% 0.19% 0.16%

In the Best Case scenario (Table 2.12), GRDP growth will expand stronger by 3.84% annually in 2023, 3.85% in 2028, 3.86% in 2033, 3.87% in 2038, and 3.84% in 2045. The best-case scenario shows a higher prospect, and the differences between the two scenarios are 0.01% in 2023, 0.03% in 2028, 0.04% in 2033, 0.05% in 2038, and 0.02% in 2045.

20 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Table 2.12: Forecast Tourism Sector Contribution to GRDP of Central Java and DI Yogyakarta (Best Case) 2018 2023 2028 2033 2038 2045

Total GRDP (in USD m) 99,898 120,607 145,704 176,087 212,909 277,187 GRDP growth (yoy %) 3.84% 3.85% 3.86% 3.87% 3.84% Additional growth with intervention (yoy %) 0.01% 0.03% 0.04% 0.05% 0.02% Total tourism spend staying in the economy 1,311 1,861 2,704 3,648 4,818 6,100 Direct 432 614 892 1,204 1,590 2,013 Domestic 231 314 438 553 689 835 International 87 150 267 429 643 892 Day/VFR 115 150 187 222 258 287 Indirect 878 1,247 1,812 2,444 3,228 4,087 Domestic 469 638 889 1,122 1,398 1,695 International 176 305 542 870 1,306 1,811 Day/VFR 233 304 380 452 524 582 % Share Total tourism spend staying in the economy 1.31% 1.54% 1.86% 2.07% 2.26% 2.20% Direct contribution of tourism to GRDP 0.43% 0.51% 0.61% 0.68% 0.75% 0.73% Domestic 0.23% 0.26% 0.30% 0.31% 0.32% 0.30% International 0.09% 0.12% 0.18% 0.24% 0.30% 0.32% Day/VFR 0.11% 0.12% 0.13% 0.13% 0.12% 0.10% Indirect & induced contribution of tourism to GRDP 0.88% 1.03% 1.24% 1.39% 1.52% 1.47% Domestic 0.47% 0.53% 0.61% 0.64% 0.66% 0.61% International 0.18% 0.25% 0.37% 0.49% 0.61% 0.65% Day/VFR 0.23% 0.25% 0.26% 0.26% 0.25% 0.21%

The indexed figures for both sets of tables are given in Appendix 3.

We have calculated the growth of Central Java and DI Yogyakarta’s GRDP based on current prices (Table 2.13), which had a growth rate of 11.05% in 2011, 8.88% in 2012, 10% in 2013, 10.97% in 2014, 9.56% in 2015, 7.63% in 2016, 7.87% in 2017, and 8.29% in 2018. The compound annual growth rate (CAGR) was 9.20% throughout the period of 2010-2018.13

13 Historical inflation rates for the period are given in Appendix 3.

21 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Table 2.13: Central Java and DI Yogyakarta GRDP (based on current prices) Year GRDP of C Java (in GRDP of DIY Total GRDP Growth IDR million) (in IDR million) (in IDR million) 2010 623,224,621 64,678,968 687,903,590 2011 692,561,627 71,369,958 763,931,586 11.05% 2012 754,529,436 77,247,861 831,777,297 8.88% 2013 830,016,016 84,924,543 914,940,559 10.00% 2014 922,471,181 92,842,484 1,015,313,665 10.97% 2015 1,010,986,637 101,440,518 1,112,427,156 9.56% 2016 1,087,316,683 109,962,354 1,197,279,036 7.63% 2017 1,172,400,482 119,131,000 1,291,531,482 7.87% 2018 1,268,700,966 129,877,458 1,398,578,424 8.29% CAGR 9.20%

2.5.3. Impact of Tourism Expenditure on other economic sectors

We have also calculated the impact of tourism growth on other economic sectors in Central Java and DI Yogyakarta provinces as an outcome of tourism development in the three TDAs.

Our assumptions for impacts on the Agriculture, Wholesale and Retail, and other sectors are as follows:14 1. The agriculture sector gains $133,000 for every $1 million of direct spending on the tourism sector. 2. The wholesale and retail sector gains $84,000 for every $1 million of direct spending on the tourism sector.

3. “Other sectors” are defined as sectors in three different categories:

• The direct contribution of travel and tourism to GDP reflects the ‘internal’ spending on travel and tourism (in particular spending on travel and tourism by residents and non- residents for business and leisure purposes) as well as the government’s 'individual' spending, i.e. travel and tourism services directly linked to visitors, such as cultural amenities (e.g. museums) or recreational (e.g. trails in national parks). Sectors/industries in this category are: accommodation services, food and beverages, retail trade, transportation services, cultural, sports and recreational. • The indirect contribution includes: travel-and-tourism investment spending, government ‘collective’ travel-and-tourism spending, impacts of purchases from suppliers. • The induced contribution includes: food and beverages, recreation, clothing, housing, household goods.

14 Assumptions are based on WTTC (2018), op. cit.

22 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

According to the WTTC Indonesia Report, in 2018 the tourism sector contributed around 5.8% to “other sectors,” and was projected to grow to 6.6% by 2028. From this projection, we can calculate the expected growth of the tourism sector annually by dividing the difference between the present and projected rates by the number of years (between 2018 and 2028, i.e., 10 years). This gives a 0.08% growth rate per year from 2018 to 2028, and allows a projection of the tourism sector’s contributions to “other sectors”.

The projected annual impacts of tourism spend on different sectors are shown in Tables 2.14 and 2.15 below.

Table 2.14: Tourism Sector Economic Impacts on other sectors (Central Java and DI Yogyakarta) Business as Usual scenario (USD million) Baseline 2023 2028 2033 2038 2045 Direct spending on tourism sector 432 586 794 985 1,172 1,372 Induced revenue on other sectors impacted 25 36 52 69 87 109 by tourism sector Induced revenues on agriculture sector 58 78 106 131 156 182 Induced revenues on wholesale 36 49 67 83 98 115 and retail sector

Table 2.15: Tourism Sector Economic Impacts on other sectors (Central Java and DI Yogyakarta) Best Case scenario (USD million) Baseline 2023 2028 2033 2038 2045 Direct spending on tourism sector 432 614 892 1,204 1,590 2,013 Induced revenue on other sectors impacted 25 38 59 84 118 160 by tourism sector Induced revenues on agriculture sector 58 82 119 160 211 268 Induced revenues on wholesale 36 52 75 101 134 169 and retail sector

These calculations indicate that under a Business as Usual / organic growth scenario, there will be various direct and induced impacts annually on other economic sectors in Central Java and DI Yogyakarta while under the Best Case scenario, with interventions to improve tourism attractions and infrastructure will produce higher direct and induced annual impacts.

23 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

2.5.4. The impact of tourism spend on employment

Besides its contribution to other sectors discussed above, the tourism sector also impacts the growth of employment in Indonesia. As with other aspects of economic forecasting, the absence of spend breakdowns into discrete economic sectors and associated turnover and employment cost for those sectors makes employment estimates difficult. Our model applies a spend-to-employment ratio to the direct spend figures to provide an estimate of direct employment in the tourism and hospitality sector, and to direct, indirect and induced spend to provide an estimate of total employment. This ratio is based on data from the WTTC Travel and Tourism Economic Impact 2018 Indonesia (Table 2.16).

Table 2.16: Estimated job creation through visitor spend Total direct contribution to GDP 2017 (IDR bn): Rp. 259,583.00 Total direct employment in tourism 2017 4,585,000 ‘Cost' per job (direct) (IDR) Rp. 56,615,703 ‘Cost’ per job (direct) ($) USD 4,000

Total direct and indirect contribution to GDP (IDR bn) Rp. 787,100.00 Total direct/indirect employment 12,241,500 Cost per job (IDR) Rp. 64,297,676 Cost per job ($) USD 4,546

It is likely that through time, 'cost' per job will increase as labour costs increase and businesses introduce greater operational efficiencies. Based on the growth projections in the WTTC report (to 2028), the model assumes that jobs grow at half the rate of expenditure.

Besides its contribution to other sectors discussed above, the tourism sector has also impacted the growth of employment in Indonesia. According to the 2017 WTTC Travel and Tourism Impacts in Indonesia Report, it was found that for every $1,000,000 spending on the tourism sector, 198 jobs were supported (consisting of 34% from direct sectors, 42% from indirect sectors, and 24% from induced sectors**). These assumptions become the basis on which the projection of tourism sector’s impact on increasing employment is conducted.

Table 2.17 Tourism Sector’s Impact on Employment - Business as usual scenario (in $ million) Baseline 2023 2028 2033 2038 2045 Direct spending in tourism 432 586 794 985 1.172 1.372 sector Domestic 231 297 392 469 553 621 International 87 144 234 330 417 540 Domestic stay 115 145 168 186 202 210 Number of Jobs Provided in 85,629 116,093 157,199 195,107 232,042 271,647 tourism sector Direct 28,976 39,284 53,194 66,021 78,519 91,921 Indirect 36,328 49,252 66,691 82,773 98,442 115,244 Induced 20,326 27,557 37,315 46,313 55,081 64,482 Growth of jobs in tourism sector 6.28% 6.25% 4.42% 3.53% 2.28% (yoy%)

24 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Table 2.18 Tourism Sector’s Impact on Employment - Best case scenario Baseline 2023 2028 2033 2038 2045 Direct spending in tourism 432 614 892 1.204 1.590 2.013 sector Domestic 231 314 438 553 689 835 International 87 150 267 429 643 892 Domestic stay 115 150 187 222 258 287 Number of Jobs Provided in 85,629 121,588 176,687 238,337 314,797 398,581 tourism sector Direct 28,976 41,143 59,788 80,649 106,522 134,873 Indirect 36,328 51,583 74,958 101,113 133,550 169,095 Induced 20,326 28,862 41,941 56,575 74,725 94,613 Growth of jobs in tourism 7.26% 7.76% 6.17% 5.72% 3.43% sector (yoy%) Additional growth of jobs in 0.99% 1.51% 1.75% 2.19% 1.15% tourism sector (yoy%) *) The sectors are defined based on the categories explained above.

From the numbers shown by the tables, we can conclude that the overall increase in direct spending on the tourism sector in Indonesia will enhance the growth rate of jobs, thereby resulting in higher employment figures.

25 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

3. Development Scenarios

This section sets out a vision for the BYP area and three possible development scenarios. Our evaluation of the scenarios will follow in Section 4.

3.1. Vision for Borobudur-Yogyakarta-Prambanan

In order to achieve the targets as outlined above, determine the broad positioning of the area, guide our direction of travel and communicate our strategy to stakeholders we have prepared a Vision Statement for the Borobudur-Yogyakarta-Prambanan tourism destination. This vision should act as an inspiration for:

• Local, Provincial and National Stakeholders • Prospective International and Domestic Visitors • The International Travel Trade

The vision is about changing the perspective held of the region by civil society as a whole, including government officials, academia, local tourism providers, the international travel trade, and the media. The vision must incorporate a new approach to tourism based on a broader and more appealing offer rather than just the present BYP triangle. In this respect we believe that the whole island of Java has tremendous untapped potential as a tourism concept because of high recognition of its name in international markets and the very wide diversity of opportunities it offers within a single island, such that it could emerge as a strong companion destination to Bali.

Our vision for the BYP ITMP area is:

‘Borobudur-Yogyakarta-Prambanan is the cultural and tourism Heart of Java, with diversified attractions and strengths that create a sustainable, resilient and world-class destination.’

This vision is the guiding principle for Borobudur-Yogyakarta-Prambanan to become a world-class tourism destination, known both in international markets and within Indonesia for its rich and unique culture and heritage including the iconic UNESCO World Heritage Sites of Borobudur and Prambanan, the historic City of Yogyakarta, its beautiful scenery, and the friendliness of its people.

Focussing initially on BYP, the selected development strategy will initially reinforce the core areas and subsequently expand into the Joglosemar region and in the longer term to further areas of Java. The overarching objectives of this strategy are to:

• Rejuvenate and expand the product range and attract new markets • Increase length of stay and visitor spend • Equitably distribute the economic benefits of tourism • Ensure a positive balance between the social and cultural costs and benefits of tourism

26 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

The overall aim is to ensure that Java is on a par with the top destinations in Southeast Asia and celebrated as offering a diverse range of tourism attractions and experiences, including new flagship visitor attractions, clusters, and themed trails.

As a destination, BYP and surrounding areas will set high standards in environmental and cultural resource management, achieved by public, private and community stakeholders working together to create a quality visitor experience. Within a context of flexibility and adaptability to ensure continuing market responsiveness, these efforts will create a sustainable and resilient tourism destination, as illustrated in Figure 3.1.

Figure 3.1 : The Sphere of Tourism Resilience

Source: ITMP Consultants

Based on this concept, the strategy for the area should be based on the following principles:

1. Sustainability, especially sound management of environmental, cultural and social resources 2. Maximising and spreading the economic benefits of tourism to all levels in society and levels of government 3. Diversification of the tourism product offer 4. Market understanding and responsiveness 5. Resilience, especially flexibility and adaptability to respond to changing market forces 6. Institutional strengthening 7. Rationalisation of institutions and legislation 8. The development of tourism clusters in all three BYP KTAs as an engine of growth for a wider area 9. Short-term improvement of BYP infrastructure and attractions 10. Medium-term expansion of tourism into Joglosemar 11. Long-term development of Java Tourism 12. Monitoring and Review

27 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

3.2. Growth Options for BYP

In comparison to the Lombok and Lake Toba ITMPs being prepared in parallel to BYP, the Central Java/ DI Yogyakarta area presents a different range of constraints and opportunities for development. Unlike Lombok and Toba, both of which are predominantly in the Development or even Discovery phases of the Tourism Area Life Cycle, BYP is relatively mature and has an established market position. Furthermore, much of BYP – especially Yogyakarta and much of Prambanan - is essentially composed of urban or peri-urban areas and with fragmented land ownership, which constrains the opportunities for the development of large sites. Here, we are confronted with issues of urban development and redevelopment as opposed to ‘green field’ planning.

Furthermore, the core issue for BYP is not how to attract tourists, as in many respects the destination is already very successful in that endeavour, especially as far as domestic visitors are concerned. The core questions identified in the baseline analysis are:

• How does BYP cope with growth beyond present visitor numbers? • How does BYP derive greater economic benefit from the tourism sector? • How does BYP attract a greater number of international visitors?

In considering the path forward, we have taken account of the principal issues identified during the Baseline Analysis, summarised as follows:

1. Narrow tourism product offer 2. Over-reliance on cultural tourism 3. Over-tourism at Borobudur WHS 4. Weak appreciation of preserving heritage values and heritage economics 5. Over-reliance on domestic market 6. Poor international standard of attractions and interpretation 7. Poor access in terms of the volume of existing / forecast arrivals 8. Inadequate services infrastructure 9. Deteriorating environmental conditions, including air pollution and depletion of groundwater 10. Inability of local communities to take advantage of economic opportunities, partly through skills and training gaps 11. Weak institutional frameworks and enforcement 12. Inadequate coordination and planning

Taking into account established tourism planning practice elsewhere and the socio-cultural and political realities of the BYP area, we have prepared in outline three principal Strategic Growth Options offering different approaches to tourism development in BYP and Joglosemar. These are:

28 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

3.2.1. ‘Hub and Spoke’ Option

This option proposes a strategy of continuing along the present path of ad hoc, spontaneous development based largely upon the existing tourism product offer, notably the ancient, unique but threatened Borobudur WHS and the ‘street retail with cultural add-ons’ offer of the City of Yogyakarta, with the Prambanan WHS as an additional attraction. Infrastructural improvements would take place, and there would be some tourism-related investment interventions mainly located at or near the current principal attractions. (Figure 3.2.) This option would mean that Yogyakarta remains the dominant tourism destination in the BYP area with a limited number of sub-centres, especially YIA, Borobudur KTA, Prambanan KTA, and the DIY Southern Beaches.

Figure 3.2 : ‘Hub and Spoke’ Option

29 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

3.2.2. ‘Cluster and Disperse’ Option

Under this option the principal three destination areas would be managed to form a more balanced engine of tourism for a wider area, focusing primarily on DI Yogyakarta and the south-central part of Central Java. Infrastructural improvements would take place, and limited product diversification would foster clusters of subsidiary visitor attractions around the existing major ones, playing to the existing strengths of cultural resources. (Figure 3.3.) This option focuses on a balanced development of discrete tourism clusters within Kota Yogyakarta and at selected dispersed attraction sites, especially Borobudur TDA, Prambanan TDA, DIY Southern Beaches, YIA, BOB landholding, Wonosari/Gunung Sewu. Figure 3.3: ‘Cluster and Disperse’ Option

30 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

3.2.3. ‘Heart of Java’ (Multi-Centre Dispersion) Option

The third option proposes that BYP should form the core of a much wider ‘Java Tourism’ product, developed over the 25-year plan period and offering a diverse spectrum of attractions and becoming a strong companion to Bali as an international destination. This scenario would see infrastructural improvements and the development of new flagship attractions as well as interventions designed to build on and exploit a wide range of existing and potential skills and attractions in BYP, including MICE, activity and nature-based tourism, beach resorts, performing arts and festivals, local-level cultural assets including gastronomy, and history from Early Man to the birth of the Indonesian Republic. (Figure 3.4.). This option would have a stronger focus on the wider area of Joglosemar, including Solo/Sangiran, Merapi/Merbabu, Wonosari/Gunung Sewu, Ambarawa/Salatiga, Dieng Plateau, Semarang, Karimunjawa in addition to Borobudur, Prambanan, DIY beaches, YIA Aeropolis.

The overall aim is to build a ‘Heart of Java’ destination as a core for expansion across Java.

Figure 3.4 : ‘Heart of Java’ Option

31 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Some of the concepts for new visitor attractions and facilities under the ‘Heart of Java’ option are set-out below:

Kotagede Traditional Market Area Improvements

The key improvements to Pasar Legi Kotagede can be summarised as follows:

• Existing façade – Full preservation of existing façade to reinforce market identity. • Babon Anim – Revitalise Babon Anim (formerly an electrical substation, built in in the early 1900s) by transforming it into a tourism information centre. • Monumen Ngejaman – Renovate the Ngejaman Monument and introduce interpretative signage regarding its significance and history. • Monumen Pacak Suji – Renovate the Pacak Suji Monument to become a welcoming statue for visitors to Kotagede. • Traditional Crafts – The market should incorporate at least three to four crafts which are traditional to DI Yogyakarta, especially batik and lurik textiles, silver-work jewellery and artefacts, wood carvings, and leather products including wayang kulit puppets. Each craft should be carried out in a distinct area, which may be a separate small building or a separate wing within the market. There needs to be an emphasis on providing sufficient space for groups to see the craftspeople at work.

Heart of Java Heritage Trail (Working Title)

32 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Java Botanic Gardens, Prambanan

There is an increasing awareness and concern about the impact of humans on the environment. Prambanan Botanic Gardens will therefore play an important role in re- connecting visitors (both tourists and local residents) with the natural world. This will be achieved by promoting a range of facilities and horticultural features that will offer recreation, education and research opportunities.

Borobudur Sound and Light Performance

The Borobudur Sound and Light Show will be a new night-time tourism attraction for Borobudur-Yogyakarta-Prambanan. It will be a professionally designed show, choreographed to the highest standards and will feature live performers, spectacular lighting against the remarkable backdrop of Borobudur Temple, and evocative music.

Wings of Time Show, Singapore

The options and the implications of each option are set out in Table 3.1 below.

33 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Table 3.1: Development Scenario Options Option 1: ‘Hub and Spoke’ Outline Yogyakarta remains the dominant tourism destination in the BYP area with a limited number of sub-centres, especially YIA, Borobudur KTA, Prambanan KTA, Southern Beaches

Locations & Key interventions Notes & Implications Tourism • Bulk of new tourism accommodation located in Kota and Metro • Plays to existing market preferences Accommodation Yogyakarta • Given limited land availability in Kota Yogyakarta, may necessitate an Distribution • Limited growth in Borobudur and Prambanan TDAs increase in Floor Area Ratios (FAR) and increase building heights • Small new accommodation cluster associated with YIA (Aeropolis) • Urban redevelopment should be anticipated over the 25-year plan period • Limited accommodation in new beach areas • Continues to provide majority of accommodation in DIY • Limited accommodation in BOB development area Principal tourist • Reinforcement of Borobudur, Prambanan and Yogyakarta as primary • Continuing focus on existing principal destinations (‘honey-pots’) and limited attractions and tourism attractions product range products • Enhancement of Yogya sites, especially Kota Gede, Kraton and • Limited relief of pressure on areas currently experiencing ‘overtourism’ (Jl. Malioboro/Margo Utomo Malioboro, Borobudur) • New flagship developments at hub and spoke sites, especially new • Insufficient relief of pressure on Borobudur Temple itself, risking de-listing Conference centre in Yogya; ‘Legends of Borobudur’ edutainment from the World Heritage List centre at Borobudur KTA; Botanical Gardens at Prambanan KTA; • Majority of attractions in DIY, fewer in C Java resort development at Southern Beaches; retail parks around YIA • Eventual decline as carrying capacity is exceeded and reputational damage • Better promotion of existing events and festivals, introduction of new results ones. • Continuing market evolution towards domestic visitors and international groups resistant to crowding and interested mainly in ‘selfie’ opportunities

Population Growth • Significant increase in Kota and Metro Yogyakarta population • Significant population growth in Kota and Metro Yogyakarta will place Distribution through redevelopment and densification additional strain on limited land availability and infrastructure capacity • New population centre at ‘Aeropolis’ YIA new town • A move towards multi-storey dwellings may be needed in Kota Yogyakarta • Minor population centres in coastal areas to support resorts (link • Limited magnet effect will counter rural outmigration, especially at with business growth in Kulon Progo/Bantul) Borobudur and DIY beaches • Natural growth around ‘spoke’ areas

34 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Economic Growth • Concentration of new and enhanced retail development in Kota and • Difficulty in identifying new commercial / industrial land in Kota Yogyakarta Metro Yogyakarta • Concentration of new industrial development in Bantul and along • Industrial and commercial activities along the YIA corridor will increase strip YIA–Jogja corridor development congestion • Development of Agrotech hub around YIA • Concentration of economic growth • Development of logistics and creative industries along YIA-Jogja • Short-term economic benefits based on apparent ‘success’ in terms of corridor visitor numbers • Difficult to increase length of stay and per capita visitor spend

Road network • YIA Toll Road essential • YIA/Jogja corridor will see a heavy increase in traffic volumes • Development of new coastal road network required • Kota Yogyakarta road network already heavily congested, difficult to • Improved public transport and traffic management required, upgrade it to increase traffic volumes / reduce journey times. including ‘Park & Ride’ system for Kota Yogyakarta • Increases in development densities would place additional strains on local • Major new parking areas required outside Kota Yogyakarta and at road networks Borobudur • Public transportation and cycle lanes can reduce motorized traffic Rail network • YIA -Yogyakarta express rail link • Prioritise rail access to YIA to reduce travel times and road congestion • Upgrade of urban stations to accommodate multi-modal operations • Consider an ‘in-town terminal’ for check-in? Magelang–Yogyakarta line with major station at Blabak • Prioritisation of rail access to Borobudur area Water Supply • Major upgrade of water supply to Kota Yogyakarta and Borobudur • Demand for water in Kota Yogyakarta will continue to exceed supply and Prambanan KTAs, including additional bulk water (through without major new infrastructure investment RISPAM), expansion of distribution network, groundwater • Enforcement of existing legislation re. prohibition on creating new wells by management, leakage reduction hotels and other businesses essential • Water-saving campaign (led by public sector)

Wastewater • Wastewater treatment and network improvements to Kota • Large-scale civil engineering investment in Kota Yogyakarta and significant Yogyakarta, including expansion of sewerage network, investment in Borobudur and Prambanan KTAs, especially to cope with improvement in on-site facilities, and additional communal demand on peak visitation days. systems, and introduction of regular desludging on-site facilities • The existing offsite sewerage treatment system of Yogyakarta is an • Sanitation improvements needed to Borobudur and Prambanan opportunity for expansion of house connections. TDAs • Special attention needed to mal-functioning septic tanks polluting the groundwater, and on untreated grey water discharged into drainage systems and rivers.

35 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Solid waste • Identification and creation of new final disposal site (TPA), since • Land purchase necessary or utilisation of state-owned land for new or TPAs in Piyungan and Pasuruhan (Magelang) have exceeded their expanded TPA(s) capacity • More encouragement of individual and business participation in ‘3Rs’ • Improvements to solid waste management infrastructure in Kota approach to waste management Yogyakarta, including construction of Kelurahan level waste • Community awareness campaigns to promote waste separation at source, transfer/recycling sites (TPS 3R) to increase recycling and reduce and stop littering and waste burning waste Drainage • Need for improved drainage in Kota/Metro Yogyakarta, Borobudur • Institutional reform, regarding establishment of well-resourced O&M and Prambanan KTAs/TDAs, including rehabilitation and expansion institution of existing drains • Restoration of river riparian buffers and dredging of especially sediment • Rehabilitation and expansion of Sabo dams from ‘cold lava’. • Law enforcement on rainwater infiltration pits (as required by building permits) Environmental • • Creation of green spaces and corridors in Kota Yogyakarta • Intensification of development in Kota Yogyakarta will exacerbate Upgrade and expansion of environmental monitoring and mitigation environmental issues (air, noise and water pollution) and deficit of open • programme (air, water, noise, hotel performance) space Introduction of environmental certification scheme for • Capacity-building with private sector and public sector, especially DLH accommodation • Biodiversity impacts on new developed areas, especially along coastline Socio-economic • Expansion of tourism-related income-generating opportunities in • Efforts to increase participation of local people in tourism can be existing hub (Kota Yogyakarta) and principal ‘spokes’ concentrated in smaller areas • Potential antagonism created amongst local people as local facilities and services become harder to access due to crowding and overloading Human Resource • Establish ‘Centre of Excellence’ Tourism & Hospitality Training • National-level educational and vocational resource Development Institute • ‘Centre of Excellence’ should rank alongside Indonesia’s top tourism educational institutes Cultural heritage • Upgrading museums and attractions in Yogyakarta, Borobudur and • Stronger legislation and enforcement required to protect aesthetic heritage Prambanan (especially interpretation) (natural, rural, built) • Stronger emphasis on research and preservation of archaeological sites and ancient structures Institutional • Retain existing institutions with minor changes, especially stronger • Realign balance of power between BCO and PT TWC to enable greater role for Borobudur Conservation Office (BCO) and create control of visitor numbers and flow crossboundary management body for Prambanan KTA. • Greater cross-border cooperation between provinces • Legislative review to achieve better cross-border sharing of benefits

36 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Option 2: ‘Cluster and Disperse’ Outline Balanced development of discrete tourism clusters within Kota Yogyakarta and at selected dispersed attraction sites, especially Borobudur TDA, Prambanan TDA, Southern Beaches, YIA, BOB landholding, Wonosari/Gunung Sewu.

Locations & Key interventions Notes & Implications Tourism • New tourism accommodation in each cluster • Reduces pressure on Yogyakarta hotels and other infrastructure Accommodation • Requires campaign to raise market awareness of additional areas to Distribution Yogyakarta/Borobudur, building on JavaPromo initiative Principal tourist • Retention of Borobudur WHS, Prambanan WHS and Yogyakarta as • Allows for touring within a limited but focused area of C Java/DIY attractions and primary tourism attractions but with enhanced development at sites • Supports the development of special interest tourism in addition to products within Yogya, especially Kota Gede, Kraton and Malioboro/Margo Utomo cultural tourism • New flagship developments, especially Conference centre in Yogya; • Creates a wider destination area than the ‘Hub and spoke’ model ‘Legends of Borobudur’ edutainment centre at Borobudur KTA; Botanical • Better balance of tourism between DIY and C Java Gardens at Prambanan KTA; resort development at Southern Beaches; retail parks around YIA • Additional development and promotion of small sites in and around principal TDAs, e.g. sunset/sunrise spots in Menoreh hills/Kab. Magelang/ Borobudur TDA; nature reserve(s) in Prambanan TDA; activity tourism around Merapi / Merbabu and Wonosari / Gunung Sewu Geopark; themed trails for walking, cycling or driving tours (e.g. ‘Diponegoro Trail’, ‘Gen. Sudirman’s Guerrilla route’, ‘Temple Trail’). • Better promotion of existing events and festivals, introduction of new ones. Population Growth • Some increase in Kota and Metro Yogyakarta population • Natural growth around clusters (limited magnet effect will counter rural Distribution • New population centre at ‘Aeropolis’ YIA new town outmigration in peripheral areas, especially at Borobudur and DIY beaches) • Population retention in coastal areas, with growth of existing settlements • Significant population increase around Borobudur and Prambanan would (especially linking with business growth in Kulon Progo / Bantul) place additional strain on limited local land availability, especially pressure • Growth in population around Borobudur especially, some growth around for building, and may fundamentally change the nature of these areas. Prambanan

37 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Economic Growth • Concentration of new retail development in Kota Yogyakarta tourism • Difficulty in identifying available commercial / industrial land in Kota clusters Yogyakarta • Concentration of new industries (especially in creative sectors) in • ‘Pull’ factor of YIA/Aeropolis will draw potential developments away from • Bantul and along the YIA–Jogja corridor Development of Agrotech hub eastern and north-eastern parts of the area around YIA • Industrial and commercial activities along YIA corridor will create strip • Development of logistics activities along YIA-Jogja corridor development congestion • Some spread of economic impacts, but primarily in DIY Road network • YIA-Jogja Toll Road essential • Increases in development densities or visitor attractions would place strains • Improved roads to principal ‘dispersed’ attractions essential on local road networks • Essential to consider parking needs in all new attractions and existing • Opportunities for ‘Hop on-Hop off’ type tour buses through area major ones Rail network • YIA-Yogyakarta express rail link • Prioritise rail access to YIA to reduce travel times and road congestion • Upgrade of urban stations to accommodate multi-modal operation Consider an ‘in-town terminal’ for check-in? Magelang–Yogyakarta line with major rail station at Blabak • Mid-term prioritisation of rail access to Borobudur area Water Supply • Major upgrade of water supply to Kota Yogyakarta and Borobudur and • Demand for water in Kota Yogyakarta may continue to exceed supply Water Prambanan KTAs, including additional bulk water (through RISPAM), supply in many outlying areas will require detailed analysis and in some expansion of distribution network, groundwater management, leakage cases may be unsustainable reduction through replacement of old pipes • Enforcement of existing legislation regarding water supply for businesses essential • Water-saving public awareness campaign required Wastewater • Wastewater treatment and network improvements to Kota Yogyakarta, • Large-scale civil engineering investment needed to service clusters Prambanan and Borobudur KTAs, and to Southern Beaches and YIA-Yogya corridor Solid waste • Identification and creation of new final disposal site (TPA), since TPAs in • Land purchase necessary or utilisation of state-owned land for new or Piyungan and Pasuruhan (Magelang) have exceeded their capacity expanded TPA(s) Improvements to solid waste management infrastructure in Kota • More encouragement of individual and business participation in ‘3Rs’ Yogyakarta, including construction of Kelurahan level waste approach to waste management transfer/recycling sites (TPS 3R) to increase recycling and reduce waste • Community awareness campaigns to promote waste separation at source, and stop littering and waste burning Drainage • Need for improved drainage in Kota/Metro Yogyakarta, Borobudur and • Institutional reform, regarding establishment of well-resourced O&M Prambanan KTAs/TDAs, including rehabilitation and expansion of existing institution drains • Restoration of river riparian buffers and dredging of especially sediment • Rehabilitation and expansion of Sabo dams from ‘cold lava’. • Law enforcement on rainwater infiltration pits (as required by building permits)

38 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Environmental • Creation of green spaces and corridors in Kota Yogyakarta, ideally linking • Increased opportunities for road touring will create more air pollution in to hills / rural areas outside the city previously relatively clean areas • Upgrade and expansion of environmental monitoring and mitigation • Capacity-building needed with private and public sector, especially DLH programme (air, water, noise, hotel performance) • Biodiversity impacts on new developed areas, especially coastline • Emphasise landscaping using native species of vegetation to encourage biodiversity of insects, birds and other animals • Introduction of environmental certification scheme for accommodation Socio-economic • Expansion / creation of tourism-related income-generating opportunities • Efforts to raise participation of local people in tourism need to be around new attractions as well as existing ones disseminated across a wider area • Opportunities at all levels (including managerial) will be available across a wider area Human Resource • Establish ‘Centre of Excellence’ Tourism & Hospitality Training Institute • National-level educational and vocational resource Development • ‘Centre of Excellence’ should rank alongside Indonesia’s top tourism educational institutes Cultural heritage • Upgrading museums in Yogyakarta, Borobudur and Prambanan and • Stronger legislation and enforcement required to protect aesthetic heritage elsewhere (especially interpretation) (natural, rural, built) • Reconstruction and/or research into archaeological sites, especially • Stronger emphasis on research and preservation of archaeological sites and Prambanan KTA ancient structures • Investment (and imagination) needed in repurposing historic buildings • Opportunities for local festivals / local wisdom to be highlighted and encouraged

Institutional • Enhance role of Borobudur Conservation Office (BCO) to cover wider area • Realign balance of power between PT TWC and public sector • Create cross-boundary management body for Prambanan KTA. • Strengthen role of BOB, rename to reflect wider role • Create overarching tourism board for DIY / southern C Java • Greater cross-border cooperation between provinces • Legislative review to achieve better cross-border sharing of benefits

39 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Option 3: ‘Heart of Java’ Outline Less focus on Yogyakarta and stronger focus on wider area, especially Solo/Sangiran, Merapi/Merbabu, Wonosari/Gunung Sewu, Ambarawa/Salatiga, Dieng Plateau, Semarang, Karimunjawa in addition to Borobudur, Prambanan, DIY beaches, YIA Aeropolis. Overall aim: to build ‘Heart of Java’ destination as core for expansion across Java.

Locations & Key interventions Notes & Implications Tourism • New tourism accommodation throughout the region • Reduces pressure on Yogyakarta accommodation and other Accommodation infrastructure Distribution • Requires campaign to raise market awareness of Java tourism, building on JavaPromo initiative Principal tourist • Retention of Borobudur WHS, Prambanan WHS and Yogyakarta as cultural • Creates a diverse tourism product appealing to different markets attractions and tourism attractions • Builds on existing strengths and product development products • New flagship and major developments, especially Conference centre in • Allows for touring throughout DIY and middle section of C Java Yogya; ‘Legends of Borobudur’ edutainment centre at Borobudur; • Supports the development of activity and special interest tourism in Botanical Gardens in Prambanan KTA; resort development at Southern addition to cultural tourism Beaches; retail parks around YIA • Provides wide range of entrepreneurial and employment • Enhanced development at many other sites and with additional themes, opportunities including sunrise/sunset spots and soft adventure (short hikes, rafting) in • Balance of tourism between DIY and C Java Kab. Magelang / Borobudur TDA; activity tourism around Merapi/Merbabu, Sundoro/Sumbing, Wonosari and the Gunung Sewu Geopark; beach and marine tourism on the Southern and South-eastern Beaches of DIY and P. Karimunjawa; retail tourism in the Aeropolis around YIA; city tourism in Semarang; creation of themed trails for walking, cycling or driving tours (e.g. ‘Diponegoro Trail’, ‘General Sudirman’s Guerrilla route’, ‘Cradle of the Republic’, ‘Temple Trail’, ‘Volcano Trail’, ‘Traditional Life of Java’, ‘Music and Theatre of Java’, ‘Gastronomy of Java’). • Better promotion of existing events and festivals, introduction of new ones.

Population Growth • New population centre at ‘Aeropolis’ YIA new town and population • Little growth other than as expected through predicted population Distribution retention with some growth in rural and peripheral areas, no additional expansion trends growth in Yogyakarta

40 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Economic Growth • Dispersed growth of new retail development • ‘Pull’ factor of YIA will draw potential developments away from eastern • Concentration of new industries (especially in creative sectors) in Bantul and north-eastern parts of the area and along the YIA–Jogja corridor • Industrial and commercial activities along the YIA corridor will create • Development of Agrotech hub around YIA strip development congestion • Development of logistics activities along YIA-Jogja corridor • More balanced economic growth impacts throughout DIY and Central Java Road network • YIA-Jogja Toll Road essential • Increases in development densities or visitor attractions would place • Improved roads to principal ‘dispersed’ attractions essential strains on local road networks • Essential to consider parking needs in all new attractions and existing • Opportunities for ‘Hop on-Hop off’ type tour buses throughout southern major ones part of area Rail network • YIA-Yogyakarta express rail link • Prioritise rail access to YIA to reduce travel times and road congestion • Upgrade of urban stations to accommodate multi-modal operations • Consider an ‘in-town terminal’ for check-in? • Magelang–Yogyakarta line with major rail station at Blabak • Mid-term prioritisation of rail access to Borobudur area Water Supply • Major upgrade of water supply to Kota Yogyakarta and Borobudur and • Demand for water in Kota Yogyakarta may continue to exceed supply Prambanan KTAs, including additional bulk water (through RISPAM), Water supply in many outlying areas will require detailed analysis and in expansion of distribution network, groundwater management, leakage some cases may be unsustainable reduction through replacement of old pipes • Enforcement of existing legislation regarding water supply for businesses essential • Water-saving public awareness campaign required Wastewater • Wastewater treatment and network improvements to Kota Yogyakarta, • Large-scale civil engineering investment needed throughout area • Prambanan and Borobudur KTAs, and to Southern Beaches and YIAYogya corridor Solid waste • Identification and creation of new final disposal site (TPA), since TPAs in • Land purchase necessary or utilisation of state-owned land for new or Piyungan and Pasuruhan (Magelang) have exceeded their capacity expanded TPA(s) • Improvements to solid waste management infrastructure in Kota • More encouragement of individual and business participation in ‘3Rs’ Yogyakarta, including construction of Kelurahan level waste approach to waste management transfer/recycling sites (TPS 3R) to increase recycling and reduce waste • Community awareness campaigns to promote waste separation at source, and stop littering and waste burning Drainage • Need for improved drainage in Kota/Metro Yogyakarta, Borobudur and • Institutional reform, regarding establishment of well-resourced O&M Prambanan KTAs/TDAs, including rehabilitation and expansion of existing institution drains • Restoration of river riparian buffers and dredging of especially sediment • Rehabilitation and expansion of Sabo dams from ‘cold lava’ • Law enforcement on rainwater infiltration pits (as required by building permits).

41 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Environmental • Creation of green spaces and corridors in Kota Yogyakarta, ideally linking • Increased opportunities for road touring will create more air pollution in to hills / rural areas outside the city previously relatively clean areas • Upgrade and expansion of environmental monitoring and mitigation • Capacity-building needed with private sector and public sector, programme (air, water, noise, hotel performance) especially DLH • Emphasise landscaping using native species of vegetation to encourage • Capacity-building needed with local people to emphasise importance biodiversity of insects, birds and other animals • of native flora and fauna (to attract special interest tourists) Biodiversity • Tourism products focussed specifically on nature impacts on new developed areas, especially coastline • Introduction of environmental certification scheme for accommodation Socio-economic • Expansion / creation of tourism-related income-generating opportunities • Efforts to raise participation of local people in tourism need to be around new attractions as well as existing ones disseminated across a wider area • Opportunities at all levels, including microenterprises in villages and management careers in larger enterprises, available across a wider area Human Resource • Establish ‘Centre of Excellence’ Tourism & Hospitality Training Institute • National-level educational and vocational resource Development • ‘Centre of Excellence’ should rank alongside Indonesia’s top tourism educational institutes Cultural heritage • Upgrading museums in Yogyakarta, Borobudur and Prambanan and • Stronger legislation and enforcement required to protect aesthetic elsewhere (especially interpretation) heritage (natural, rural, built) • Reconstruction and/or research into archaeological sites, especially • Stronger emphasis on research and preservation of archaeological sites • Prambanan KTA and Dieng Plateau and ancient structures • Investment (and imagination) needed in repurposing historic buildings • Opportunities for local festivals / local wisdom to be highlighted and encouraged Institutional • Create overarching tourism board for DIY / C Java • Strengthen role of BOB, rename to reflect wider role • Enhance role of Borobudur Conservation Office (BCO) to cover wider area • Combine renamed BOB with JavaPromo to create Destination • Create cross-boundary management body for Prambanan KTA Management/Marketing Organisation for DIY / C Java in order to support cross-border cooperation between provinces • Realign balance of power between PT TWC and public sector • Legislative review to achieve better cross-border sharing of benefits

42 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

4. Proposed Planning, Space and Design Standards

The purpose of the Tourism Development Planning Standards is to improve consistency in plan and policy statement structure, format and content. In particular, the preparation of detailed standards, accompanied by development guidelines, is to remove any inconsistencies and contradictions which exist at present and provide a more detailed framework that responds to a wider range of land uses and building typologies.

4.1. Planning spatial layers

Currently, strategic plans and policy statements are prepared under the RTRW while detailed proposals are set out in the RDTR. While these two planning vehicles are not inconsistent with each other, they are both largely based on broad policy statements with little detail in the areas of development typologies, quantified overall development objectives and phasing. We believe that if the objectives and recommendations of the BYP ITMP are to be achieved, including attracting increased levels of FDI, then a sectorial tourism plan accompanied by planning standards and development guidelines should prepared and adopted. It is our recommendation that the sectorial tourism plan be considered as an additional ‘layer’ of both the RTRW and RDTR and that the assessment of tourism development proposals be considered against this framework.

This approach of developing an integrated area plan through the preparation of a range of sectorial ‘spatial plans’ is a natural extension of GIS-based plan preparation and is used in many countries, including New Zealand.

The present RTRW and RDTR documents offer a very crude framework beyond the delineation of ‘tourism’ areas. The Sectorial Tourism Plan will have to reflect the much finer grain of detail that is the ITMP, and as such we recommend that this plan incorporate more specific zoning designations accompanied by planning standards.

By the same principle, other spatial layers derived from the BYP ITMP and integrated with the RTRW and RDTR plans include:

• Transport, including road, rail, parking and public transport proposals and facilities • Water, Wastewater and Sanitation facilities and proposals • Services infrastructure networks and proposals

The preparation of such planning spatial layers will make available to investors and their consultants a range of information and development standards that should enable the speedy preparation and assessment of new development proposals.

In examining the three TDAs of the BYP ITMP we have identified a range of recommended zone designations and prepared broad planning standards, which are set out below in Table 4.1. While these standards are applicable to BYP, they could be adapted or modified for other locations dependant on local conditions and tourism development objectives.

In preparing planning standards, we have taken into account local standards in urban, peri-urban and rural areas as well as drawing upon international standards of best practice from Singapore, Hong Kong and Western Australia.

43 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Table 4.1: Proposed Tourism Spatial Layer Planning Standards Zone Permitted Uses Floor Area Ratio/ Notes Max building height, Site Coverage Cultural Core ▪ World Heritage Site FAR 0.25 ▪ Includes World Heritage Sites and ▪ Cultural and Max height = 4m designated cultural sites educational SC 25% ▪ Proposals to be referred to the ▪ High quality retail and Ministry of Education and Culture for catering Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA). Village Tourism ▪ Residential, including FAR 1.0 ▪ Ensure that the local character of the homestay Max height = 10m village (rural or urban) is maintained accommodation SC 50% and not materially altered in physical ▪ Local commercial and or social fabric by the scale and retail nature of the proposed development. ▪ Catering, including ▪ Adopt international standards of restaurants and food tourism provision but maintain the outlets architectural character of the ▪ Offices, including location. information and ▪ Minimise the use of motorised interpretation Centres. transport, promote the use of ▪ Local transport pedestrian and cycle movement. facilities including ▪ Adopt and incorporate sustainable visitor parking technologies including photovoltaic cells and solar water heating into

developments. Tourism Cluster ▪ Tourism FAR (urban) 2 ▪ The proposed Tourism Cluster Zone Zone Accommodation FAR (rural) 1 designation indicating that this area ▪ Restaurants and cafés Site coverage max has been strategically designated for ▪ Tourism-related retail 50% proposed tourism developments ▪ Entertainment facilities should take precedence over other ▪ Transport facilities proposals. ▪ Integrate public transport planning. Tourism ▪ Hotels FAR (urban) 2 ▪ Ensure the provision of safe and Accommodation ▪ Hostels FAR (rural) 1 convenient access, including cycle, Zone ▪ Homestay clusters Site coverage SC 50% pedestrian and disabled access to accommodation sites. ▪ Integrate public transport planning. Tourism ▪ Museums FAR (urban) 2 ▪ Integrate public transport planning Facilities ▪ Information and visitor FAR (rural) 1

centres Site coverage and ▪ Theatres, Conference building height vary and Exhibition Centres on a case by case ▪ Craft Centres basis Tourism Routes ▪ Thematic routes, Not applicable ▪ Ensure safe and convenient access, including historic and including cycle, pedestrian and cultural trails disabled access to sites. ▪ Access roads and ▪ Ensure adequate and clear signage touring routes along designated routes ▪ Cycle and walking trails Conservation ▪ Varies on a case by FAR (urban) 2 ▪ Maintaining cultural or natural Zone case basis dependant FAR (rural) 1 heritage relies on the planning on the locational framework to capture proposed

44 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Zone Permitted Uses Floor Area Ratio/ Notes Max building height, Site Coverage context and uses of the Site coverage and changes that may affect an identified Conservation zone building height vary heritage place. on a case by case ▪ Proposals should be accompanied by basis a detailed HIA which demonstrates that the proposed development conforms to detailed planning criteria and building design guidelines in order to preserve the heritage integrity of the location. Rural and ▪ information and FAR 0.1 ▪ The purpose of this zone is to ensure Ecotourism interpretation Centres. SC 10% the integrity of rural and ecotourism ▪ Local transport Max building height areas for the benefit of local facilities including 5m residents. visitor parking. ▪ Motorised access and activities should be prohibited ▪ Pedestrian and cycle access and activities should be encouraged. ▪ Adopt and incorporate sustainable technologies including photovoltaic cells and solar water heating. River and ▪ Walking and cycle trails FAR 0.1 ▪ The purpose of this zone is to ensure Adventure ▪ Landing stages and SC 10% the integrity of the extensive river vehicle access points Max building height systems of the TDAs as green arteries ▪ Landscaping and 5m extending through the area. leisure areas ▪ This zone will cover all river courses ▪ Adventure sports, e.g. and a 25m reserve extending from rafting, tubing, zip each riverbank. lining, paragliding ▪ The use of these areas for motorised access or activities should be prohibited ▪ Adopt and incorporate sustainable technologies including photovoltaic cells and solar water heating. ▪ All proposals for development in this zone must be accompanied by a risk assessment examining flood and volcano-related risks. Mountain and ▪ Cable-car stations, FAR 0.1 ▪ Specific conditions that will apply to Scenic pylons and winding SC 10% the development of these zones will gear Max building height include: ▪ Viewing platforms, 5m ▪ The minimisation of landscape including ‘selfie spots’ disturbance ▪ Restaurants and cafés ▪ The requirement not to modify or associated with break the existing skyline viewing platforms ▪ Motorised access other than that ▪ Outdoor activities for construction and servicing is including camping, not encouraged climbing and ▪ Adopt and incorporate paragliding sustainable technologies including ▪ Walking and cycle trails photovoltaic cells and solar water heating

45 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Zone Permitted Uses Floor Area Ratio/ Notes Max building height, Site Coverage ▪ Toilets, Information ▪ Proposals to develop these zones and interpretation must be accompanied by an centres Environmental Impact Assessment and a Geotechnical Report certifying the stability of the site and proposed structures. ▪ Proposals should be accompanied by a Visual Impact Assessment demonstrating that the visual disturbance to the mountain or scenic area is of an acceptable level and that the overall integrity of the area has not been prejudiced. Source: BYP ITMP Consultants

4.2. Proposed Design Guidelines

Complementary to the Planning Spatial Zone Standards, a set of design guidelines has been developed to guide the detailed design of proposed developments in order to ensure the areas are developed in a harmonious manner and address key issues such as:

• Lack of sufficient off-street parking • Deficit of public open space in the urban area • The proliferation of visually intrusive advertising hoardings and signage • Architectural design and construction materials which clash with neighbouring developments.

Proposed design guidelines are set out in outline in Table 4.2 below.

Table 4.2: Proposed Design Guidelines Zone Space Standards Notes Cultural Core ▪ World Heritage Site ▪ All design proposals should be submitted to the Ministry of ▪ Cultural and educational Education and Culture for comment and approval ▪ High quality retail and catering ▪ Developments are to be of the highest international standards Village Varies by typology ▪ The purpose of this zone is to ensure the integrity of village areas for the benefit of local residents. ▪ In rural areas all buildings to be designed in the Javanese vernacular architectural style and the use of modern material such as tinted and reflective glazing and metal works avoided. Tourism Cluster Not applicable, varies by ▪ A detailed urban design plan indicating built form and Zone typology massing, site access and linkages as well as streetscape and open space design standards has been prepared as a key element of the KTA detailed plan. This urban design plan should inform the preparation of individual development design proposals to ensure a harmonious and integrated approach to developing the Tourism Cluster Zone.

46 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Zone Space Standards Notes ▪ Development proposals for this zone will be assessed against the Urban Design Plan to ensure that the overall development objectives of the zone are achieved. Tourism Hotel Room Size ▪ A detailed urban design plan indicating built form and Accommodation massing, site access and linkages as well as streetscape and Zone Star Grade Hotel open space design standards has been prepared as a key • Net Room Area 30m² element of the KTA detailed plan. This urban design plan • Gross Room Area 44m² should inform the preparation of individual development design proposals to ensure a harmonious and integrated Non-star Hotel approach to developing the Tourism Accommodation Zone. • Net Room Area 20m² ▪ Development proposals for this zone will be assessed against • Gross Room Area 34m² the Urban Design Plan to ensure that the overall development objectives of the zone are achieved. Parking provision Star grade hotel: 1 space per bedroom Non-star: 0.5 spaces per bedroom Conservation Varies on a case by case ▪ Heritage preservation relies on the planning framework to Zone basis dependant on the capture proposed changes that may affect an identified locational context and heritage place. uses of the Conservation ▪ All building design proposals should respect the local zone architectural style, colours and materials. ▪ Proposals should be accompanied by a detailed HIA which demonstrates that the proposed development conforms to detailed planning criteria and building design guidelines in order to preserve the heritage integrity of the location. Rural and Village tourism space ▪ The purpose of this zone is to ensure the integrity of rural and Ecotourism standards apply ecotourism areas for the benefit of local residents. ▪ In rural areas all building a to be designed in the Javanese vernacular architectural style and the use of modern material such as tinted and reflective glazing and metal works avoided. ▪ Particular emphasis is to be given to landscaping using indigenous plant species. River and Mountain and Scenic ▪ The purpose of this zone is to ensure the integrity of the Adventure Standards apply extensive river systems of the TDAs as green arteries extending through the area. ▪ Emphasis is to be placed on the use of local and natural materials such as wood, bamboo and stone ▪ This zone will cover all river courses and a 25m reserve extending from each riverbank. ▪ Particular emphasis is to be given to the provision of extensive and intense landscaping using indigenous plant species. Mountain and Space standards and ▪ Building design, choice of materials and colours should reflect Scenic equipment provision are the objective of minimising the visual impact of development to be of the highest international standards Disaster and All development proposals must demonstrate that unrestricted firefighting access can be Evacuation gained to at least one of the principal facades of all buildings and that provision has been made to international standards for fire escape and assembly areas. Fire Access Source: BYP ITMP Consultants

47 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

5. Evaluation

5.1. Evaluation criteria

Based on the key interventions and implications for each of the options for development scenarios as outlined above, and taking account of the Terms of Reference and Environmental and Social Management Framework and the aim of creating a sustainable and resilient tourism destination, we have developed a list of criteria for evaluating the different options, as follows:

1. Product Offer Diversity: likelihood of creating products which appeal to a wide diversity of market segments 2. Market Diversification: the potential for attracting different and evolving markets

3. Product:Market Match: possibilities for ensuring a good fit between expected markets and products 4. Carrying Capacity: based on minimising physical, environmental and social negative impacts 5. Clustering Opportunities: opportunities for ensuring economies of scale for infrastructure development and for compensating for weak/additional products with stronger ones 6. Socio-economic equity: potential for maximising economic benefits across a wider geographical area and accruing to as many stakeholders as possible, while minimising negative impacts such as antagonism towards visitors and acculturation. Gender issues are included in this point, although since women are able to play a full role in both the formal and informal economy, this was not felt to be a significant issue in terms of differentiating between the three scenarios. It is not possible to quantify the benefits at this stage, although socio- economic indicators will be developed at a later stage of the ITMP. 7. Environmental Impacts: opportunities for mitigating any negative environmental impacts and where possible creating environmental enhancements. It is not possible to quantify these at this stage, although environmental indicators will be developed at a later stage of the ITMP. 8. Cultural Heritage Impacts: likelihood of being able to ensure that tourism interventions support the relevance and preservation of tangible and intangible cultural heritage. It is not possible to quantify these at this stage, although cultural indicators will be developed at a later stage of the ITMP. 9. Flexibility and Resilience: ensuring stakeholder learning in order to ensure the destination continues to respond to market preferences into the future, and to ensure the ability to ‘bounce back’ quickly in the event of disasters such as earthquakes. 10. External Domestic Access: opportunities for improving access via road, railway and domestic flights. 11. External International Access: likelihood of adding international flights to YIA through market demand, especially through direct air links to short-haul and mid-haul international markets including China, India, Korea and Australia, and proximity to the international cruise-ship port of Tanjung Emas, Semarang. 12. Long-term Growth Prospects: likely opportunities for expansion across the 25-year period of the project, especially positioning ‘Java Island’ product, taking into account available land, environmental constraints and market trends.

48 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

13. Attractiveness to FDI and DDI: with strong demand and attractive projected visitor and occupancy rates, the tourism sector should be attractive to investors. Using the above criteria, an evaluation of the three development scenario options has been carried out within the Consultant team, using a simple scoring system in which the option with high potential in each category has been given ‘3’, medium potential ‘2’, and low potential ‘1’ (Table 5.1). The selection of criteria is based on the Consultant’s assessment of the most significant possible criteria.

Table 5.1: Evaluation of Options A, B, and C Criteria Option A Option B Option C 1 Product offer diversity 1 2 3

2 Market Diversification Potential 2 2 3 3 Product market match 3 3 3 4 Carrying capacity 1 2 3 5 Clustering opportunities 2 2 2 6 Socio-Economic equity 1 2 3 7 Environmental impacts 1 2 2 8 Cultural heritage impacts 2 2 3 9 Flexibility and resilience 1 2 3

10 External domestic access 2 2 3 11 External international access 2 2 3 12 Long-term expansion prospects 1 2 3 13 Attractiveness to private investment 1 2 3 SCORE 20 27 37

Rank #3 #2 #1

5.2. Conclusion

This process produced a clear result, with Option C (‘Heart of Java’) scoring the largest number of points. The principal reasons for this are that encouraging tourism expansion into a wider area of Central Java will provide higher socio-economic benefits in that it will allow for greater product diversity and therefore appeal to a wider range of markets. In doing so, it will provide a range of employment and entrepreneurial opportunities, from micro-enterprises to major investors, while generating revenues for the public sector through taxes and (to some extent) entry fees.

The elaboration of the preferred scenario will be taken forward into the next task.

49 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

6. GIS-Based Decision-Making Tool

6.1. Introduction

This section describes the development of a GIS-based spatial decision-making support system for the ITMP. The intention is that such a GIS Decision Making System (GIS DFS) will provide a tool that can be employed nationally across a range of tourism development areas and provide a robust and logical framework assessment of site suitability and growth potential.

While the objective of this task is clear, the complexity of modelling land use across hugely varying potential sites such that it can model growth as specified on a GIS-based map is challenging and highly complex.

A number of sophisticated GIS-based land use growth software modelling solutions have been developed. Perhaps the best known of these is the SLEUTH model developed by Dr. Keith C. Clarke at University of California Santa Barbara. This model integrates 2 sub-models, the Urban Growth Model (UGM) and the ‘Deltatron’ Land Use/Land Cover Model (DLM).

The SLEUTH model has been employed widely around the world at academic institutions to model growth scenarios, including the impacts of proposed planning policy changes. The disadvantage of SLEUTH is that it currently only defines built-up land and does not model intra-urban categories such as are likely to be key areas for tourism development. In addition to its modelling limitations this level of simulation modelling requires high-level computer skills and significant hardware for data processing purposes and may be so complex as to intimidate stakeholders.

Nevertheless, the SLEUTH methodology does provide a valuable insight into how the decision making process may be developed and employed systematically while engaging maximum stakeholder participation in the process. At the heart of this methodology lies the preparation and evaluation of two data sets as GIS layers, namely:

• Preparation of GIS Attraction Layer, and • Preparation of GIS Exclusion Layer

6.2. GIS Exclusion Layer

The GIS Exclusion layer is a composite representation of all available GIS layers deemed to represent areas which are not suitable for tourism development. This represents the following data sets:

• Potential Disaster Areas, including volcano, flood, landslip, tsunami and earthquake as mapped by the National Disaster Agency (Badan Nasional Penanggulangan Bencana - BNPB). We have obtained and incorporated this into the BYP ITMP GIS dataset. This data enables individual disaster risks to be plotted, and weighted, independently on the GIS Exclusion Layer. To more readily understand the level of risk, we have also incorporated a composite illustration for Kab. Magelang, set out below as Figure 6.1. As can be seen, the core of the KTA - around Borobudur Temple - is a low risk area, while risk levels become more elevated in upland areas such as the Menorah Hills.

50 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Figure 6.1: Borobudur TDA, Disaster Risk Analysis

Source: BYP ITMP GIS dataset

• Restricted land, including military installations, airfield approaches and prisons. Such land will be considered as being comprehensively excluded from the development assessment.

• Land Status, including traditional lands (tanah adat). Land status is a highly complex issue and encompasses a wide range of ownership and development conditions. Over the TDAs, there are present significant constraints to be mapped regarding land status and the availability of sufficient developable land inadequately sized parcels.

• Land Value. The identification of high value land that may have to be acquired for development or infrastructure provision may be a determining factor in assessing the feasibility of development options. Figure 6.2 below indicates land values across Kabupaten Magelang, including the Borobudur TDA. The illustration shows that land values vary between IDR 100,000 and 2 million per square metre, with the upland, including the Menoreh range, attracting the lowest valuations.

51 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Figure 6.2: Borobudur TDA, Land Valuation

Source, BYP ITMP GIS

• Agricultural Uses, as protected by the National Food Security Act, and in particular irrigated rice cultivation.

• Protected Land, including national and provincial parks, nature reserves, protected landscapes and forests as well as watersheds.

The exclusion area should also incorporate weightings agreed with stakeholders. Exclusion Zone GIS mapping can then be prepared for all TDAs and KTAs as part of the decision-making process.

Initial mapping of potential exclusion zones is set out below in Figure 6.3. This indicates that the major exclusion criteria for the Borobudur TDA are extensive agricultural areas and disaster risk, particularly from volcanos and landslips. In addition, both the Borobudur and Prambanan World Heritage sites are protected by conservation regulations which restrict development. This preliminary assessment needs to be augmented with additional mapping layers and discussed with stakeholders. Even at this juncture however it is clear the that some broad rationalisation or simplification of the analysis will be required if a broad and coherent development framework is to be identified.

52 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Figure 6.3, Borobudur TDA, Preliminary Exclusion Assessment

Source: BYP ITMP GIS Database

This preliminary analysis makes it clear that intensive land development over centuries has resulted in a complex patchwork of land ownership, status and land use conditions. This is equally true and perhaps even more complex in the Yogyakarta TDA, which is further complicated by extensive traditional land ownership issues.

In the case of rural areas, such as the Borobudur TDA, it may be necessary to consolidate isolated packages of agricultural land into development zones in order that new developments and infrastructure can be provided.

6.3. GIS Attraction Layer

The GIS Attraction Layer should be a composite analysis of all GIS captured data that represents the relative attraction to tourists and developers of potential locations remaining in a TDA after the abstraction of development exclusion zones. The GIS for the BYP ITMP will map the following parameters:

• Tourist Attractions and Potential Attractions: cultural, natural and intangible attractions, which are weighted to reflect their significance. As an example, Borobudur WHS will be heavily weighted while lesser sites will acquire a lower weighting. • Tourist Accommodation. A determinant of the attractiveness of an area will be the presence of existing or proposed tourist accommodation, hotels, guesthouses and homestays.

53 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

• Access and Connectivity. Access to attractions and the length of journey time taken to reach them are primary factors in assessing an area’s viability. Based on existing and proposed transport infrastructure linkages, the GIS decision-making system will allow an assessment of journey time from external gateway and accommodation clusters to tourist attractions.

6.4. Stakeholder Engagement, Weighting of Parameters

In order to conduct an analysis of the exclusions and attractions layer, a weighted evaluation matrix will be prepared. This will include weighting criteria which reflect the perceived importance of each parameter. Each development option will then be evaluated on the basis of their performance against that parameter. The values for each option, set out in the evaluation matrix, will then be then be compared to create a ranked order of their performance related to the criteria as a whole. The elements of this decision-making tool should be prepared with the active participation of stakeholders.

6.5. Evaluation, Presentation

From the analysis of the Exclusion and Attraction GIS layers, we propose that a summary GIS layer is prepared in order to guide and prepare a range of development scenarios in the GIS base and as a guide for the evaluation of any future tourism proposals. This GIS layer will identify three tourism development zone categories:

i. DEVELOPMENT EXCLUSION ZONE, marked as a Red Zone. For reasons which will be clearly specified, no tourism or tourism-related development should be permitted in such zones. ii. CONDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT ZONE, marked as a Yellow Zone. Tourism and tourism-related development may be permitted in these zones subject to compliance with specified development conditions. These may vary from development intensity and design conditions to detailed impact assessments. iii. TOURISM DEVELOPMENT ZONE, marked as a Green Zone. This comprises areas suitable for tourism and tourism related development.

6.6. Representation of Development Scenarios

With such complex development constraints, the challenge is to prepare a clear planning framework for tourism development over 5-year and 25-year horizons. Currently the strategic planning framework for all three TDAs is set out in the RTRW Strategic Plan, prepared by Bappeda at both provincial and local levels. An illustration of an RTRW is GIS format is set out below in Figure 6.4.

54 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Figure 6.4: RTRW Kapubaten Magelang

Source: Bappeda Magelang, BYP ITMP GIS Database

As can be seen from the illustration, the land use classifications set out in the RTRW are rather broad and crude, and as such they are not suitable to communicate the level of detail and specificity that the ITMP is tasked to deliver. We have had therefore to consider the generation of a new vehicle which will both ensure conformity with approved RTRWs and be capable of delivering highly detailed development information and conditions to local planners and developers.

We propose that as a supplement to the RTRWs, ‘tourism development’ GIS Layers are prepared to represent the strategic framework for tourism development planning in order to guide local planners and developers. We recommend that such layers are incorporated into the RTRW and RDTR documentation. In order to fully reflect the detailed content of the ITMP, the tourism layers will illustrate key access infrastructure as well as detailing zoning proposals. Dependant on the nature of the ITMP and the type of tourism proposed, the zones may then be adjusted. As an example, the development of beach tourism areas may require the identification and specification of marine recreational areas, pleasure craft anchorages, marine reserves, ‘no swim’ areas and supervised swimming areas.

For the BYP ITMP, which covers both rural and urban areas, we initially propose the identification of the following zones on plan:

• Village Tourism Zone • Eco and Nature Tourism Zone • Cultural Heritage Tourism Zone • Tourism Services Zone • Tourism Cluster • Tourism Accommodation Zones, and • Conservation Areas

55 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

These zones would be read in coordination with the underlying RTRW and RDTR and would provide specific guidance as to the nature and quantity of tourism development within the zone. Zones will contain guidance on what uses are permitted or excluded from the zone designation. Zones will be individually reference on plan, and supplementary planning briefs for each will define and specify a range of parameters, including:

• A statement of the purpose and function of that zone • A schedule of permitted and excluded uses within that zone • Inter-connectivity with adjacent tourism zones • Building design guidelines including architectural style and materials • Planning development guidelines including floor area ratios, build height and setbacks, site coverage, parking and service provision

The presentation of such planning parameters on a common GIS platform will enable implementation to be updated and monitored on an ongoing basis and ensure that the infrastructure provision recommended by the ITMP can be designed and implemented on a common mapping base.

6.7. Availability of GIS Data

The employment of a GIS-based system in land use planning assumes that all relevant data sets, as GIS layers, are readily available as ‘open source’ data whose use is not restricted. 15

Indonesia has established a national geospatial portal, www.tanahair.indonesia.go.id. The geoportal is organised at national level and connects various ministries and other institutions including provincial governments, all of which are partners of the National Geospatial Information Network (JIGN). This gateway enables users to take advantage of a number of features including data analysis, geoprocessing, geotagging, drag and drop data files with OpenView based map viewer technology. While the geoportal is a powerful and useful resource, we have found that information in its database is not comprehensive and varies widely from province to province and Kabupaten to Kabupaten. To address this situation, for the purposes of tourism development planning it is recommended that a basic array of GIS layers are made available to the planners of the area concerned. These layers are set out in the table below.

15 In the preparation of the BYP ITMP collecting GIS data from national, provincial and local sources has consumed a considerable amount of time and professional effort – this should not be necessary.

56 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Table 6.1: GIS Base Layers Layer Name Purpose Responsible Agency Administrative To identify administrative responsibilities Bappeda / Bappenas Boundaries Topography, Contours To determine landforms and enable slope analysis Bappeda / PUPR Existing Land Use To identify present land use Bappeda Land Status To determine land status BPN Land Value To determine land value BPN Proposed Land Use, To determine proposed strategic land use Bappeda RTRW Road Network To identify transport linkages and connectivity Cipta Karya Rail Network To identify transport linkages and connectivity Cipta Karya Agriculture To identity active agricultural areas and types, Ministry of Agriculture including irrigated lands Forestry To identify forest areas and forest types Ministry of Forestry Protected Areas To identify and define development exclusion areas, Ministry of Forestry including national and provincial parks as well as nature reserves Cultural Assets To identify cultural assets including UNESCO World Ministry of Education Heritage Sites and Culture Potential Disaster, To identify and define development exclusion areas BNPB Volcano Potential Disaster, To identify and define development exclusion areas BNPB Earthquake Potential Disaster, To identify and define development exclusion areas BNPB Tsunami Potential Disaster, To identify and define development exclusion areas BNPB Landslip Potential Disaster, Flood To identify and define development exclusion areas BNPB Tourist Attractions To identify all tourism attractions Kementerian Pariwisata / Dinas Pariwisata Source ITMP Consultants

6.8. Conclusion

Carrying out the steps above will mean that a comprehensive GIS-based decision-making support system can be prepared for the TDAs of the BYP ITMP, which will become a system which can be replicated across other areas of Indonesia.

57 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Appendices

Appendix 1: Supporting information for Section 1.3 (Methodology)

This section contains the supporting basis and detailed information for the assumptions shown in the Methodology section.

The international arrivals distribution split between source markets, referred to in Phase 1 of the model, is shown below:

Table A1.1: Distribution of International arrivals by source market country Country % of international visitors Netherlands 13 Malaysia 13 France 5 Japan 6 Germany 4 Australia 4 USA 4 Singapore 10 China 3 South Korea 4 Other countries 34

‘Other countries’ represent 34% of arrivals, or around 135,000 people. To provide more granularity on this, these visitors have been assigned to areas of origin using the BPS Indonesia and Directorate General of Immigration data. Applying ratios from these sources translates into the numbers shown in Table A2:

Table A1.2: Approximate numbers of visitors from ‘other’ countries Country Est. no of visitors (k) Other Europe visits 84 Other ASEAN 26 Taiwan / Hong Kong 6 India 19 MENA 1

For modelling the accommodation baseline (Phase 2 of the model), data on room supply, Average length of stay (ALOS), Room occupancy, Average guests per room, and the split between international and domestic guests by accommodation type was needed; this is summarised below. As the table highlights, the baseline data is not available in a consistent format, and has gaps in a number of areas.

58 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Table A1.3: Accommodation supply data (baseline) Supply Borobudur Prambanan City of DI Source / notes Yogyakarta Yogyakarta

Establishments

Hotel – Star-rated 13 49 90 85

Hotel - Non-star 61 598 490 1,081 rated

Homestay 245

Rooms Hotel - Star 641 0 8,562 8,786 The rooms estimate is based on establishment numbers in Hotel - Non-star 1,234 335 8,111 13,831 different accommodation size categories.

Homestay - Type 116 127 21 1,058 1,435 The Borobudur data from Horwath 2016 highlights 368 bed-spaces, Homestay - Type 2 259 46 2,303 3,124 split into Type 1 and Type 2 homestays on the basis of 1 room each in Type 1 and 2 rooms in Type 2. No data available for Prambanan or the City of Yogyakarta. These figures are an assumption based on the same ratio of homestays to hotels as in Borobudur. Length of stay

International 1.37

Star-rated 2.3 2.1

Non-star rated 2.3 2.1

Homestay

Domestic 1.28

Star-rated 1.7 2

Non-star rated 1.5 2

Homestay All 1.3

Star-rated 1.2

Non-star rated 1.3

Homestay - Type 1 1.2 No data is available on length of stays in homestays. These figures Homestay - Type 2 1.8 are an assumption.

Room Occupancy

Star-rated hotel 39% 31% 67.50% 57% Non-star rated 39% 33% 43.90% 45% accommodation Homestay - Type 1 15-25% Data relates to Kab Magelang (Based on interviews & BPS Kab. Homestay - Type 2 25%-40% Magelang). This is assumed to be the same in other areas.

16 Horwath HTL (2017) define Homestay Type 1 as Basic Businesses in Undeveloped and Remote Areas, and Type 2 as More Developed Businesses in Developing Areas (p.42)

59 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Supply Borobudur Prambanan City of DI Source / notes Yogyakarta Yogyakarta Calculations use the mid-point of the range. Guests per Room Star rated Hotel 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 The number of guests per room is required to estimate visitors. This Non-star rated 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 is based on 1.9 per room.17 accommodation Homestay - Type 1 1.9 No data available. Figures for homestays are an assumption Homestay - Type 2 1.9 based on hotels. Percentage International / domestic split International Star-rated Hotel 7.80% Non-star rated 2.20% accommodation Homestay - type 1 10% Data relates to Kab Magelang and assumed to be the same in other Homestay - type 2 40% areas. Domestic Star rated Hotel 92.20% Non-star rated 97.80% accommodation Homestay - type 1 90% Homestay - type 2 60% Sources: • Borobudur data from Horwath HTL (2016) op. cit.; BPS Kab. Magelang (2017) Kab. Magelang Dalam Angka 2017 • Prambanan data from Horwath HTL (2016) op. cit.; BPS Kab. Klaten (2018) Kabupaten Klaten Dalam Angka 2017 • Yogyakarta data from BPS Kota Yogyakarta (2018) Kota Yogyakarta Dalam Angka • DI Yogyakarta data from Horwath HTL (2016) op. cit.; BPS DI Yogyakarta (2017) DI Yogyakarta Dalam Angka

This phase also calculated the current performance of accommodation by the four different areas and different accommodation types. This included:

• Room nights – supply multiplied by occupancy • Number of visitors – Room nights divided by average length of stay multiplied by guests per room • Domestic / international visitor splits.

In Phase 3 of the model, on determining growth projections, rates of growth for the ‘Business as Usual’ scenario are shown in Table A1.4.

17 BPS Jawa Tengah (2018) Statistik Tingkat Penghunian Kamar Hotel Provinsi Jawa Tengah 2017, Semarang: Badan Pusat Statistik)

60 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Table A1.4: Growth rates for ‘Business as Usual’ scenario Business as Usual Scenario Market Category CAGR to: 2023 2028 2033 2038 2045 Domestic (staying commercial accommodation) Leisure and culture 4.0% 1.8% 1.2% 1.2% 1.2% MICE 4.0% 1.8% 1.2% 1.2% 1.2%

International 6.4% 5.3% 3.8% 2.0% 2.0% Netherlands 3.6% 2.7% 1.8% 0.9% 0.9% Malaysia 4.3% 3.3% 2.2% 1.1% 1.1% France 7.6% 5.7% 3.8% 1.9% 1.9% Japan 3.3% 2.5% 1.6% 0.8% 0.8% Germany 9.1% 6.8% 4.5% 2.3% 2.3% Australia 4.9% 3.6% 2.4% 1.2% 1.2% USA 9.7% 7.2% 4.8% 2.4% 2.4% Singapore 4.2% 3.2% 2.1% 1.1% 1.1% China 15.0% 11.3% 7.5% 3.8% 3.8% South Korea 1.6% 1.2% 0.8% 0.4% 0.4% Other Europe 7.5% 5.6% 3.7% 1.9% 1.9% Other ASEAN 3.4% 2.5% 1.7% 0.8% 0.8% India 13.8% 10.4% 6.9% 3.5% 3.5% MENA 2.4% 1.8% 1.2% 0.6% 0.6%

Domestic Day Visitor/VFR 2.0% 0.9% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%

International CAGR (to 2045) 4.1% All Visitors CAGR (to 2045) 1.6%

61 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Rates of growth for the ‘Best Case Scenario’ are shown in Table A1.5.

Table A1.5: Growth rates for Best Case Scenario growth, 2023-45 Best Case Scenario Market Category CAGR to: 2023 2028 2033 2038 2045 Domestic (staying commercial accommodation) Leisure and culture 5.0% 2.9 2.3% 2.3 2.3 MICE 5.0% 2.9 2.3% 2.3 2.3

International 7.14% 7.23% 6.39% 5.51% 3.00% Netherlands 3.64% 3.1% 2.4% 1.8% 0.9% Malaysia 4.34% 3.7% 2.8% 2.2% 1.1% France 7.65% 6.5% 5.0% 3.8% 1.9% Japan 3.27% 2.8% 2.1% 1.6% 0.8% Germany 9.07% 7.7% 5.9% 4.5% 2.3% Australia 4.86% 4.1% 3.2% 2.4% 1.2% USA 9.65% 8.2% 6.3% 4.8% 2.4% Singapore 4.21% 3.6% 2.7% 2.1% 1.1% China 20.04% 17.0% 13.0% 10.0% 5.0% South Korea 1.61% 1.4% 1.0% 0.8% 0.4% Other Europe 7.46% 6.3% 4.8% 3.7% 1.9% Other ASEAN 3.38% 2.9% 2.2% 1.7% 0.8% India 18.46% 15.7% 12.0% 9.2% 4.6% MENA 2.39% 2.0% 1.6% 1.2% 0.6%

Domestic Day Visitor/staying .5% .9% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% with friend relative

International CAGR (to 2045) 6.13% All Visitors CAGR (to 2045) 2.14%

62 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

The inputs for the analysis in Phase 4 of the model are summarised in the table below.

Table A1.6: Inputs to Phase 4 modelling Phase 4 Inputs (Both Scenarios)

INPUTS Borobudur Prambanan City of Metro Rest of Yogyakarta Yogyakarta Joglosemar Baseline Length of stay International 1.3 1.3 2.3 2.1 n/a Domestic 1.3 1.3 1.6 2 n/a Occupancy 39% 33% 56% 50% n/a 2023 % visits 7.6% 1.3% 67.2% 18.0% 6.0% % staying in hotels 89% 88% 91% 86% 86%

Length of stay International 1.4 1.4 2.3 2.1 2.1 Domestic 1.4 1.4 1.6 2 2 Occupancy 41% 36% 58% 52% 52% 2028 % visits 8.2% 1.6% 61.8% 20.3% 8.1% % staying in hotels 90% 88% 91% 87% 87%

Length of stay International 1.6 1.6 2.5 2.3 2.3 Domestic 1.6 1.6 1.8 2 2 Occupancy 48% 43% 62% 57% 57% 2033 % visits 8.6% 1.9% 59.0% 19.8% 10.8% % staying in hotels 90% 88% 91% 87% 87%

Length of stay International 2 2 2.6 2.5 2.5 Domestic 1.8 1.8 1.9 2 2 Occupancy 55% 52% 66% 62% 62% 2038 % visits 9.1% 2.1% 57.4% 19.3% 12.1% % staying in hotels 90% 88% 91% 87% 87%

Length of stay International 2.4 2.4 2.7 2.7 2.7 Domestic 2 2 2 2.1 2.1 Occupancy 62% 60% 70% 68% 68% 2045 % visits 9.9% 2.3% 56.3% 19.4% 12.1% % staying in hotels 90% 88% 91% 87% 87%

Length of stay International 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.8 Domestic 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 Occupancy 70% 70% 70% 70% 70%

The inputs for Phase 5 of the model (determining the impacts of tourism growth), are shown in Table A1.7 (average daily spend according to different market categories) and A1.8 (percentage increase in average spend over time).

63 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Table A1.7: Average Daily Spend by Market Category Spend per Day (by Market Category) Market Group Spend per day Notes/source ($US) Domestic (staying commercial accommodation) Leisure and culture 24.5 Source: Baseline Report Ch4, p44 (from Visitor Behaviour Survey) Business 30.6 No spend figures exist for domestic business markets. We have assumed spend to be similar to domestic overnight but have increased spend by an assumed 20% to reflect the typically higher spend among this market International Netherlands 69.6 Source: Baseline Report Chp.4, p22 (from BPS Malaysia 124.9 Passenger Exit Survey 2016) France 69.6 Japan 98.6 Germany 90.7 Australia 90.7 USA 149.8 Singapore 124.9 China 98.6 South Korea 98.6 Other Europe 69.6 Other ASEAN 124.9 India 98.6 MENA 175

Domestic Day Visitor/VFR 16.4 Source: Baseline Report Chp.4, p44 (from Visitor Behaviour Survey)

Available spend figures would benefit from improvements and consistent data collection by BPS. For example, they are not broken down by categories of visitor spend, which adds to the difficulty of establishing the impact of increasing tourism spend on the different associated sectors.

64 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Table A1.8: Percentage Increase in Average Spend (Real Terms per annum)

% increase in spend (Real Terms per annum) To 2023 To 2028 To 2033 To 2038 To 2045

Domestic (staying commercial accommodation) Leisure and culture 2.0% 2.0% 1.5% 1.0% 0.0% MICE 2.0% 2.0% 1.5% 1.0% 0.0%

International Netherlands 3.0% 3.0% 2.0% 1.5% 1.0% Malaysia 3.0% 3.0% 2.0% 1.5% 1.0% France 3.0% 3.0% 2.0% 1.5% 1.0% Japan 3.0% 3.0% 2.0% 1.5% 1.0% Germany 3.0% 3.0% 2.0% 1.5% 1.0% Australia 3.0% 3.0% 2.0% 1.5% 1.0% USA 3.0% 3.0% 2.0% 1.5% 1.0% Singapore 3.0% 3.0% 2.0% 1.5% 1.0% China 3.0% 3.0% 2.0% 1.5% 1.0% South Korea 3.0% 3.0% 2.0% 1.5% 1.0% Other Europe 3.0% 3.0% 2.0% 1.5% 1.0% Other ASEAN 3.0% 3.0% 2.0% 1.5% 1.0% India 3.0% 3.0% 2.0% 1.5% 1.0% MENA 3.0% 3.0% 2.0% 1.5% 1.0% Domestic Day Visitor/VFR 2.0% 2.0% 1.5% 1.0% 0.0%

65 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Appendix 2: Map of ‘Metro Yogyakarta’

The map in the figure below shows the administrative divisions covered by the area we term Metro Yogyakarta, consisting of the kecamatan in Kab. Sleman and Kab. Bantul which are situated around the periphery of the City of Yogyakarta.

66 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Appendix 3: Indexed figures for economic impacts on GRDP

Table A3.1 below exhibits the projected GRDP index growth rates under the Business As Usual scenario. Under this scenario, the GRDP index growth will be 100% constant from 2023 to 2045.

Table A3.1: Index Figures for tourism’s contribution to the C Java and DIY Economy (Business as Usual) Index Figures Business as Usual (BAU) Scenario 2018 2023 2028 2033 2038 2045 Total GRDP (in USD m) BAU 100 121 146 176 212 276 GRDP growth (yoy %) 100 100 100 100 100 Additional growth if tourism

sector is developed (yoy %) Total tourism spend staying in 100 136 184 228 271 317 the economy Direct 100 136 184 228 271 317 Domestic 100 128 170 203 239 269 International 100 167 270 382 482 624 Day visitors/VFR 100 127 146 163 176 184 Indirect 100 136 184 228 271 317 Domestic 100 128 170 203 239 269 International 100 167 270 382 482 624 Day visitors /VFR 100 127 146 163 176 184 % Share Total tourism spend staying in 100 112 126 130 128 115 the economy Direct contribution of tourism to 100 112 126 130 128 115 GRDP Domestic 100 106 116 115 113 98 International 100 138 186 217 227 226 Day visitors/VFR 100 105 101 93 83 67 Indirect & induced contribution of tourism to GRDP 100 112 126 130 128 115 Domestic 100 106 116 115 113 98 International 100 138 186 217 227 226 Day visitors/VFR 100 105 101 93 83 67

67 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Meanwhile under the Best Case scenario, the GRDP index growth will also be 100% annually from 2023 to 2045. However, there is a change of number in 2038, which is 101%. Subsequently, additional growth rates can be attained if the tourism sector is well developed, i.e. 100% in 2023, 194% in 2028, 246% in 2033, 316% in 2038, and 109% in 2045 (Table A3.2).

Table A3.2: Index Figures for tourism’s contribution to the C Java and DIY Economy (Business as Usual) Index Figures Best Case Scenario 2018 2023 2028 2033 2038 2045 Total GRDP (in USD m) 100 121 146 176 213 277 GRDP growth (yoy %) 100 100 100 101 100 Additional growth if tourism sector is developed (yoy %) 100 194 246 316 109

Total tourism spend staying in 100 142 206 278 368 465 the economy Direct 100 142 206 278 368 465 Domestic 100 136 189 239 298 361 International 100 173 309 495 743 1,030 Day visitors/VFR 100 131 163 194 225 250 Indirect 100 142 206 278 368 465 Domestic 100 136 189 239 298 361 International 100 173 309 495 743 1,030 Day visitors /VFR 100 131 163 194 225 250 % Share Total tourism spend staying in 100 118 142 158 173 168 the economy Direct contribution of tourism to 100 118 142 158 173 168 GRDP Domestic 100 113 130 136 140 130 International 100 144 212 281 349 373 Domestic stay 100 108 112 110 106 90 Indirect & induced contribution 100 118 142 158 173 168 of tourism to GRDP Domestic 100 113 130 136 140 130 International 100 144 212 281 349 373 Domestic stay 100 144 212 281 349 373

68 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

The table below documents the historical inflation rates of Central Java from 2008 to 2016 (which we assume also apply to DI Yogyakarta). The inflation rates were 9.55% in 2008, 6.88% in 2009, 2.68% in 2010, 4.24% in 2011, 7.99% in 2012, 8.22% in 2013, 2.73% in 2014, 2.36% in 2015, and 3.17% in 2016. Based on those figures, the average inflation rate during the period was 5.37%.

Table A3.3: Historical Inflation Rates for Central Java Year Inflation (yoy %) 2008 9.55% 2009 6.88% 2010 2.68% 2011 4.24% 2012 7.99% 2013 8.22% 2014 2.73% 2015 2.36% 2016 3.71% Average 5.37%

69 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Appendix 4: Indicative List of Stakeholder meetings July-October 2019

In addition to the meetings below, the team of architects working for the ITMP BYP has held numerous meetings with the Client team and other stakeholders.

Name of Institution Names of people consulted with Consultant Date (where available) Dinas PUP ESDM, D.I. Edy Suryono, Kepala Seksi Frank van Paassen 02 Juli 2019 Yogyakarta Pengembangan Air Bersih dan Penyehatan Lingkungan Permukiman Badan Koordinasi Jim Jessamine 03 Juli 2019 Penanaman Modal RIDA, Jakarta Bpk Francisco: RIDA Jim Jessamine, Rik 05 Juli 2019 Frenkel, Frank van Paassen Balai Desa Pereng; Bpk Purwanto (Kepala Desa Pereng) Sapto Siswoyo 09 Juli 2019 Prambanan Klaten Bappenas Jim Jessamine 10 Juli 2019 Paseban Candi Kembar Bpk Heru (Kepala Desa Bugisan) Sapto Siswoyo Plaosan, Prambanan Klaten Balai Desa Kebondalem Bpk Wahyu (Kepala Desa Kebondalem Kidul; Prambanan Klaten Kidul) Balai Desa Tlogo; Bpk Raksono (Kepala Desa Tlogo) 11 Juli 2019 Prambanan Klaten Balai Desa Bokoharjo, Candi Bpk Dody (Kepala Desa Bokoharjo) Barong dan Banyunibo; Prambanan Sleman Bappenas Jim Jessamine 25 Juli 2019 Cipta Karya, Magelang Bpk Santosa: Kepala Seksi Air Minum Frank van Paassen 23 Juli 2019 dan Penyehatan Lingkungan DLH Magelang Urip Rahardjo: Kepala Bidang Kebersihan dan Pertamanan DLH Bappeda Magelang Adang Ludhantono: Litbangda PDAM Magelang Bpk Heru Bappenas Jim Jessamine, 01 Agustus 2019 Janet Cochrane RIDA, Kantor Triple-A Bpk Kuswardono dan Ibu Maulidya Rik Frenkel, Frank 06 Agustus 2019 (RIDA) van Paassen, Shinta Dewi Planning Meeting re Ibu Ary Setyastuti (ex Balai Pelestarian Janet Cochrane 07 Agustus 2019 Borobudur Cagar Budaya) TP5, DI Yogyakarta Rani Sjamsinarsih: Ketua Tim Rik Frenkel, Frank 07 Agustus 2019 Pelaksana Percepatan Pembangunan van Paassen, Program Prioritas (TP5) Shinta Dewi, Umar Dhani Bappeda DI Yogyakarta Ibu Meta Grizanda Meizy Rosadi: Frank van Paassen, Kepala Subbidang Perhubungan Shinta Dewi Infrastruktur Wilayah, Energi Sumber Daya Mineral, Bidang Sarana Prasarana

70 BYP ITMP - Growth Projections and Development Scenarios

Name of Institution Names of people consulted with Consultant Date (where available) Dinas Pertanahan dan Tata Bpk Zardan: Staf seksi Pembinaan Tata Ruang, DI Yogyakarta Ruang Badan Otorita Borobudur Bisma Jatmiko Jim Jessamine, 09 Agustus 2019 Janet Cochrane Bappeda Klaten Ibu Myta, Bpk Sugeng Santoso, Sub- Frank van Paassen 13 Agustus 2019 Bagian Perencanaan dan Program PDAM Klaten Sigit Setyawan: Direktor Tehnik PDAM Klaten PUPR Klaten Kepala Bidang Penataan Ruang, Bpk Sriyanto: Kepala Seksi Perencanaan Persampahan Bappenas Jim Jessamine, 19 Agustus 2019 Janet Cochrane Borobudur Conservation Ibu Yenny Supandi, Ibu Isni Janet Cochrane 20 Agustus 2019 Office Wahyuningsih, Bpk Hari Setyawan, Bpk Panggah Ardiyansyah Kementerian Pariwisata (at Bpk Arief Yahya, Pemda Jawa Tengah, Janet Cochrane 22 Agustus 2019 BOB Purworejo) DIY, Bpk. Sugeng (Pemda Kab. Magelang), Kulon Progo, DLH Kab. Magelang. RIDA Jim Jessamine Badan Otorita Borobudur Bisma Jatmiko Jim Jessamine, 26 Agustus 2019 Janet Cochrane UNESCO (Jakarta) Christa Hardjasaputra, Rizky Fardhyan, Jim Jessamine, 27 Agustus 2019 Moe Chiba Janet Cochrane Badan Otorita Borobudur Bisma Jatmiko Jim Jessamine, 03 September Janet Cochrane 2019 Kementerian Pariwisata Jim Jessamine 11 September 2019 Bappeda Kota Yogyakarta Itmam Jim Jessamine 24 September 2019 Litbangda Magelang Adnan Ahmad Zaenuri 11 Oktober 2019 Bappeda Kota Yogyakarta Niniek Febriany 11 Oktober 2019 Badan Perencanaan Peter Mac Nulty, 14 Oktober 2019 Infrastruktur Wilayah/RIDA Anton Damanik, Adji Kusworo, Umar Dhani

71