ANNEXES ANNEX A Main Report Cikampek – Palimanan Toll Road West Java, Indonesia 0207054/08-06/AT/LP-04
FINAL REVISED
LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA CIKAMPEK – PALIMANAN TOLL ROAD WEST JAWA
MAIN REPORT
FINAL REPORT
PT. MITRAPACIFIC CONSULINDO INTERNATIONAL In Association with
Jl. Lembah Sukaresmi I No. 15, Bandung 40162, Indonesia Phone : +62-22-2034072, Fax : +62-22-2060278 E-mail : [email protected] List of Contents
LIST OF CONTENTS
LIST OF CONTENTS ...... i LIST OF FIGURES ...... iii LIST OF TABLES ...... v 1. Introduction ...... 6 2. Understanding of Project ...... 6 3. Geological and Seismic Condition ...... 8 3.1. Geological Condition...... 8 3.2. Seismic Condition ...... 9 4. General Site Condition ...... 11 4.1. Package 1 ...... 12 4.1.1. STA 107+300 – 109+550...... 12 4.1.1.1. STA 107+550 (Cibeunying River) ...... 12 4.1.1.2. Sta 109+500 – 109+900 ...... 13 4.1.2. STA 109+550 – 113+000 ...... 14 4.1.3. STA. 113+650 – 117+750 ...... 17 4.2. Package 5 & 6 ...... 19 4.2.1. STA. 178+750 – 180+500 ...... 19 4.2.2. STA. 180+250 – 181+600 ...... 22 4.2.3. STA. 187+250 - 187+700 ...... 23 4.2.4. STA. 190+650 - 191+050 ...... 26 4.2.5. STA. 197+350 - 197+850 ...... 27 4.2.6. STA. 199+950 - 200+125 ...... 28 4.2.7. STA. 202+100 - 202+950 ...... 30 4.2.8. STA. 203+100 - 204+100 ...... 31 5. Geotechnical Investigation ...... 33 5.1. Previous Soil Investigation ...... 33 5.2. Additional Soil Investigation Program ...... 33 5.3. Results of Additional Soil Investigation...... 37 5.3.1. Package 1 ...... 37 5.3.2. Package 2 ...... 38 5.3.3. Package 3 ...... 40 5.3.4. Package 4 ...... 43 5.3.5. Package 5 ...... 43 5.3.6. Package 6 ...... 43 6. Determination of Design Parameters ...... 44 7. Result of Analysis ...... 50
i List of Contents
7.1. Cut Slope and Embankment ...... 50 7.2. Problematic Soil ...... 52 8. Foundation of Bridges ...... 52 8.1. Site Condition ...... 54 9. Conclusions ...... 57 10. Recommendations ...... 57
ii List of Contents
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Cikampek Palimanan Toll Road Alignment ...... 6 Figure 2. Morphology of low land, generally used for agriculture mainly paddy fields (photo of site visit) ...... 8 Figure 3. Geological map of western part of java (N. Ratman & S. Gafoer, 1998) ...... 8 Figure 4. Zone of ground movement of Cikampek-Palimanan Toll road ...... 9 Figure 5.Java island fault...... 10 Figure 6. Seismicity of the proposed toll road area...... 10 Figure 7. Earthquake source zones in Indonesia (E. K. Kertapati et. al 1999) ...... 11 Figure 8. Situation of existing condition at STA 107+300 – 109+550 ...... 12 Figure 9. Area condition at Sta. 107+550 ...... 13 Figure 10. Plan Profile at sta.109+500 – 109+900 ...... 13 Figure 11. Bamboo forest at hill near sta. 109+700 ...... 14 Figure 12. Paddy field at lower land, STA 109+900, typical flood plains area...... 14 Figure 13. Situation of existing condition and drainage pattern surrounding the area of STA 109+550 - 113+850 ...... 15 Figure 14. Matrix plan profile, satellite photo and soil profile previous data at STA 111+500 – 111+750 ...... 16 Figure 15. Existing situation at STA 111+650 – 111+750 ...... 16 Figure 16. Situation of existing condition at STA 113+650 – 116+150 ...... 17 Figure 17. Soil profile at STA 113+500 – 114+200 based on soil investigation...... 18 Figure 18. The latest Plan & Profile at STA 113+500 – 114+200 ...... 18 Figure 19. Situation existing resident houses and warehouse, part of land acquisition for toll road ...... 19 Figure 20. Situation of existing condition at STA 178+750 – 180+250 ...... 20 Figure 21. Tension crack as seen in most of the area of paddy field...... 21 Figure 22. Existing condition of Kadipaten – Jatibarang National Road ...... 21 Figure 23. River canal at STA.179+900 ...... 21 Figure 24. Location of light railway have changed to desa road (STA. 180+165) ...... 21 Figure 25. Satellite photo at STA. 178+600 – 180+500 ...... 22 Figure 26. Plan-Profile at STA. 178+600 – 180+500 ...... 22 Figure 27. Soil profile data at STA. 178+600 – 180+500 ...... 22 Figure 28. Situation existing condition at STA 179+350 - 179+650 ...... 23 Figure 29. Situation existing condition at STA 187+250 – 187+700 ...... 24 Figure 30. Situation of existing condition at STA 187+700 – 187+750 ...... 25
iii List of Contents
Figure 31. Satellite photo at STA 186+800 – 188+400 ...... 25 Figure 32. Soil profile at STA 186+800 – 188+400 from soil investigation ...... 26 Figure 33. Situation of existing condition at 190+650 - 191+050 ...... 26 Figure 34. Soil profile at STA. 190+000 – 190+900 ...... 27 Figure 35. Situation of existing condition at 197+350 - 197+850 ...... 28 Figure 36. Situation of existing condition at 199+950 - 200+125 ...... 29 Figure 37. Soil profile at STA 199+600 – 200+350 ...... 30 Figure 38. Situation existing condition at 202+100 - 202+950 ...... 30 Figure 39. Local soil used for bricks by people...... 31 Figure 40. Situation of existing condition at 203+100 - 203+700 ...... 32 Figure 41. The existence of soft layer underlain the top layer...... 37 Figure 42. SPT & qc profiles near STA 123+300 and STA 130+000 ...... 38 Figure 43. Cone resistance,qc (MPa) profiles at package 2...... 39 Figure 44. Satellite photo & Soil Profile at location fault suspected...... 40 Figure 45. Site condition at area of fault suspected...... 40 Figure 46. Boring log at STA 133+820 – 133+850 ...... 41 Figure 47. SPT profile BH-82B compared with BH STA 138+550 ...... 42 Figure 48. Boring logs at package 6 ...... 44 Figure 49. Comparable SPT value and tip resistance of CPTE...... 45 Figure 50. Correlation of effective shear strength with N-SPT ...... 46 Figure 51. Correlation of effective shear strength with total shear strength parameters ...... 46 Figure 52. Correlation of shear strength parameter from TX-CU with TX-UU...... 47
Figure 53. Correlation of parameter (wn, c’, ’) ...... 47
Figure 54. Correlation of Ncorr vs Modulus ...... 47
Figure 55. Correlation of Ncorr vs Cc,Cr,Cs and wn ...... 48
Figure 56. Correlation of void ratio, e with other parameters(Cc,Cs,Cr,wn) ...... 49
Figure 57. Correlation of and natural water content, wn with other parameters(Cc,Cs,Cr) ...... 49 Figure 8-1. Cimanuk River ...... 54 Figure 8-2. Cilamatan River ...... 55 Figure 8-3. Cipanas River ...... 55 Figure 8-4. Cipunagara River ...... 56 Figure 8-5. Cikeruh River ...... 56
iv List of Contents
LIST OF TABLES
Table 5-1. Summary of location drilling machines...... 34 Table 5-2. Summary of CPTE tests ...... 35 Table 5-3. Summary of soil investigation volume ...... 36 Table 6-1. SPT and qc relationships ...... 45 Table 7-1. Summary of analysis cut slope and embankment (Package 1,2&3)...... 50 Table 7-2. Summary of analysis cut slope and embankment (Package 4,5&6)...... 51 Table 7-3. Ground Treatment ...... 52 Table 8-1. List of Underbridges ...... 52 Table 8-2. List of Overbridges ...... 53
v Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
Cikampek – Palimanan Toll Road West Java, Indonesia
1. Introduction Construction of Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road in West Java is to be completed in 2009. The detailed design is conducted by Mitrapacific Consulindo International (MCI) including the change of highway alignment. GEC is requested to support the geotechnical design and recommendation. A number of additional soil investigations were also conducted by GEC. This final report is intended to provide the general site information, result of soil investigations, determination of soil parameters for design and anaalysis, stability analysis of cut slope and embankment and some recommendation of bridge foundation.
2. Understanding of Project The project is located between Cikampek (Sta 91+500) and Palimanan which is about parallel to the existing railway. Figure 1 show the proposed location where the toll road will passes through some important business area including Kalijati, Subang, Kertajati, Sumberjaya and Palimanan.
Figure 1. Cikampek Palimanan Toll Road Alignment
6 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
The project is to construct a toll road from Cikampek to Palimanan which will link the transportation from Jakarta to Cirebon. The previous study of the project was carried out on behalf of Direktorat Jendral Bina Marga, Departemen Pekerjaan Umum in 1998 by a consortium of consultants consisting of: Pacific Consultants International in association with, Mott MacDonald Limited, PT Seecons, PT Indah Karya and PT Purnajasa Bima Pratama. The toll road is parallel to the railroad with total length of 116 km passing four kabupaten (Kabupaten Subang, Kabupaten Indramayu, Kabupaten Majalengka and Kabupaten Cirebon) and through 12 kecamatan. The facility includes a number of Ramp and Interchange as follows: 1. Cikopo Interchange STA 90+340 2. Kalijati Interchange STA 117+500 3. Subang Interchange STA 129+150 4. Cikedung Interchange STA 157+520 5. Kertajati Interchange STA 178+100 6. Sumberjaya Interchange STA 194+075 7. Palimanan Interchange STA 204+600
PT Seecons, one of the consortium members conducted all the soil investigation tests as well as the quarry. Total volume of soil tests in 1998 consists of 6,107 m machine boring, 208 locations of hand boring and 362 undisturbed samples. Additional to drillings, 205 mechanical CPT has been conducted and 274 test pits. For aggregates, 35 samplings were carried out to evaluate the quality. Total number of laboratory tests includes 688 soil properties, 344 Unconfined Compression Tests and 274 Triaxial UU Compression tests plus 274 consolidation tests. Due to the existence of expansive clays, a total of 46 samples were tested for their swelling potential and swelling pressures. A review of these soil test results has been provided by GEC in the previous Report and a number of soil correlations, comments and recommendation were suggested including the additional soil tests to be conducted for new locations as well as for verifications of some inconsistent data The additional geotechnical conducted by GEC was intended to review the missing locations which were required for design and also to verify some areas of the previous soil investigation in selected locations. The proposed locations and the result of additional soil investigations are presented on the following sections.
7 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
3. Geological and Seismic Condition The location of Cikampek-Palimanan toll road is in the Jakarta Low Plains which is widespread in the north of West Java. The surveys conducted by geotechnical consultant at a number of selected stations of the project site, revealed that the majority of Cikampek-Palimanan toll road is located in a low plains geomorphology, except in certain areas surrounding Palimanan. This means that it is expected the vertical alignment will be more or less having low gradient, less cutting but may be more fills depending on the design elevation. The main problem with low land area is the drainage system and it is more likely that most areas will be on residual soil, flood plains, alluvial or colluvial areas. From the geological section of West Java (N. Ratman & S. Gafoer, 1998) it is shown that the river pattern is about parallel heading toward the sea. This is typical low land characteristics, while those in hilly areas or undulating surface; the river pattern is generally dendrites.
3.1. Geological Condition In general, low land and flat morphology is used for agriculture. Hence the soils in this area, especially on the upper layer, soft soils may be dominant.Figure 2 shows typical land use along the project location where flat land is cultivated as paddy fields. From the geological map, it is shown that the project area is mainly located in Pleistocene sediments (Qps) and only small section of about 15 Km near Sumberjaya, is on river sediments. This area may be expected soft soils
Figure 2. Morphology of low land, generally used for agriculture mainly paddy fields (photo of site visit)
Figure 3. Geological map of western part of java (N. Ratman & S. Gafoer, 1998)
8 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
In report presented by Moh (1988), West Java is area of most frequent landslides. The reasons of the landslides in Java are due to three factors, the terrain or geomorphology, the soil condition and the rain intensity. It is important to identify whether the locations of the project is in close proximity with the sliding potential area.
GEC has re-plotted the toll road route in the potential sliding zone and discovered that the location of the project is safe from landslides (Figure 4). There is less possibility of placing embankment on moving ground. However, care should be taken since slides can be resulted from improper fill placement on soft soils.
Figure 4. Zone of ground movement of Cikampek-Palimanan Toll road
3.2. Seismic Condition There are some faults which have been identified in Java such as Baribis, Patahan Bumi Ayu, Cimandiri, as well as other minor fault. But data or research on these faults still minimum. Some faults that have been identified were shown at Figure 5. Red line indicates the faults breaking to bedrock, while which green color is fault which seen at surface ground.
9 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
PROPOSED TOLL ROAD
Figure 5.Java island fault. From site investigation results, the existence of fault crossing the the toll road is not detected. The geological report doest not mention fault along the highways and based on seismicity, there is no record of earthquakes epicenters except south of west Java (near Sukabumi) and deep earthquake focus at Java sea.
PROPOSED TOLL ROAD
Figure 6. Seismicity of the proposed toll road area.
10 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
This following figure shows the seismic zone proposed by the directorate of geology (E. K. Kertapati et. al. 1999). Project site is located on 0.10-0.15 g area. This maximum acceleration is in the bed rock. Hence a proper method should be used to estimate the magnification of acceleration based on soil condition. The seismic loading to be used for design is 0.15 g which is corrected based on soil condition (soft, medium or hard).
PROPOSED TOLL ROAD
Figure 7. Earthquake source zones in Indonesia (E. K. Kertapati et. al 1999)
4. General Site Condition To know general site condition of toll road, site visits have been conducted several times. First time was together with OPUS & LMS teams and the second were carried out on 18 – 21 September 2007. The first site visit aimed to identify fault location and slim piles area (which was proposed in the previous design) and is concluded the location of fault at Cilamatan River does not exist and amount of slim piles were substantially reduced or even not required.. The second site visit was conducted to verify the location of additional soil investigation and survey the access road to the location of field test. In 18 – 19 October 2007, survey was conducted at Package 1 and in 20 – 21 October 2007 at Package 5 and 6. A series of site visits were also conducted by geotechnical expert and engineers during the course of the field investigation to ascertain the design between November 2007 – January 2008. The last visit before this revised final report, was conducted at the end of March 2008.
11 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
4.1. Package 1 At Package 1, especially Package 1B, the route of survey was started near STA 107+300 and was finished at STA 117+550. The situation of existing toll road was figured as follow.
4.1.1. STA 107+300 – 109+550.
Figure 8. Situation of existing condition at STA 107+300 – 109+550
4.1.1.1. STA 107+550 (Cibeunying River) Based on long profile of highway, this area is embankment area with height of embankment 2 m approximately. Existing condition at this area is dominated by paddy field which has elevation 2.0 – 3.0 m above Cibeunying river approximately. River bed condition can be seen when survey was done. It is shown the bed of river is bedrock. However from the width of the river, river flows may be high with the risk of flooding, hence the design of elevation should reconsider the elevation of the bridge. Bearing capacity could be high when loose material is removed.
12 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
Cibeunying River
a. Paddy field along cibeunying river b. River bed condition of cibeunying river
Figure 9. Area condition at Sta. 107+550
4.1.1.2. Sta 109+500 – 109+900 At this area is location of deep cut and high fill. Location of deep cut at Sta. 109+484 that is due to approach of OB-2 Kabupaten Road. Plan profile of this area is shown below.
Figure 10. Plan Profile at sta.109+500 – 109+900 Maximum cut is 10 m depth and fill 10 m high approximately. Existing condition at this area was dominated by sub-urban plantation and bamboo forest. At fill area the land is dominated by paddy field as shown on the following figures.
13 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
Figure 11. Bamboo forest at hill near sta. 109+700
Figure 12. Paddy field at lower land, STA 109+900, typical flood plains area.
From geomorphology, it is shown that the paddy field is on sediment deposit. It is very likely that the area was a flood plain. It is anticipated that the deposit may be soft with certain thickness. For fill placement, this material shall be removed. The depth removal is considered based on the height of fill. During construction period, it is strongly recommended that the contractor shall take care of irrigation channels. In some cases the channels shall be redirected.
4.1.2. STA 109+550 – 113+000 STA 109+550 – 113+550 is covered with sub-urban plantation and STA 113+550 – 113+650 is rubber plantation which the lower land is paddy field. From visual view, surface layer soil is
14 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java dominated by red clay. At some locations, the highway cross or are located on flood plains. Figure 13 shows clearly drainage pettern of this region.
Figure 13. Situation of existing condition and drainage pattern surrounding the area of STA 109+550 - 113+850
Based on previous design, at the location crossing Ciburangrang River (STA. 111+665) was area of slim piles (111+500 – 111+750). The embankment is 15 m high and the existing soil data is
15 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java represented by one CPT only. GEC decided to substitute 2 CPTE for this location to verify soft soil thickness. Existing condition of this area is predominated by paddy field and Ciburangrang River is used to supply water to paddy crop.
Figure 14. Matrix plan profile, satellite photo and soil profile previous data at STA 111+500 – 111+750
Ciburangrang River
Figure 15. Existing situation at STA 111+650 – 111+750
At STA 111+650 – 111+750, the site is a gentle slope toward Ciburangrang river. It is possible that the top soil layer is colluvial (some banana trees could indicate this phenomena). From Figure 15, this area was flood plains, and the rain water must have influence on the formation of Ciburangrang River. Consequently, Ciburangrang River might be flooded during rains and cre must be taken on the height of embankment.
16 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
4.1.3. STA. 113+650 – 117+750 The general site condition of STA 113+650 – 116+150 is shown on Figure 16. The toll road has some crossing with Desa road (STA 114+375, STA 114+825 and STA 115+250).
Figure 16. Situation of existing condition at STA 113+650 – 116+150
At the location OB-2 Kabupaten Road (STA 113+650) with cut plan of slope 8 m deep, the site is characterized by soft to medium layer 20 m thickness approximately. GEC conducted soil test to verify the soil layers for this location at STA 113+650, STA 133+850 and STA 114+000 using boring machine and CPTE. STA 116+600 is area with embankment of 3 m high and STA 116+900 – 117+500 is area of cut with 6 – 15 m depth approximately. At the location crossing Cijambe River (STA 116+600) there is no soil investigation data.
17 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
Figure 17. Soil profile at STA 113+500 – 114+200 based on soil investigation.
Figure 18. The latest Plan & Profile at STA 113+500 – 114+200
18 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
Toll road crossing on some resident houses and warehouse at STA 117+000 are shown on the following figures.
Figure 19. Situation existing resident houses and warehouse, part of land acquisition for toll road
4.2. Package 5 & 6 At this area, the paddy fields form the majority of land use. During dry season (as shown in previous survey) a number of rivers and irrigation channels lack of water. The surrounding land tends to be dry and cracks occur on the surface. The ground surface seems to be strong enough to support heavy equipments passing by. In some places, people make use of the soil material for ceramics. This indicates that the soil has high plasticity. Several description of field situation can be seen in the following sub chapters.
4.2.1. STA. 178+750 – 180+500 A General view of the condition at STA 178+750 – 180+250 is shown on Figure 28. It is shown that at STA 179+000, the toll road will be on over bridge crossing local road and irrigation channel. One CPTE is planned near the bridge. This area is dominated by paddy fields.
19 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
Figure 20. Situation of existing condition at STA 178+750 – 180+250
Paddy fields dominate the land of this area to the boundary of Cimanuk river, where cracks are also observed (see Figure 21). The cracks are due to shrinkage of expansive soils or high moisture content. Indeed, potential swelling test needs to be conducted to recognize shrinkage magnitude of that material.
20 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
Figure 21. Tension crack as seen in most of the area of paddy field. Based on previous design, the location of toll road will be have crossing with Kadipaten-Jatibarang national road & irrigation canal (STA 179+000), river canal (STA 179+900), desa road (STA 180+165) and recommend the use of slim piles. Height of embankment in this area is 7.0 m approximately.
Figure 22. Existing condition of Kadipaten – Jatibarang National Road
Figure 23. River canal at STA.179+900 Figure 24. Location of light railway have changed to desa road (STA. 180+165)
GEC proposed to lower vertical alignment to 0.5 – 1.0 m above the flood level and national and desa road could be changed to over bridge. Light railway crossing at STA 180+165 from previous data have been changed to desa road. Matrix of satellite photo, plan-profile and soil profile of toll road at this area are shown on following figures.
21 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
Figure 25. Satellite photo at STA. 178+600 – 180+500
Figure 26. Plan-Profile at STA. 178+600 – 180+500
Figure 27. Soil profile data at STA. 178+600 – 180+500
4.2.2. STA. 180+250 – 181+600 This area is close to the abutment of Cimanuk river under bridge with abutment height of 8.0 m approximately. A few of resident houses would be acquired for toll road. Previous design at STA
22 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
181+100 – 181+200 recommend to use slim piles which the location near resident houses. It is proper to confirm the soil layers by using CPTE.
Figure 28. Situation existing condition at STA 179+350 - 179+650
4.2.3. STA. 187+250 - 187+700
Survey was done from Ciranggon River at STA. 187+750 to Jatiwangi-Wanasalam Under Bridge at STA 187+280. Water level at Ciranggon river tends to drought and water pond at some spots. It’s not seen existence of fault at around river. Some tension cracks were shown at surface paddy fields and at STA 187+700 alignment of toll road crossing to grave yard. Existing condition at this area are shown in and Figure 30.
23 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
187+100 187+100 187+100
187+700 187+700
Figure 29. Situation existing condition at STA 187+250 – 187+700
187+700
24 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
(a) Grave yard STA 187+750
(b) Ciranggon river in dry condition (c) Tension crack at paddy field
Figure 30. Situation of existing condition at STA 187+700 – 187+750
Figure 31. Satellite photo at STA 186+800 – 188+400
25 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
Figure 32. Soil profile at STA 186+800 – 188+400 from soil investigation
4.2.4. STA. 190+650 - 191+050
Figure 33. Situation of existing condition at 190+650 - 191+050
The survey was started at STA 190+650 to STA 191+650 which is the location of Cikeruh River. Most areas are for agriculture. From visual inspection, the soil condition is sufficiently firm and cracks are all over the area, mainly in soil having brown or yellowish brown color. The toll road will cross Cikeruh River at STA 191+150. The width of river is about 10 m where sand stone is
26 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java seen and is used by local people for building materials. There is about 1.5 – 3.0 m height difference between the river and existing slope and the river bank is seen as the result of soil erosion. No geological structure is detected. At STA 190+975, there is Pertamina gas pipe installed which need to be more detailed for design and protected during the construction of the toll road.
Figure 34. Soil profile at STA. 190+000 – 190+900 Based on previous design, soil profile along STA.190+000 – 190+900 is shown in Figure 34. There is inconsistency data between BH – 63 and S-25.
4.2.5. STA. 197+350 - 197+850 Field observation was started from STA 197+850 to STA 197+350. From visual inspection, the toll road will be located on relatively flat area. The soils with brown and yellowish color are generally swell and shrink. The location is close to residential area hence easily reached / accessed.
27 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
Figure 35. Situation of existing condition at 197+350 - 197+850
4.2.6. STA. 199+950 - 200+125 This area is also relatively flat. Soil has grey color to brown. Shrinkage is also a phenomenon. The road will cross through irrigation channel of 6 m wide. Ceramic is one activity found on the site. Based on previous design, STA 200+000 - 201+000 was area of slim piles. Soil profile at location STA 199+600 – 200+500 can be seen at Figure 37, which is strong (SPT > 22) the use of slim piles in this area is not suitable.
28 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
Figure 36. Situation of existing condition at 199+950 - 200+125
29 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
Figure 37. Soil profile at STA 199+600 – 200+350
4.2.7. STA. 202+100 - 202+950
Figure 38. Situation existing condition at 202+100 - 202+950
30 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
Observation started at STA 202+100 and end STA 202+950. The location passed by the proposed toll road is actually situated on relatively flat area. Soil condition at the observed area has swell and shrink behavior specially on STA 202+400 to STA 202+950. However at STA 202+100 to STA 202+400 the soil is soft and used for paddy fields. Other areas are used for manufacture of bricks as shown on Figure 39.
Figure 39. Local soil used for bricks by people.
4.2.8. STA. 203+100 - 204+100 During site survey, the weather is clear. A number of similar conditions in this area are: . The areas are relatively flat. . Most areas have swelling and shrinkage characteristic which is significant. . Soil color is yellowish brown . In some places, the local people make use of the soil for bricks. This indicates high plasticity of soils.
31 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
Figure 40. Situation of existing condition at 203+100 - 203+700
32 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
5. Geotechnical Investigation 5.1. Previous Soil Investigation Previous soil investigation at plan toll road Cikampek – Palimanan consist of 2 phase program. The first program was done at 1998 which cover along the plan of toll road and access road start from ramp Sadang (STA 90+340) to Palimanan Interchange (STA 204+600). But, referring to changed of alignment which previously the toll road start from Sadang is altered to Cikopo Interchange, the second SI program is carried out from STA 91+500 to STA 101+500 and some spot at area of river bridges and barrier gates such as: Palimanan over bridge Palimanan Barrier gates Cikopo Barrier gates Ciwaringin river bridge Cimanuk river bridge Cipunegara river bridge Based on previous SI at STA 91+500 – 101+500, the subsoil condition can be distinguished as follows: Due to the coverage of this soil investigation (10 km at package 1A) it can be predicted that there will be some variation of soil condition from one location to another. However it can be described that generally the first soil layer consisting of soft to stiff Silty Clay/Clayey Silt layer with N-value varies from 3-16. Layer thickness of this top soil usually around 11-15 meter, except for the location around DB.XX and DB.XXII where the top layer only about 6-8 meter thick, and for the location around DB.V, DB.VII, DB.XI1, DB.XIV, DB.XV, DB.XV1, and DB.XVII where the top soil can be found up to the depth of > 20 meter. The first soil layer is underlain by 2-10 meter thick stiff to very stiff Silt/Sandy Silt, or medium dense to dense Sand/Gravelly Sand. This second layer sometimes found in partially cemented form. Hard layer of mostly cemented Silt/Sand with average N-value > 32, usually found below the second layer except for the location around DB.XVII, DB.XVIII, and DB.XIX where no hard layer was found until the drilling activity terminated at the depth of 40 meter below the existing ground surface. DCPT/Sondir data show that the top layer consisting of soft (even partly very soft in S.1, S.2, S.8, S.9, S.10. S.11, and S.12) to medium, found up to the depth of 11 -15 meter, except for S.1, S.13, and S.14 where the top layer only about 6-8 meter, also for S.10 and S.12 where the top soil can be found up to the depth of about 20 meter. Two to six meter depth of medium to very stiff layer found below the top layer, followed by hard layer with qc > 200 kg/cm2. In some location such as S.2, S.3, S.4, S.5, S.8, S.9, S.10, S.11 and S.12, hard layer with qc > 200 kg/cm2, could not be reached because DCPT (Sondir) machine capacity of 2.5 tons exceeded due to very high soil friction.
5.2. Additional Soil Investigation Program To verify the soil condition and to add information on areas not covered by previous soil investigation, additional soil investigation program proposed and conducted by GEC. The locations of field tests are shown in following tables.
33 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
Table 5-1. Summary of location drilling machines.
Planned Actual STA STA No Date Depth Depth Package Planned conducted (m) (m) 1 September 27 - 29, 2007 113+650 113+650 30 28 2 September 30 - October 2, 2007 114+800 114+800 30 31 3 October 4 - 6, 2007 110+850 116+100 15 26.5 4 October 7 - 9, 2007 116+900 116+900 20 25 5 108+470 108+470 15 20.5 October 25 - 27, 2007 1 6 109+540 109+500 30 25.5 7 October 25 - 27, 2007 117+500 117+480 15 26.5 8 94+670 94+670 30 27.5 October 28 - 30, 2007 9 95+975 95+975 30 25.5 10 October 28 - 31, 2007 118+420 118+420 10 26.5 11 November 2 - 8, 2007 180+700 180+700 30 50 12 November 2 - 5, 2007 180+900 180+900 30 30 5 13 November 1 - 3, 2007 187+750 187+300 30 14 14 November 5 - 11, 2007 191+025 191+025 10 36 15 November 4 - 5, 2007 197+300 197+300 30 13.5 16 November 7 - 8 2007 200+000 200+000 20 11 6 17 November 9 - 12, 2007 205+130 204+000 20 27.5 201+170 25 18 November 7- 11, 2007 177+950 176+650 20 30 19 November 12 - 15, 2007 175+250 175+250 30 25 20 November 13 - 20, 2007 160+800 160+825 30 50 4 21 November 17 - 25, 2007 161+400 161+250 30 42 22 November 10 - 13, 2007 171+100 171+100 30 36.5 23 November 13 - 16, 2007 - 158+900 - 26 24 November 16 - 17, 2007 123+550 123+300 30 18.5 2 25 November 14 - 15, 2007 128+080 130+000 30 19 26 November 17 - 18, 2007 133+770 133+850 30 21.5 27 November 19 - 21, 2007 133+820 133+820 30 36 28 November 19 - 20, 2007 134+970 134+970 30 23 3 29 November 22 - 28, 2007 146+350 149+675 20 45 30 December 1 - 4, 2007 138+550 138+550 30 41 Total 760 858
34 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
Table 5-2. Summary of CPTE tests
No Date STA Depth (m) Package No Date STA Depth (m) Package
1 September 27, 2007 113+300(add) 2.708 53 November 5, 2007 194+140 6.072 2 September 27, 2007 113+850 18.619 54 November 5, 2007 198+700a 8.938 3 September 28, 2007 114+000 14.016 55 November 5, 2007 198+950 (add) 2.889 4 September 28, 2007 114+740 23.069 56 November 6, 2007 198+650 4.039 5 September 29, 2007 114+350 7.687 57 November 8, 2007 200+000 2.140 6 6 September 29, 2007 115+300 14.707 58 November 8, 2007 201+850 20.360 7 September 29, 2007 116+750 9.095 59 November 8, 2007 202+300 19.860 8 September 30, 2007 117+100 14.961 60 November 9, 2007 203+100 17.440 9 September 30, 2007 117+350 15.820 61 November 9, 2007 203+550 12.650 10 September 30, 2007 117+950 19.024 62 November 9, 2007 204+000 6.400 11 October 1, 2007 118+250 13.525 63 November 11, 2007 177+500 16.040 12 October 1, 2007 118+400 21.372 64 November 11, 2007 176+650 10.290 13 October 2, 2007 109+500 21.309 65 November 12, 2007 176+200 11.180 14 October 2, 2007 109+800 (add) 9.732 66 November 12, 2007 175+400 7.590 15 October 2, 2007 109+830 4.309 67 November 13, 2007 169+600 6.680 16 October 3, 2007 111+630 4.410 68 November 13, 2007 168+200 15.020 4 17 October 3, 2007 111+675 7.414 69 November 14, 2007 167+700 15.300 1 18 October 4, 2007 108 +380 20.953 70 November 14, 2007 167+100 14.870 19 October 4, 2007 111+350 13.498 71 November 14, 2007 160+800 9.730 20 October 5, 2007 107+300 9.656 72 November 15, 2007 161+400 18.990 21 October 5, 2007 107+860 6.158 73 November 15, 2007 161+250 18.140 22 October 5, 2007 106+800 4.670 74 November 16, 2007 119+100 19.990 23 October 6, 2007 106+100 5.000 75 November 17, 2007 120+400 14.960 24 October 6, 2007 104+250 3.487 76 November 17, 2007 121+800 12.190 25 October 6, 2007 104+000 10.808 77 November 17, 2007 122+800 13.900 26 October 6, 2007 103+400 10.058 78 November 18 ,2007 123+860 17.580 27 October 7, 2007 102+780 3.680 79 November 18, 2007 123+250 9.300 2 28 October 7, 2007 102+560 9.430 80 November 18, 2007 124+800 4.070 29 October 7, 2007 95+975 20.229 81 November 18, 2008 126+170 9.730 30 October 7, 2007 94+670 18.003 82 November 19, 2007 126+140 19.580 31 October 24, 2007 113+650 20.370 83 November 19, 2007 128+250 15.230 32 October 24, 2007 116+900 9.780 84 November 19, 2007 129+900 13.640 33 October 25, 2007 116+100 14.930 85 November 20, 2007 130+000 5.940 34 October 25, 2007 117+480 21.495 86 November 20, 2007 133+600 20.470 35 October 26, 2007 179+050 22.430 87 November 20, 2007 136+150 4.980 36 October 27, 2007 180+155 12.230 88 November 20, 2007 138+600 13.800 3 37 October 27, 2007 181+100 14.180 89 November 21, 2007 138+400 10.000 38 October 27, 2007 182+500 11.670 90 November 21, 2007 149+700 (add) 4.040 39 October 28, 2007 181+600 14.760 91 November 21, 2007 150+350 4.510 40 October 29, 2007 182+750 14.300 92 November 23, 2007 142+500 19.080 41 October 29, 2007 183+050 10.140 42 October 30, 2007 184+800 2.630 43 October 30, 2007 186+050 4.860 5 44 October 30, 2007 186+350 7.100 45 October 31, 2007 187+100 1.650 46 November 1, 2007 187+700 6.379 47 November 1, 2007 188+260 3.250 48 November 1, 2007 188+300 16.290 49 November 4, 2007 190+250 3.490 50 November 4, 2007 190+690 (add) 5.126 51 November 4, 2007 192+700 (add) 2.809 52 November 4, 2007 192+750 2.408
35 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
The soil investigations have been monitored during the course of the field work and some changes have been made to optimize the results. The contract or planned volume of work and the actual tests conducted is summarized in Table 5-3.
Table 5-3. Summary of soil investigation volume
Volume No Description Unit Contract Actual Field Works : 1 Mobilitation & Demobilitation 1.1 Boring Machine & Engineer ls 4 4 1.2 CPTE Machine & Engineer ls 2 2 2 Local Transportation, setting, shifting 2.1 Boring Machine location 30 30 2.2 CPTE location 84 92 3 Deep boring 3.1 * Dry Boring meter 760 858.5 3.2 * N SPT interval 1.5 m pcs 506 545 3.3 * UD Sample sample 97 71 3.4 * Core Boxes pcs 152 172 4 Electrical Cone Penetration Test (Piezocone Test) location 84 92 5 Dissipation Test location 84 34 6 Test Pit nos 20 21
Laboratory Tests: 8 Soil Properties : set 97 71 8.1 Specific gravity sample 8.2 Unit Weight sample 8.3 Water content sample 8.4 Grain size distribution sample 8.5 Atterberg limit sample
8.6 UU Triaxial Test (Undisturb Samples) sample Based on contact 8.7 Consolidation Test sample 9 CU Triaxial Test sample 30 22 10 Free Swell Test sample - 33 11 Compaction Test sample 20 20 12 Laboratory CBR (soaked) sample 20 6 13 Laboratory CBR (unsoaked) sample 20 18 14 Lab. Test for Compacted Samples set 20 20
36 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
5.3. Results of Additional Soil Investigation In general, soil investigation for this project can be divided into field investigation and laboratory testing. Field investigations are conducted by electronic cone penetration tests (CPTE) with pore pressure measurement and boring machines. Laboratory test consisted:
Index Properties (Gs, , wn, Atterberg Limit, Grain size) Triaxial Unconsolidated Undrained Test (TX-UU) Triaxial Consolidated Undrained Test (TX-CU) Consolidation Test Swelling Test Compaction Test Soaked & Unsoaked CBR Test The result of additional soil investigation shows that at most locations, generally soils stratification and consistency are not the same then the previous soil investigation. Hence the design and analysis is based on the new SI.
5.3.1. Package 1 There are 34 CPTE and 10 deep borings conducted at this area. In general, fist layer is dominated by fine grained soils such as clay, silty clay or clayey silt with 16 -18 m thickness. Hard layer usually was identified at depth 21– 28 m from ground layer which is indicated by N-SPT value > 50. This layer was dominated by coarse grained soil such as sand or gravel and cemented soils. At STA 108+470, hard layer was found at 17 m which consist of cemented coarse sand mix with angular gravel. At some location, the tip resistance of CPTE test show the existence of soft layer compared the top layer. This soft layer is started at depth 6.0 – 7.0 m until 13.0 – 17.0 m as shown in the following figure.
109+500 113+650 114+740 116+100 117+480
qc (MPa) qc (MPa) qc (MPa) qc (MPa) qc (MPa) 012345678910 012345678910 012345678910 012345678910 012345678910 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 7 7 7 7 7 8 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 10 10 10 10 10 11 11 11 11 11 12 12 12 12 12 13 13 13 13 13 14 14 14 14 14 15 15 15 15 15 16 16 16 16 16 17 17 17 17 17 18 18 18 18 18 19 19 19 19 19 20 20 20 20 20 21 21 21 21 21 22 22 22 22 22 23 23 23 23 23 24 24 24 24 24 25 25 25 25 25 26 26 26 26 26 27 27 27 27 27 28 28 28 28 28 29 29 29 29 29 30 30 30 30 30
Figure 41. The existence of soft layer underlain the top layer.
37 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
Laboratory test have conducted from both undisturb samples and test pits. Generally, soil type of samples is silty clay or silt with hight plasticity (MH) based on USCS classification Void ratio, e value tends greater then 1. Natural water content from samples at 2.00 – 2.50 m depth varies from 37 - 50 % and samples at 5.00 – 15.00 depth have 42 – 70 % approximately.
5.3.2. Package 2 12 CPTE and 2 deep boring have been conducted at this package. Profiles of SPT value at 2 location of drilling are shown in the following figure: STA 123+300 STA 123+250 STA 130+000 STA 130+000 qc (MPa) qc (MPa)
0246810 0246810 0 0
1 1
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 5
6 6
7 7
8 8
9 9
10 10
11 11
12 12
13 13
14 14
15 15
16 16
17 17
18 18
19 19
20 20
Figure 42. SPT & qc profiles near STA 123+300 and STA 130+000
Above profile show the top layer is dominated by silty clay until 8-13 m depth with medium to stiff consistency. At STA 130+000, lightly cemented sand layer was found at depth 5.0 – 9.5 m. The CPTE test at this location was terminated at this layer. The cone resistance from CPTE test near boring location show consistent results with N-SPT value as shown on the figures. Another CPTE tests at package 2 was carried out at STA 119+100, 120+400, 121+800, 122+800, 123+860, 124+800,126+140, 126+170, 128+250 and 129+900. Typical with package 1, qc profile at this area shown existence of soft layer underlain the top layer.
38 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
STA 119+100 STA 120+400 STA 121+800 STA 122+800 STA 123+860 Desa Kalijati Desa Kaliangsana Desa Batusari Desa Batusari Desa Balimbing 0246810 0246810 0246810 0246810 0246810 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 1
2 2 2 2 2
3 3 3 3 3
4 4 4 4 4
5 5 5 5 5
6 6 6 6 6
7 7 7 7 7
8 8 8 8 8
9 9 9 9 9
10 10 10 10 10
11 11 11 11 11
12 12 12 12 12
13 13 13 13 13
14 14 14 14 14
15 15 15 15 15
16 16 16 16 16
17 17 17 17 17
18 18 18 18 18
19 19 19 19 19
20 20 20 20 20 STA 124+800 STA 126+140 STA 126+170 STA 128+250 STA 129+900 Desa Balimbing Desa Cijabong Desa Cijabong Desa Sukamelang Desa Sukamelan 0246810 0246810 0246810 0246810 0246810 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 1
2 2 2 2 2
3 3 3 3 3
4 4 4 4 4
5 5 5 5 5
6 6 6 6 6
7 7 7 7 7
8 8 8 8 8
9 9 9 9 9
10 10 10 10 10 11 11 11 11 11 12 12 12 12 12 13 13 13 13 13 14 14 14 14 14 15 15 15 15 15 16 16 16 16 16 17 17 17 17 17 18 18 18 18 18 19 19 19 19 19 20 20 20 20 20
Figure 43. Cone resistance,qc (MPa) profiles at package 2.
39 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
5.3.3. Package 3 There are 5 borings and 7 CPTE tests conducted at this area. Based on main report-1998, it was identified the presences of normal fault at area STA 133+820 – 133+850 as shown below. Satellite Photo Satellite Photo Soil Profile Soil Profile
Figure 44. Satellite photo & Soil Profile at location fault suspected. Figure 45 show site condition at area of fault indicated were dominated by sugar field and at lower land (STA 133+850) is fishpond. Elevation of existing ground at STA 133+850 is lower then STA 133+850 with 4-5 m high differences.
(a) West view from STA 133+850 (b) South view from STA 133+820
Figure 45. Site condition at area of fault suspected.
40 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
The possibility of fault maybe interpreted from sloping ground near fishpond. To verify indication of fault, 2 deep boring were located at STA 133+820 and STA 133+850 have been conducted. Figure 46 show SPT value and soil profile at the location.
HOLE NO : STA 133+820 HOLE NO : STA 133+850
SOIL / ROCK SPT (Automatic Trip Hammer) DATE
Text:SYMBOL DESCRIPTION SAMPLE DEPTH (m) DEPTH
DEPTH (m) DEPTH N 0204060
1 1.00 1.50 1.50 2 3 5 2 1.95 15 15
3 Silty clay, reddish brown, 3.00 4 4 8 medium consistency, medium 3.45 15 15 plasticity SOIL / ROCK SPT 4 4.00 (Automatic Trip Hammer)
4.50 DATE 9 Text:SYMBOL DESCRIPTION SAMPLE DEPTH (m)
4.50 4 5 (m) DEPTH N 0204060 5 4.95 15 15
Silty clay, reddish brown, 6 6.00 3 5 8 1 medium consistency, medium 1.00 6.45 15 15 plasticity 1.50
, 2007 , 5 th Silty clay, light grey to red, 1.50 2 3 1.95 15 15 7 medium consistency, medium 2 plasticity Silty clay, greyish brown to 3 8 8.00 3 red, soft consistency, low 3.00 1 2
November 19 November 8.50 plasticity 3.45 15 15 7 Silty clay, brown to light grey, 8.50 3 4 9 medium consistency, medium 8.95 15 15 4 plasticity Silty clay, light grey, soft consistency, low plasticity 6 10 10.00 4 5 9 5 5.00 2 4 10.45 15 15 5.45 15 15
11 11.00 4 5 9 6 11.45 15 15 , 2007 , Sandy silt, brown mix with 6.50 th black and white, medium to 7.00 7 12 stiff consistency, low plasticity 7.00 5 6 11 Sandy Silt, light brown to 12.50 4 6 10 7.45 15 15 yellow, loose to medium 12.95 15 15 13 dense 8 November 17 November 8.50 6 8 14 8.95 15 15 14 11 9 14.00 4 7 Silty clay, brown, medium 14.45 15 15 consistency, medium plasticity
15 10 Lightly cemented sand mix Cemented sand, purple, > 50 44 with angular gravel, black, 15.50 17 33 medium dense to dense 10.50 22 12 15.90 15 10 10.95 15 15 very dense 11 16 Silty clay, light brown to light
, 2007 , grey, stiff consistency, th Silty clay, light green to yellow, medium plasticity 14 17 very stiff consistency, high 17.00 15 11 26 12 12.00 6 8 12.45 15 15 plasticity 17.45 15 15
18 13
November 20 > 50 12 18.50 26 24 Silty clay, grey to dark grey, 13.50 5 7 Cemented sand, black, very 18.93 15 13 stiff consistency, high plasticity 13.95 15 15 19 dense 14 14.50 15.00 20 15 15.00 7 7 14 20.00 23 27 > 50 15.45 15 15 20.45 15 15 Silty clay, dark grey to yellow, 16 21 hard consistency, low Silty clay, dark grey to light 17
, 2007 16.50 8 9
plasticity th grey mix with yellow, very stiff 21.50 13 20 33 16.95 15 15 17 21.95 15 15 consistency, high plasticity 22 , 2007 Silty clay, dark brown to th > 50 yellow, with trace of 18 18.00 27 23 fine sand, very stiff to stiff 20 Silty clay, dark grey mix with 18.43 15 13 23 23.00 9 11 18 November yellow, with trace of fine sand, consistency, high plasticity 23.45 15 15 hard consistency, low plasticity 19 Clayey silt, light brown to > 50 24 20 November Cemented sand with angular 19.50 30 20 yellow, very stiff to hard > 50 gravel, dark grey mix with 24.50 24 26 19.88 15 8 consistency 20 yellow, very dense 24.95 15 15 25
Figure 46. Boring log at STA 133+820 – 133+850 Above boring logs show the soil layer tends to continue and this info shall be used to clarified the fault is not present.
41 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
Another SI at package 3 is CPTE test at 133+600 (Mayingsal Sugar Plantation). Soil profile show the soil profile dominated by clay soil until penetration terminated at 20 m depth. Soil layers base on drilling log at STA 134+970 show top soil until depth 11 m is identified silty clay layer. From 0-5 m has stiff to medium consistency and at 5 – 11 m has soft to medium consistency which indicated from SPT value 3 – 5 approximately. The second layer is dominated silty sand with dense to very dense consistency until 17.5 m depth. The underlain layer is cemented sand where the drilling was terminated at depth 22.5 m. CPTE test near Kabupaten road (STA 136+150) show the hard layer were founded at 5.0 m.
(a) SPT profile BH-82B (b) BH STA 138+400
Figure 47. SPT profile BH-82B compared with BH STA 138+550
42 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
CPTE test near desa road (STA 138+400, Desa Padaasih) show the soil layer at 0.0 – 9.0 m dominated clay to silty clay soil which cone resistance ranges 2- 4 MPa. The underlain layer is sand to silty sand until depth 10 m where test terminated. Another soil investigation is located STA 138+550 using boring machine. The drilling location is more or less with BH-82B which conducted in 1998. The previous SI profile compared to boring log STA 138+550 is shown as Figure 47. For the result of these tests, they show different soil layers. In the previous test, a shallow foundation should be sufficient for previous soil investigation.
5.3.4. Package 4 11 CPTE tests and 6 deep borings were conducted at Package 4. Result of boring at STA 158+900 to STA 176+650 show the top layer is dominated by silty clay soil. The thickness of upper soil layer varies from 23 – 46 m. The bearing layer generally dominated by sand to silty sand or sand & gravel layer. At STA171+100 lenses are found at depth 3.5 – 9.0 m which dominated by silty sand soil with SPT value 20-40. Sand lenses layer is also founded at STA 176+650. The consistency of this layer is very hard which estimated from SPT value greater than 50 at depth 12.0 – 13.5 m.
5.3.5. Package 5 In general, the existing land is flat and dominated by paddy field. There are 4 boring and 18 CPTE tests conducted from STA 79+050 to 192+750. Two boring locations are located at Cimanuk River (STA 180+700 and 180+900), one at STA 187+300 near Jatiwangi-Wanasalam Kabupaten road, and the last one at STA 191+025 is close to the Cikeruh River. The top layer is dominated by silty clay but at location next to river, the upper soil is relatively thin and thickness varies from 1.0 – 4.0 m. The second layer is dominated by sandy soil. The bearing layer at STA 187+300 shallower compared to the other location. At STA 180+700, the bearing layer is identified at depth 47.0 m from existing surface and STA 180+900 at 27.0 m. At STA 191+025, the top soil is silty clay with 1.5 thickness. The second layer is gravelly sand to coarse sand until 7.5 depths with dense to very dense consistence.
5.3.6. Package 6 There are 3 boring and 10 CPTE test at package 6. The 3 boring logs can be shown as follow.
43 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
STA 197+300 STA 200+000 STA 204+000
Figure 48. Boring logs at package 6
Figure 48 shows the hard layer found at 8 – 10 m depth consisted of sandy or gravelly sand soil. The bearing layer at STA 204+000 is found 24.5 m depth which is dominated by clayey silt with weakly cementation.
6. Determination of Design Parameters In general, the soil design parameters are determined based on laboratory tests and their characteristics. However, due to limited data, the parameters can also be estimated from empirical correlations. Unfortunately, the available published data of correlations might not be applicable. Hence it is preferably to develop local correlations. CPTE test may be used to obtain continuous soil stratification, more practical and some soil parameter could be found by using empirical correlation. From additional soil test conducted by
44 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
GEC, it could be developed a series of soil parameter correlations from in-situ testing and laboratory test as shown as in the following. These correlations will be used for further analysis. In some areas, where soil drillings are close to CPTE, the results may be compared. The SPT N values are compared to the tip resistance of CPTE. It is shown that the data are consistent; hence it is convenient to use either one. The following table may be used as guidance:
Table 6-1. SPT and qc relationships
Soil Description qc/N Clays-clay to silty clay 2.5 Silt Mixtures clayey silt to silty clay 2.5 Very stiff sand to clayey sand 5 V.Stiff fine grained 3.5 2 qc in kg/cm
116+100 116+100 113+650 113+650
N-SPT qc (kg/cm2) N-SPT qc (kg/cm2) 0 102030405060 0 25 50 75 100 125 0 102030405060 0255075100125 0 0 0 0 1 7 1 1 10 1 2 2 2 2 7 13 3 3 3 3 4 12 4 4 12 4 5 5 5 5 11 13 6 6 6 6 7 9 7 7 7 5 8 8 8 8 6 4 9 9 9 9 10 10 10 10 5 7 11 11 11 11 12 5 12 12 6 12 13 13 13 13 14 8 14 14 7 14 15 15 15 15 18 13 16 16 16 16 17 25 17 17 6 17 18 18 18 18 28 8 19 19 19 19 20 19 20 20 15 20 21 21 21 21 22 25 22 22 17 22 23 23 23 23 60 60 24 24 24 24 25 60 25 25 60 25 26 26 26 26 60 60 27 27 27 27 28 28 28 60 28 29 29 29 29 30 30 30 30
Figure 49. Comparable SPT value and tip resistance of CPTE. It has to be noted that these correlations are not the same as those proposed by Robertson et al (1986). The reason could be that, the soils in the project are of volcanic origin and residual soils. Wesley (1974) worked in a number of projects in west Java and found out that the residual soil has different characteristics than those written in most text books. Figure 50 shows the correlations of SPT N values and the soil shear strength. As indicated by Wesley (1974) the shear strength ratios and the friction angle of residual soils and red clays are much higher than indicated in the textbook. Friction angle as high as 45 degrees may be obtained.
45 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
For the purpose of soil parameter determination, lower boundary is suggested. As shown in the figure, c’ and ’ are defined by using lower boundary.
TX - CU vs N' TX - CU vs N' 45 1.8 40 1.6 35 1.4 1.2 30 '
v 1 25 ' 0.8 20 c' / 0.6 15
0.4 10 0.2 5 0 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 N corrected N corrected
Figure 50. Correlation of effective shear strength with N-SPT
NCorrected at Figure 50 is defined by corrected N-SPT values using the formula :
1.7 2 NCorrected = CN x N where CN = where V ' in kg/cm . 0.7 V '
where CN is correction for overburden. Figure 51 shows the correlation of effective and total shear strength based on TX-CU Tests. These parameters are used for long term and short term stability analysis. It is shown that there is close relationship between total stress parameters and effective stress parameters. The effective cohesion values may be obtained by multiplying the total stress cohesion by a factor of 0.9 and the effective friction angle may be obtained by multiplying the total friction angle by a factor of 1.3. Again in this example, the text book says that for normally consolidated soils, the effective cohesion should be close to zero. However, the term normally consolidated can not be applied for residual soils.
TX - CU TX - CU 2.0 45 1.8 40 1.6 35 1.4 30
' 1.2
v 25 ' 1.0 20 c' / 0.8 15 0.6 10 0.4 5 0.2 0.0 0 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 c / v '
Figure 51. Correlation of effective shear strength with total shear strength parameters
Due to limited TX-CU tests, it is expected that the long term soil parameters may be correlated with the results of TX UU tests. Hence the soil parameters for both tests are useful. The plot is shown to be scattered, however the trend is acceptable.
46 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
TX - UU vs TX - CU TX - UU vs TX - CU 45 1.8 40 1.6 35 1.4 30 1.2
' 25 v
1 ' 0.8 20 c' / 0.6 15 0.4 10
0.2 5
0 0 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 c / ' u v u
Figure 52. Correlation of shear strength parameter from TX-CU with TX-UU.
In general there is relationship of between cohesion and friction angle obtained from TX-UU and those resulted from TX-CU Other useful parameter correlations may be derived from water content as shown on Figure 53. As water content increases, the shear strength decreases. In fact this could be related to the higher saturation or higher plasticity of the soils
wn (%) vs TX - CU (Effective) wn (%) vs TX - CU (Effective) 2.0 45 1.8 40 1.6 35 1.4 30
' 1.2
v 25 '
1.0 20 c' / 0.8 15 0.6 0.4 10 0.2 5 0.0 0 0 10203040506070 0 10203040506070 Natural water Content, % Natural water Content, %
Figure 53. Correlation of parameter (wn, c’, ’) It is interesting to correlate the N-SPT with the compressibility characteristics of the soil. The plot is shown in the following figures.
TX - CU vs N' TX - CU vs N'
700 700
600 600
500 500 ' ' v 400 400 v / 50 300 E / 300 E
200 200
100 100
0 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 N corrected Ncorrected
Figure 54. Correlation of Ncorr vs Modulus
47 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
Figure 54 shows correlations of corrected N-SPT with the moduli resulted from TX-CU which is normalised with effective stress.
E50 can be used for larger strains such as in the case of embankment. However for small strains these moduli such is in cut, the moduli may be twice than that for high strains. For small strains the ratio Enorm and Ncorr is 15 and for large strain, the ratio E50norm and Ncorr is 30 (or twice that of large strains). The soil compressibility can also be approximated by the results of oedometer or consolidation test. In this case the compressibility is measured as constrained modulus or compression index (Cc). It is nicely shown that as the SPT N value increases, the compressibility decreases. Other phenomenon of interest is that there is a unique relationship of SPT N values and water content. Other parameter of interest is void ratio. It is clear that the void ratio determine the compressibility. However, the void ratio is not normally available except if sample is taken. SPT N values are more readily available, and if CPT is available despite of SPT, then it can be also correlated indirectly through SPT-N
NCorrected vs Cc NCorrected vs Cc/Cr
0.8 9 0.7 8 7 0.6 6 0.5 5
Cc 0.4
Cc/Cr 4 0.3 3 0.2 2 0.1 1 0 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
NCorrected NCorrected
Ncorrected vs Cc/Cs NCorrected vs wn (%)
12 90 80 10 70 8 60 50 6
Cc/Cs 40 4 30 20 2 10 Natural water content, wn (%) 0 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
NCorrected NCorrected
Figure 55. Correlation of Ncorr vs Cc,Cr,Cs and wn
48 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
e vs Cc e vs Cc/Cr
0.8 9 0.7 8
0.6 7 6 0.5 5
Cc 0.4
Cc/Cr 4 0.3 3 0.2 2 0.1 1 0 0 00.511.522.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 Void ratio, e Void ratio, e
e vs Cc/Cs e vs wn (%)
14 90
12 80 70 10 60 8 50
Cc/Cs 6 40 30 4 20 2 10 Natural water content, w (%) w content, water Natural 0 0 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 Void ratio, e Void ratio, e
Figure 56. Correlation of void ratio, e with other parameters(Cc,Cs,Cr,wn)
It is very common to correlate water content and the soil compressibility. The following figures show the dependency of soil compressibility on water content (wn).
Natural water content, wn (%) vs Cc Natural water content, wn (%) vs Cc/Cr Natural water content, wn (%) vs Cc/Cs
0.8 10 10 y = 0.0075x y = 0.1136x 0.7 9 9 8 8 0.6 7 7 0.5 6 6
Cc 0.4 5 5 Cc/Cr Cc/Cs 0.3 4 4 3 3 0.2 2 2 0.1 1 1 0 0 0 0 102030405060708090 0 102030405060708090 0 102030405060708090 Natural water content, wn (%) Natural water content, wn (%) Natural water content, wn (%)
Figure 57. Correlation of and natural water content, wn with other parameters(Cc,Cs,Cr)
49 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
7. Result of Analysis 7.1. Cut Slope and Embankment Summary of analysis cut slope and embankment can be shows in the following table:
Table 7-1. Summary of analysis cut slope and embankment (Package 1,2&3).
Remarks with slope cover slope with Lower slope 1H :1V slope Lower 1H :1V slope Lower Lower slope 1H :1V slope Lower 1H :1V slope Lower Upper Slope 1H : 1V Upper 1H Slope Upper slope 1.5H :1V Upper slope slope, toe and medianslope, cover with horizontal drain installation horizontal with Long Term embankment (m) embankment Deformation at top of Deformation Term Long embankment Deformation at baseof Term Short Bishop Seismic Load
M - P 1.2891.331 1.2861.616 1.3281.513 0.35 1.598 1.513 0.20 0.60 0.32 0.25 0.15 Seismic Load Stress Effective 2.328 2.332 1.372 1.368 Total Stress 2.299 2.2964.366 2.687 4.370 5.131 2.689 5.132 1.557 2.265 1.560 2.268 0.50 0.78 0.28 2.964 2.965 3.968 3.977 2.063 2.064 p Bisho Seismic Load Load Seismic Factor of Safety of Factor - CUT SLOPE EMBANKMENT P Existing GWLExisting Existing GWL M - P Bishop M - P Bishop Seismic Load M Load Seismic Rainfall Stress Effective Surface GWL Surface Total Stress Stress 1.631 1.424 Effective Existing GWL Existing Total Stress (m) Height of Height Embankment Depth of / Cut Cut / Embankment STA 95+975 Left95+975 Right95+975 Embankment102+560 Embankment102+780 6.00 Cut Embankment103+400 Cut 9.00 4.073 6.00 4.078 1.591 5.00 1.571 2.969 5.00 3.276 3.008 3.044 3.209 3.028 2.776 3.244 2.552 2.348 3.627 3.648 2.263 2.335 2.085 2.105 4.481 4.474 2.213 4.697 2.214 2.390 4.653 2.389 2.806 1.519 2.801 1.520 104+250 Left104+250 Right 104+250 Left106+800 Embankment Embankment Right 106+800 Left108+400 6.00 Embankment 3.00 Embankment 4.00 8.00 Cut 4.371 2.943 4.582 3.271 7.00 2.659 2.389 2.180 1.849 3.230 1.865 1.812 3.118 1.775 3.119 1.775 3.466 2.133 3.463 2.133 1.828 1.867 1.828 1.867 0.38 0.63 0.25 111+675 Embankment111+675 Cut113+650 14.00 Left113+850 Right113+850 1.459 Left114+800 1.569 8.00 Cut 2.601 Cut 2.231 Cut 1.686 8.00 1.899 5.00 1.884 2.024 10.00 2.853 2.089 1.864 2.703 1.444 1.611 2.413 1.519 1.776 2.570 1.789 2.336 2.981 1.110 1.827 1.108 1.500 1.829 1.659 1.100 1.662 1.787 1.100 1.786 1.100 1.100 0.85 0.96 0.11 114+800Right Cut Right117+350 Left119+100 10.00 Right119+100 1.971 Left120+400 Cut 2.098 Right120+400 Cut 1.598 Left121+800 Cut 1.562 Right121+800 10.00 Cut 1.757 Cut 2.035 9.00 9.00 1.985 Cut 1.374 Cut 2.120 10.00 1.778 2.851 2.233 8.00 2.140 2.764 1.762 1.367 1.808 10.00 2.612 2.359 1.531 1.730 7.00 1.540 1.555 2.001 1.546 1.534 1.746 1.621 1.645 1.532 1.306 2.123 1.304 2.130 1.295 1.144 1.117 1.289 1.196 1.143 1.131 1.190 115+300 Embankment115+300 7.00 Embankment122+800 Left123+250 12.00 Right123+250 Left123+860 1.956 Right123+860 2.059 Cut124+800 Cut Left129+900 Cut Right129+900 Cut 8.00 Left133+850 Embankment 8.00 Embankment Embankment 1.551 7.00 11.00 1.677 Embankment 1.566 8.00 7.00 11.00 1.490 1.724 1.318 3.529 1.581 1.334 7.00 1.577 1.559 3.679 1.457 1.458 1.131 1.195 1.467 1.216 1.509 1.129 1.120 1.786 1.194 1.787 1.215 1.140 1.100 1.100 0.70 2.501 2.889 1.534 2.500 2.886 1.537 3.001 1.10 3.121 1.859 2.999 3.210 1.859 1.360 1.901 1.100 0.40 1.360 1.897 1.100 0.72 0.47 1.12 0.58 0.40 0.11 116+100 Left116+100 Right116+100 Left117+350 Cut Cut Cut 5.00 8.00 3.631 11.00 2.160 3.446 2.205 2.117 3.255 1.776 1.971 2.954 1.700 1.806 1.921 2.251 2.820 1.632 1.588 2.824 1.532 1.587 Right133+850 Left138+600 Embankment Right138+600 Embankment 7.00 Embankment 6.00 6.00 1.794 1.611 1.899 1.756 3 1 2 1 6 2 3 4 7 8 9 5 19 20 22 23 24 No Package 11 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 21
50 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
Table 7-2. Summary of analysis cut slope and embankment (Package 4,5&6). Remarks with slope cover and soil nailing soil and slope cover with 0.40 Long Term embankment (m) embankment Deformation at top of Deformation Term Long embankment 0.40 Deformation at baseof Term Short Bishop Seismic Load
M - P Seismic Load Stress Effective Total Stress 5.769 5.742 6.086 6.025 3.353 3.345 0.65 0.92 0.27 2.039 2.0412.137 2.212 2.138 2.212 2.309 2.3102.708 1.256 2.7082.831 1.317 3.081 2.8322.027 1.250 3.081 3.105 1.8762.154 1.311 3.104 2.144 1.728 1.583 2.145 2.497 1.434 1.950 1.582 1.299 0.40 1.432 1.530 0.42 1.301 1.188 0.80 0.65 0.92 0.40 0.38 0.27 0.40 p Bisho Seismic Load Load Seismic Factor of Safety of Factor - CUT SLOPE EMBANKMENT P Existing GWLExisting Existing GWL M - P Bishop M - P Bishop Seismic Load M Load Seismic Rainfall Stress Effective Surface GWL Surface Total 3.292 3.0146.034 4.778 2.946 4.388 2.948 4.397 Stress Stress Effective Existing GWL Existing Total 3.731 3.634 6.561 5.595 1.564 1.741 2.779 2.262 2.973 2.973 Stress (m) Height of Height Embankment Depth of / Cut Cut / Embankment STA 160+800 Left160+800 Cut 9.00 160+800 Right160+800 Left161+250 Right161+250 Cut175+400 Left176+200 Cut Cut Right176+200 4.00 Embankment Embankment Embankment 7.00 2.758 2.495 2.807 2.424 2.392 2.300 1.588 1.612 2.535 2.360 2.541 2.360 177+500 Left177+500 Right177+500 Left179+050 Embankment Embankment Right179+050 Left180+155 Embankment Embankment Right180+155 10.00 Left181+100 Embankment Embankment Right181+100 1.687 6.00 Left 1.754181+600 Embankment Embankment Right181+600 1.941 9.00 Left182+500 2.002 Embankment Embankment Right182+500 6.00 Left182+750 Embankment Embankment Right182+750 3.245 9.00 Left183+050 Embankment 3.386 Embankment Right183+050 3.629 2.187 9.00 Left187+300 3.319 Embankment 2.266 Embankment Right187+300 2.160 1.524 6.00 Left190+690 2.459 Embankment 1.671 Embankment Right190+690 1.616 2.710 10.00 Left198+700 1.758 Embankment 2.858 Embankment Right198+700 1.655 2.428 8.00 1.787198+950 2.483 Embankment Embankment Left200+000 1.678 3.821 8.00 1.680 Right 200+000 1.829 3.981 1.638 Embankment Left201+850 3.794 Embankment 2.281 Embankment 1.742 Right 1.771201+850 3.953 2.243 9.00 1.748 1.659 Embankment 5.00202+300 Embankment 4.422 Embankment 2.116 Left203+550 4.824 1.327 1.354 3.875 10.00 9.00 1.843 1.446 3.634 1.408 1.169 1.384 Embankment 1.375 2.268 1.605 1.485 1.404 1.676 2.268 0.70 2.643 1.166 2.553 1.454 1.867 2.643 1.488 2.553 1.867 0.92 2.799 1.885 2.250 2.376 1.388 2.845 2.799 1.885 2.249 2.378 2.772 2.270 2.542 2.695 1.664 2.170 1.385 2.157 2.270 2.542 2.698 2.171 0.22 2.798 0.45 2.226 2.453 1.661 2.394 1.449 2.126 1.612 2.799 2.227 2.453 2.394 2.511 2.505 0.65 0.65 2.259 1.445 1.700 2.240 1.609 1.454 2.513 2.505 2.259 2.238 2.537 0.70 1.05 2.248 1.701 2.420 1.508 1.545 3.009 1.452 2.539 2.250 2.419 3.010 2.459 0.20 1.00 0.23 4.636 1.505 1.543 3.717 1.528 1.460 2.459 4.619 3.717 1.500 3.771 0.90 5.211 0.40 0.25 1.500 1.526 1.416 3.768 1.457 1.676 5.212 1.555 1.590 1.501 1.764 4.048 1.05 1.560 1.503 0.30 1.594 0.32 1.764 1.411 4.029 2.821 1.670 1.651 1.725 2.065 1.533 1.376 2.416 1.656 1.727 0.02 1.535 0.45 0.48 2.065 2.791 1.645 1.364 1.114 1.398 1.145 2.582 2.408 0.15 1.648 0.60 2.582 0.42 1.367 1.114 0.28 1.117 2.749 1.142 0.16 2.749 0.52 0.80 0.33 1.118 1.558 0.15 1.20 1.557 0.10 0.05 0.48 0.40 0.62 0.40 0.4 0.14 5 6 4 27 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 28 29 No Package 25 26 37
51 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
7.2. Problematic Soil On particular locations are found soft soil and expansive soil which need to treated or removed before the embankments are laid. Table 7-3 shows location of problematic soils and the proposed treatment. Expansive soil may be treated by lime-soil mixture or replacement of the foundation material with lime-stone. Quality control is especially important during pulverization, mixing and compaction during construction.
Table 7-3. Ground Treatment
PROPOSED CIKAMPEK-PALIMAN TOLL ROAD
SCHEDULE OF GROUND TREATMENT WORKS
Details of Ground Treatment Max. Emb. Type of Proposed STA Length Type 1Type 2 Type 3 Type 4 No. Package Height Ref. SI Ground Additional Remaks (m) DEGL HS RLSR (m) Treatment SI (New) From To (m) (m) (Month) (m) (m) (Month) 1 103+200 103+850 650 9 CPTe 103+400 1 2 - - - - - 21 104+100 104+500 400 6 CPTe 104+250 1 1 Replace only at paddy field 3 111+500 111+725 225 14 CPTe 111+675 1 3 - - - - - Replace only at paddy field 4 122+750 122+900 150 12 CPTe 122+800 4 - - - - 2 5 2 124+275 125+500 1225 8 CPTe 124+800 1 2 - - - - - Replace only at paddy field 6 129+475 130+100 625 11 CPTe 129+900 1 1 - - - - - Replace only at paddy field 7 133+675 134+200 525 8 Drilling log 133+850 1+4 1.5 ----3 3 8 138+450 138+950 500 3 CPTe 138+600 1 1 ----- 9 166+900 167+300 400 3 CPTe 167+100 1 1 ----- 10 167+550 168+150 600 3 CPTe 167+700 1 0.5 ----- 11 4 174+850 175+600 750 10 CPTe 175+400 1 1.25 ----- 12 176+100 176+800 700 8 CPTe 176+200 4 - ----2 13 176+150 176+825 675 8 CPTe 176+650 1 0.5 ----- 14 177+350 178+000 650 8 CPTe 177+500 1+4 0.5 ---- 15 179+650 180+500 850 6 CPTe 180+155 4 - ----2 5 16 181+450 181+650 200 7 CPTe 181+600 4 - ----1 17 181+750 183+400 1650 9 CPTe 182+500 1 2 ----- 18 198+550 199+025 475 7 CPTe 198+700 1 0.5 ----- 19 199+600 201+150 1550 14 CPTe 200+000 1 1.25 ---- 20 201+150 202+200 1050 11 CPTe 201+850 4 -- --2 6 21 202+200 202+650 450 9 CPTe 202+300 4 -- --2 22 202+850 203+450 600 5 CPTe 203+100 1 2 ----- 23 203+300 203+750 400 9 CPTe 203+550 1 2.5 -----
Note: 1) Type 1 ground treatment refers to soil removal and replacement 2) Type 2 ground treatment refers to surcharging 3) Type 3 ground treatment refers to prefabricated vertical drain 4) Type 4 ground treatment refers to after end of embankment construction, the pavement construction wait until a few month
5) DEGL denotes excavation depth below existing ground level. 6) HS denotes surcharge height
8. Foundation of Bridges For foundation of bridges, alternatives of shallow foundation, driven piles and bored piles may be considered, depending on soil conditions and accessibility to site. Some piers must be constructed in the mid of the river, hence the method could be by driving pile through pontoon or by constructing cofferdam. Scouring may be an issue.Table 8-1 and Table 8-2 shows the bridges location and the spans.
Table 8-1. List of Underbridges Sta. No. Pack Name From - To 1 1 Cikopo 91+994 - 92+024 2 1 Railway 92+223 - 92+293 3 1 Ciherang 94+958 - 95+050 4 1 Cilandak 99+017 - 99+042 5 1 Cilamaya 101+854 - 101+946
52 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
Sta. No. Pack Name From - To 6 2 Cibodas 120+578 - 120+680 7 2 Ciasem 123+385 - 123+628 8 2 Desa Road 124+831 - 9 3 Cilamatan 138+767 - 138+859 10 3 Cipunagara 142+121 - 142+430 11 3 Cikandung 146+254 - 146+346 12 4 Cipanas 161+438 - 161+500 13 4 Cidudut 175+164 - 14 5 National Road 178+976 - 179+927 15 5 Cimanuk 180+651 - 180+972 16 5 Kabupaten Road 182+487 - 182+512 17 5 Cilutung 184+889 - 185+017 18 5 Jatiwangi-Wanusalam 187+268 - 187+393 19 5 Ciranggon 187+727 - 187+776 20 5 Loji-Ligung 190+660 - 190+685 21 5 Cikeruh 191+011 - 191+111 22 6 Ciwangi 194+852 - 23 6 Cikadondong 199+927 - 24 6 Prapatan Budur 200+050 - 25 6 Kabupaten Road 2 200+716 - 26 6 Ciwaringin 201+052 - 201+247 27 6 Desa Road 2 201+552 - 201+547 28 6 Jomin Road 202+123 - 29 6 Winomg 205+231 -
Table 8-2. List of Overbridges
No. Pack. Name Sta No. Pack. Name Sta
1 1 Cikampek I. C 92+920 33 3 Kabupaten Road 139+840 2 1 Kabupaten Road 93+250 34 3 Desa Road 140+860 3 1 Desa Road 94+658 35 3 Kabupaten Road 142+736 4 1 Desa Road 95+975 36 3 Desa Track 144+800 5 1 Kabupaten Road 97+702 37 3 Desa Road 147+863 6 1 Desa Track 98+500 38 3 Kabupaten Road 149+714 7 1 Desa Track 100+000 39 3 Desa Road 153+453 8 1 Kabupaten Road 101+100 40 3 Desa Road 154+250 9 1 Kabupaten Road 103+985 41 3 Desa Road 155+480 10 1 Desa Road 106+165 42 3 IC Bridge 157+500 11 1 Kabupaten Road 107+195 43 4 OB1588 158+888 12 1 Kabupaten Road 109+484 44 4 OB1608 160+845 13 1 Kabupaten Road 113+631 45 4 OB1635 163+536 14 1 Desa Road 114+800 46 4 OB1676 167+675 15 1 Desa Road 116+072 47 4 OB1710 171+060 16 1 Kabupaten Road 116+946 48 4 OB1720 172+021 17 1 Kalijati I/C Ramp 117+520 49 4 OB1728 172+851 18 2 Kabupaten Road 119+070 50 4 OB1736 173+612 19 2 Desa Road 121+100 51 5 Desa Road 181+100 20 2 Desa Track 121+825 52 5 Kabupaten Road 189+070 21 2 Desa Track 122+585 53 5 Desa Road 189+599
53 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
No. Pack. Name Sta No. Pack. Name Sta 22 2 Kabupaten Road 123+855 54 5 Kabupaten Road 192+712 23 2 Kabupaten Road 126+180 55 6 OB1941 194+100 24 2 Kabupaten Road 128+286 56 6 OB1952 195+289 25 2 I/C 129+125 57 6 OB1972 197+289 26 3 Provinsi Road 130+012 58 6 OB1981 198+191 27 3 Desa Road 131+575 59 6 OB1990 199+000 28 3 Desa Road 133+566 60 6 OB1994 199+446 29 3 Desa Road 134+735 61 6 OB2057 205+776 30 3 Kabupaten Road 136+135 62 6 OB2064 206+418 31 3 Desa Road 138+433 63 6 OB 2073 207+325 32 3 Desa Road 139+360
8.1. Site Condition A number of rivers where bridges are to be constructed were inspected. Among the most important rivers include Cimanuk, Cilamatan, Cipanas, Cipunagara and Cikeruh river. Figure 8-1 shows Cimanuk River, which is the longest river crossing. The river is wide and used by people for transportation. At the position of abutment scouring is significant as seen from the erosion on the river bank. Caution is to be warned to the contractor due to difficulty in driving the piles. The use of pontoon for the driving equipment is necessary. Scour protection shall be provided.
Figure 8-1. Cimanuk River
Most of bridge site currently have no access road like Cilamatan River (Figure 8-2). This river is not a big river, however there is indication that the surrounding area seems to be moving ground. Hence the bridge engineer should consider the actual load due to lateral soil pressure.
54 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
Figure 8-2. Cilamatan River
Figure 8-3 shows Cipanas River. The river bank shows some soil that is originated from the upper layer that moves forward the river. Particular interest is the conddition of Cipanas River where the soil is dominated by silty soil causing erosions and land slides. Figure 8-3 shows the nearby site where sliding has just occurred.
Figure 8-3. Cipanas River
Figure 8-4 shows the site condition where the river basically has flat topography. The dominations of sand is clear and people is mining the sand. During the second site visit, there were some spots which was excavated below water. This situations may be dangerous to the foundations of the bridge.
55 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
Figure 8-4. Cipunagara River
Figure 8-5 shows Cikeruh River. From its name, Cikeruh (mean muddy), this river may be mixed with eroded material from the upstream side.
Figure 8-5. Cikeruh River
56 Final Report Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road, West Java
9. Conclusions . In most areas, the soil is dominated by tropical residual soil, and in some areas colluvial may be found on upper layer. In the flat land, the soil is characterized as flood plains which are mostly used by the people as paddy fields . The characteristics of residual soil do not follow those published in text book, hence, the use of soil parameters need attention. These soils are ussually unsaturated and unsaturated soil parameters may be more suitable for design purposes. . Local correlations of soil properties and mechanical characteristics have been established and may be used for determination of design soil parameters. These correlations are used in site where data from laboratory tests are limited. . Analysis for cut and embankment of specific sites are presented. Rain induced slope stability analysis is important and the report accommodate this issue. . In some cases, wetting of slope surface may cause degradation in the stability; however the risk is only surface failure. Widening of the berm may be considered. . In some locations, the soils may need treatment such as soft soils and the high potential swelling soils. The expansive soil zone is identified at STA 160+825~176+650 approximately.
10. Recommendations . In general cut slope with H : V = 1 : 1 is safe. Due to the need of fill material, the slope may be reduced at inclination of less than that. In general embankment slope with H : V = 2 : 1 is sufficient, however problems may arise due to degradation of soil strength in soaked condition. Typical result of laboratory testings in borrow material show that the soil strength could be degraded where unsoaked CBR of 5 % is reduced to 1.8% and 15% down to 1.5%, which is very significant. The selection of borrow materials shall be strict during construction. As a rule, laboratory tests should be carried out to investigate the suitability of material for every 5000 – 10000 cubic meters. . Expansive soil may be treated by lime-soil mixture or replacement of the foundation material with lime-stone. Quality control is especially important during pulverization, mixing and compaction during construction. . For bridge foundations, shallow foundation, driven piles and bored piles may be attempted. The factors that should be considered are soil conditions and accessibility.
Bandung, June 2008
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANT PT. MITRAPACIFIC CONSULINDO INTERNATIONAL
Prof. Paulus P. Rahardjo, Ph. D YAMAKAWA, Nobuwaka Director General Manager
57 ANNEX B Alternative Route Study
ANNEX C Public Consultation and Disclosure Plan REPORT
PT. Lintas Marga Sedaya
The proposed Cikampek- Palimanan toll road project
Public Consultation and Disclosure Plan
April 2012
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Project Overview
PT Lintas Marga Sedaya (LMS), in cooperation with the Toll Road Regulatory Agency (BPJT) and the Department of Public Works, is planning to build a 116.4 km section of toll road, from Cikampek (Cikopo) to Palimanan (the Toll Road Project or Project). While the Toll Road is a government project, LMS has invested in the project and is responsible for all preparation, construction, and operation activities.
The Cikampek (Cikopo) – Palimanan Toll Road is considered vital to connect the internal regions in West Java Province, particularly as the existing roads and connections in the Province experience significant degradation and suffer from high traffic volumes. It is also viewed by Government as a way to help overcome infrastructure constraints and thereby boost economic development, investment and employment in the area.
This Toll Road will administratively cover five regencies in West Java Province including Purwakarta, Subang, Majalengka, Indramayu and Cirebon. It is expected to accelerate traffic flow between cities and provinces across these regencies and provide an alternate route to the Southern Route and North Coast Route resulting in an equal distribution of economic benefits.
The predominant zonings within the vicinity of the Toll Road include forest plantation, agricultural, industrial and settlement areas. As such, the toll road will have both environmental and social (including cultural) implications.
LMS understands that it is stakeholder expectation to be involved in the development of the Toll Road, particularly as there is high interest in the value it can deliver to the people in the area and there is potential for conflict of interest surrounding land acquisition processes that will be required to construct the Toll Road. LMS also understands that engagement activities can help create value, ensure integrity of the Toll Road and assist with maintaining its ‘social licence to operate’. As such, LMS is taking a strategic approach to stakeholder engagement that will support the Toll Road throughout its lifecycle (development, construction and operations).
This Stakeholder Public Consultation and Disclosure Plan (PCDP) is an integral component of various social studies and impact assessment reports that have been developed to support the Toll Road project. It has been developed in order to assist LMS in identifying impacted stakeholders and help manage concerns and issues as a consequence of the Toll Road project.
It has also been developed in accordance with International Finance Corporation (IFC) and Asian Bank Development (ABD) Guidelines.
PT ERM Indonesia PROJECT Code: 0143051//April 2012 1
1.2 PCDP Purpose and Objectives The purpose and objectives of the development of this PCDP are outlined in the following sections.
1.2.1 PURPOSE OF THIS PCDP
The purpose of this PCDP is to: • Ensure that LMS meets international laws, Indonesian regulations, International Finance Corporation (IFC) and Asian Development Bank (ADB) Guidelines surrounding stakeholder engagement requirements for large infrastructure projects such as the Toll Road Project in order to secure necessary funding.
• Ensure LMS meets community expectations and its own internal corporate standards related to stakeholder engagement activities.
• Eliminate or minimise potential impacts on the progress and reputation of LMS and the Toll Road Project.
• Understand and capture stakeholder interests in the development of the Toll Road Project.
• Help ensure LMS continues to retain its social licence to operate.
• To ensure support and alignment amongst LMS staff for the Toll Road.
1.2.2 PCDP OBJECTIVES Objectives of this PCDP are to:
• Identify the stakeholders interested in, or a party to the development and implementation of the Toll Road Project;
• Provide stakeholders with opportunities to obtain a greater insight into the development and implementation of the Toll Road Project;
• Identify stakeholder critical issues in relation to the Toll Road Project and where possible, address stakeholder concerns through development of the Toll Road;
• Identify any relevant mitigation measures (through stakeholder engagement) that may assist in minimising potential impacts on Project schedule and scope as well as LMS’s reputation;
• Detail how LMS will engage with stakeholders in the development and implementation of the Toll Road Project;
PT ERM Indonesia PROJECT Code: 0143051//April 2012 2
• Identify knowledge gaps, barriers and opportunities that may influence the successful development and implementation of the Toll Road Project;
• Ensure appropriate levels of stakeholder consultation are undertaken in order to meet regulatory requirements and minimise potential impacts on Project schedule and scope; and
• Outline internal actions and responsibilities for implementing engagement.
1.3 Legal and Regulatory Framework
This PCDP has been developed according to a legal and regulatory framework which incorporates: • International law;
• Indonesian regulations;
• International best practice;
• Community expectations; and
• LMS Corporate Policies and Guidelines. This framework is described in detail below.
1.3.1 INTERNATIONAL LAW
Indonesia has ratified or is party to certain international conventions or agreements which include requirements or set standards for disclosure and consultation (as outlined below). For further details, see Appendix A.
International Labour Organisation (ILO) – Fundamental Conventions
The Government of Indonesia is party to the eight ‘fundamental’ ILO conventions, four of which contain provisions relating to consultation, disclosure and/or grievance redress: • C 29: Forced Labour [1930]
• C 111: Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) [1958]
• C 138: Minimum Age [1973]
• C 182: Worst Forms of Child Labour [1999]
PT ERM Indonesia PROJECT Code: 0143051//April 2012 3
Convention on Biological Diversity
The 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) is an international legally binding treaty, signed and ratified by the Government of Indonesia.1 Within the convention are passages relating to community consultation and participation—principal among which is Article 8(j) [In-situ Conservation] which specifies that, subject to national legislation, party states must: “respect, preserve and maintain knowledge, innovations and practices of indigenous and local communities embodying traditional lifestyles relevant for the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity and promote their wider application with the approval and involvement of the holders of such knowledge, innovations and practices and encourage the equitable sharing of the benefits arising from the utilisation of such knowledge, innovations and practices”.
This article carries with it the implicit requirement that the biodiversity conservation practices of indigenous and local communities need to be consulted and studied. Indigenous participation is critical not only in regards to gathering this information, but for determining equitable recompense for the benefits accrued from the utilisation of indigenous knowledge.
In addition to the CBD itself, the Decisions of the Conference of Parties (COP) must also be taken into account as they relate to disclosure and consultation.
The Fifth Conference of Parties2 reaffirmed the necessity for Indigenous Peoples participation in the development of guidelines for benefits sharing. It also emphasises that women and women’s organisations must also be fully incorporated in the consultation process and given full access to participation.
The Fifth Conference of Parties also mandates the use of various mediums of communications to most effectively reach, inform, and include the view and concerns of target indigenous populations, and states that Indigenous People should be engaged to develop a register of knowledge on traditional practices and lifestyles relevant to conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity— including about ways to strengthen legislation, customary practices and traditional systems of resource management and methods of protecting their knowledge against unauthorised use. It requires that women’s knowledge be of conservation and methods of sustaining biological diversity be specially documented and preserved.
1http://www.cbd.int/convention/parties/list/
2Decision V/16, Annex: Programme of Work, 1 General Principles 5, 139–42; Available at: http://www.cbd.int/decision/cop/?id=7158
PT ERM Indonesia PROJECT Code: 0143051//April 2012 4
Finally, the Fifth Conference of Parties states that Indigenous Peoples and local communities must be consulted and encouraged to participate in thedevelopment of cultural, environmental and social impact assessments regarding any development proposed to take place on sacred sites and on lands or waters occupied or used by indigenous and local communities.
Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination
The UN International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) is a second-generation human rights instrument that commits its signatories to the elimination of racial discrimination and the promotion of understanding among all races. The Government of Indonesia acceded to this convention on 25 Jun 19993 (with the reservation that it does not consider itself bound by the provision of Article 22).
While the ICERD itself does not contain specific requirements on community consultation, it establishes the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination4, and empowers it to make general recommendations to the UN General Assembly. This Committee’s guidelines do contain disclosure and consultation provisions.
1.3.2 INDONESIAN REGULATION
LMS is committed to upholding all applicable laws and regulations of the Government of the Republic of Indonesia. Those laws and regulations most applicable to public consultation and disclosure activities are the following: • Law (UU) No 23 of 1997 re: Environmental Management
• Law (UU) No. 41 of 1999 re: Forestry
• Government Regulation (PP) No. 27 of 1999 re: Environmental Impact Assessment
• Head of BAPEDAL Decree (KepKa5) No. 8 of 2000 re: Public Participation in and the Disclosure of Information on the AMDAL Process
• Law (UU) No. 32 of 2009 re: Environmental Protection and Management
Further details of these laws is provided in Appendix B.
3http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IV- 2&chapter=4&lang=en
4The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination is a body of human rights experts tasked with monitoring the implementation of the Convention.
5Keputusan Kepala
PT ERM Indonesia PROJECT Code: 0143051//April 2012 5
1.3.3 INTERNATIONAL BEST PRACTICE
This PCDP has voluntarily been developed according to the requirements of the International Finance Corporation’s (IFC) Performance Standards and the Asian Development Bank (ADB) as outlined below.
International Finance Corporation
The IFC has adopted policy requirements and guidelines (Performance Standards, or PS) relevant to public consultation and disclosure to ensure projects are implemented in an environmentally and socially responsible manner.
IFC’s Policy on Social & Environmental Sustainability highlights the need for Community Engagement and Broad Community Support. Specifically, it states that “IFC is committed to working with the private sector to put into practice processes of community engagement that ensure the free, prior, and informed consultation of the affected communities….leading to broad community support for the project within the affected communities…” Broad community support, in IFC’s definition “is a collection of expressions by the affected communities, through individuals or their recognised representatives, in support of the project.”
The IFC Performance Standards on Social and Environmental Sustainability define clients' roles and responsibilities for project management—including requirements for information disclosure.
There are a total of eight Performance Standards, six of which contain specific requirements for public consultation and disclosure: PS 1: Social and Environmental Assessment and Management System.
PS 2: Labour and Working Conditions
PS 5: Land Acquisition and Involuntary Resettlement
PS 6: Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Natural Resource Management
PS 7: Indigenous Peoples
PS 8: Cultural Heritage
See Appendix C for details of consultation and disclosure requirements for each of these six Performance Standards. To summarize briefly:
PT ERM Indonesia PROJECT Code: 0143051//April 2012 6
Performance Standard 1 establishes the importance of effective community engagement through disclosure of project-related information and consultation with local communities on matters that directly affect them. Community engagement is defined as “an on-going process involving the client’s disclosure of information, free of external manipulation, interference, or coercion, and intimidation, and conducted on the basis of timely, relevant, understandable and accessible information”.
IFC articulates three general topics within the framework of community engagement: 1) Disclosure, 2) Consultation and 3) Grievance Mechanisms.
Disclosure refers to public disclose of key project documents, principal among which is the Assessment document—information on the purpose, nature and scale of the project, the duration of proposed project activities, and the nature of such potential risks and impacts. Consultation refers to process via with the proponent provides affected communities with opportunities to express their views on project risks, impacts, and mitigation measures. Such consultation should also allow the client to consider and respond to community inputs and be tailored to the language preferences and decision-making process of the affected communities and to the needs of disadvantaged or vulnerable groups. For projects with significant adverse impacts on affected communities, consultation must ensure their free, prior and informed consultation and facilitate their informed participation, meaning that the proponent incorporates community inputs directly into the Client decision-making process. Such consultation must be documented—particularly the measures taken to avoid or minimise risks to, and adverse impacts on, the affected communities.
The project Grievance Mechanism is a system for receiving and facilitating resolution of communities’ concerns and grievances. This system should address concerns promptly using an understandable and transparent process that is culturally appropriate and readily accessible to all segments of the affected communities—at no cost and without retribution. The mechanism should not impede access to judicial or administrative remedies.
Reporting refers to the formal process for compiling and presenting written information about technical aspects of project design as well as for project action and implementation plans. IFC requires clients to disclose to affected communities an Action Plan describing specific mitigation measures and actions necessary for the project to comply with applicable laws and regulations as well as with the requirements of the Performance Standards. Clients must also provide periodic reports that describe progress with Action Plan implementation on issues that involve ongoing risk to, or impacts on, affected communities and on issues of concern identified via the consultation process or grievance mechanism. Reports must be accessible to the affected communities and distributed regularly (not less than annually).
Performance Standard 2 requires consultation in cases of large-scale retrenchment. In such cases, the proponent must ensure consultation with
PT ERM Indonesia PROJECT Code: 0143051//April 2012 7
employees, their representative organisations and the government (where appropriate) in a manner that is absent of discrimination. IFC PS 2 also stipulates the need for a grievance mechanism for workers (and their organisations, where they exist) to raise reasonable workplace concerns. IFC obligates clients to inform their workforce of the grievance mechanism at the time of hire, and make it easily accessible to them.
Performance Standard 5 requires consultations for matters of Land Acquisition and Involuntary Resettlement that evidence the informed participation of affected persons and communities in decision-making processes. It stipulates that consultation “will continue during the implementation, monitoring, and evaluation of compensation payment and resettlement”. IFC also mandates that clients establish special grievance mechanisms for receive and addresses concerns specific to compensation and relocation.
In Performance Standard 6, the need for community consultation is understood as integral to defining an appropriate system of independent certification for the sustainable management of the resources.
Under Performance Standard 7, when a project initiative will affect communities of Indigenous Peoples, the proponent must work to establish an ongoing relationship with these communities. Projects with adverse impacts require a process of free, prior, and informed consultation with affected communities of Indigenous Peoples to facilitate their informed participation on matters that affect them directly. Processes of community engagement must be culturally appropriate and commensurate with the risks and potential impacts to the Indigenous Peoples.
To ensure these aims, IFC mandates the following steps: • Involve Indigenous Peoples’ representative bodies (e.g. councils of elders or village councils, etc.)
• Be inclusive of both women and men and of various age groups in a culturally appropriate manner
• Provide sufficient time for Indigenous Peoples’ collective decision- making processes
• Facilitate the Indigenous Peoples’ expression of their views, concerns, and proposals in the language of their choice, without external manipulation, interference, or coercion, and without intimidation
• Ensure that the grievance mechanism is culturally appropriate and accessible for Indigenous Peoples
IFC also requires clients to seek to identify opportunities for culturally appropriate development benefits that are commensurate with the degree of project impacts and which aim the improving the standards of living and livelihoods of Indigenous Peoples and that fostering the long-term
PT ERM Indonesia PROJECT Code: 0143051//April 2012 8
sustainability of the natural resources upon which indigenous communities rely.
Performance Standard 8 states that where a project may affect cultural heritage, the proponent must consult with affected communities who use, or have used within living memory, the cultural heritage for longstanding cultural purposes and must incorporate the views of the affected communities on such cultural heritage into the client’s decision-making process. Consultation will also involve the relevant national or local regulatory agencies that are entrusted with the protection of cultural heritage.
Finally, the 2006 IFC Policy on Disclosure of Information6 is a 13-page document outlining the scope of materials that IFC makes publically available—either on a routine basis or upon request. This disclosure policy is intended to reflect IFC’s commitment to transparent business practices in-line with the Policy on Social and Environmental Sustainability and the Performance Standards.
In accordance with the prescripts of IFC’s Performance Standards, the disclosure policy requires that IFC clients self-disclose information to project- affected parties about all types of adverse environmental and social impacts that could potentially result from the project, as well as the client’s plan to mitigate or eliminate these impacts.
Asian Development Bank
The ADB's Safeguard Policy Statement (2009) emphasises the importance of consultation and public participation in development projects, particularly with those people who are likely to experience social impacts as a result of such development projects. The consultation and public participation process must be substantive and meaningful. It should be performed at the initial phase of the project, through open and transparent procedures and without coercion. The ADB also emphasise the importance of involving stakeholders in the decision-making stages of the project. Stages may include the design, impact assessment, mitigation planning, and implementation phases.
The ADB Safeguard Requirements define clients' roles and responsibilities for project management—including requirements for information disclosure.
There are a total of four Safeguard Requirements, three of which contain specific requirements for public consultation and disclosure: Safeguard Requirements 1: Environment
Safeguard Requirements 2: Involuntary Resettlement
Safeguard Requirements 3: Indigenous Peoples
6http://www.ifc.org/ifcext/sustainability.nsf/AttachmentsByTitle/pol_Disclosure2006/$FILE /Disclosure2006.pdf
PT ERM Indonesia PROJECT Code: 0143051//April 2012 9
See Appendix D for details of consultation and disclosure requirements for each of these three Safeguard Requirements.
1.3.4 COMMUNITY EXPECTATIONS While the Toll Road Project must obtain the requisite formal permits and licences to operate in accordance with the laws and regulations of the jurisdictions in which LMS works, it must also gain the informal, but no less important, social licence to operate.
The social licence is defined by the expectations of the community for best- practice social and environmental stewardship. Failure to meet these may result in:
• Damage to the company’s reputation through community action opposed to the Project;
• Loss of government support;
• Restrictions on the company’s future operations or Project approvals; and
• Criticism of poor community engagement in the media.
It is important to note that community expectations, with respect to the type and level of community consultation, is in a state of constant flux and needs to be investigated according to the social, economic and environmental conditions of the day. LMS will monitor community response and adjust engagement plans accordingly.
Up to current phase or prior to the construction, LMS has committed and agreed to perform the construction and improvement of physical infrastructure who are cut off or directly affected by the construction of the toll road. The physical infrastructure to be built by the LMS, such as drain canal, bridges, national roads, regency roads, and village roads has been approved by the Department of Public Works and is perceive by the Regional Development Agency in each and every Sub-district affected by trajectory of Cikampek (Cikopo) – Palimanan toll road.
1.3.5 LMS CORPORATE POLICIES The concept of Corporate Social Responsibility is progressively known as Corporate Responsibility (CR) as this holistically includes all elements on how a company does business rather than merely focusing on the social aspects, i.e. philanthropy and community projects. CR importantly includes the wider issues of governance, ethics and impact on the community and environment.
Corporate Responsibility is not limited to Public Relations (PR) or how a company may choose to give away its money, but encourages the board and
PT ERM Indonesia PROJECT Code: 0143051//April 2012 10
senior management to review all aspects of its business to ensure there is no practice of irresponsible behaviour in its value chain.
LMS is committed to good Corporate Relations through its Corporate Social Responsibility Policy which provides a commitment by business to contribute to economic development, environmental, and social sustainability of community. This should be conducted through the on-going engagement of stakeholders, the active participation of community impacted by company activities, and the public reporting of company policies and performance in the economic, environmental, and social aspect.
1.4 PCDP Structure This PCDP contains the following sections:
Section 1 Introduction – describes the project background, PCDP purpose and objectives, and regulatory framework.
Section 2 Stakeholder and Issues Identification and Mapping – contains the methodology used to identify stakeholders and issues along with results of these processes.
Section 3. Previous Consultation and Disclosure – explains consultation activities undertaken on the Toll Road Project to date.
Section 4. Grievance Mechanism – details LMS’s Grievance Procedure / Mechanism.
Section 5. Public Consultation and Disclosure Guideline – provides LMS guidelines on Public Consultation and Disclosure.
Section 6. Planned Future Public Consultation Activities - provides a detailed description of planned future consultation activities and includes a timetable showing when these activities will occur.
Section 7. PCDP Implementation – details resources for implementation of this PCDP and described monitoring, reporting and evaluation measures to be undertaken to ensure the success of this PCDP.
2 STAKEHOLDER AND ISSUES IDENTIFICATION AND MAPPING
International guidelines suggest a targeted approach to identifying stakeholders in the first instance. For example, the International Finance Corporation (IFC) suggests:
“There is no one right way of undertaking consultation. Given its nature, the process will always be context-specific. This means that techniques, methods, approaches and timetables will need to be tailored for the local situation and the various types of
PT ERM Indonesia PROJECT Code: 0143051//April 2012 11
stakeholders being consulted. Ideally, a good consultation process will be targeted at those most likely to be affected by the project.”7
This approach has been considered by LMS in the development of a strategic approach toward stakeholder engagement by firstly developing a stakeholder list, then by identifying Project issues and risks, followed by mapping each of the stakeholders and related issues. Each of these stages is detailed in the following section.
2.1 Stakeholder Identification and Mapping The term 'stakeholders' may refer to any individual or group that are directly or indirectly affected by the Company’s operations and/or is capable of affecting the outcome of the Project. As such, there are many and diverse social groups that may be understood as stakeholders in the Toll Road Project—each of which will have different needs and priorities.
In most cases, LMS decisions about which audiences are targeted for consultation activities is influenced by how directly the stakeholder/s are affected by Project operations (and according to their relative vulnerabilities) or how directly they are capable of affecting these operations. To the greatest extent possible, LMS endeavours to equally take into consideration the views and the interests of all stakeholders.
The following section describes the methodology used by LMS to identify stakeholders and results of this process.
2.1.1 METHODOLOGY AND RESULTS Method
The methodology used to identify ‘stakeholders’ of the Toll Road Project involved a number of stages including:
• Time of Study
LMS in cooperation with ERM undertook social baseline studies to develop a Social Impact Assessment Report with the objective of identifying any key or material baseline conditions in the 62 village which traversed by the toll road and gather issues to identify the impacts and mitigate the risks. This document is a part of proponent’s reporting to secure finance, namely ESHIA (Environmental and Social Health Impact Assessment). It is also ERM’s objective to establish
7http://www.ifc.org/ifcext/sustainability.nsf/AttachmentsByTitle/p_StakeholderEn gagement_Full/$FILE/IFC_StakeholderEngagement.pdf
PT ERM Indonesia PROJECT Code: 0143051//April 2012 12
recommendations to address the issues identified during the review process.
In order to guide impact assessment, impact mitigation, and community development, a range of studies has been conducted over an extended period of time with the specific aim of characterising the baseline social conditions within an area defined as the Social Impact Zone (SIZ). One of the studies is Stakeholder Mapping which will be developed into Stakeholder Mapping.
Study of stakeholder identification and mapping of Toll Road Project were conducted on November 2011 with 21 days of field work.
• Defining the Project area;
Project affected stakeholders cross five Regencies of the West Java Province including Purwakarta, Subang, Indramayu, Majalengka and Cirebon. See Figure 2-1 for further details
Figure 2-1 - Proposed Toll Road
• Stakeholder identification, mapping and analysis.
The stakeholder identification, mapping and analysis was conducted through following steps:
Identification Stakeholder Mapping study uses qualitative research methods. The qualitative research typically relies on the methods for
PT ERM Indonesia PROJECT Code: 0143051//April 2012 13
gathering information; the most common use is in-depth interview. The SEP study used in depth interviews to gather information on stakeholders from respondents. In-depth interview is a qualitative research technique that involves conducting intensive individual interview to explore perspective on a particular idea, project or situation. The primary advantage of in-depth interviews is that they provide much more detail information than what is available through other data collection methods, such as surveys. They may also provide a more relaxed atmosphere in which to collect information people may feel more comfortable having a conversation about their perspectives, interests and provide sensitive information in particular. Stakeholders identification process involve respondents from government officials (provincial and regency), head of villages, community leaders, civil society (individual and institution), journalists, and project affected peoples. Based on initial respondent, process of stakeholder identification continue through snow balling technique. Snowball sampling is a method used to obtain research and knowledge, from extended associations, through previous acquaintances. Snowball sampling uses recommendations to find people with specific knowledge that has been determined as being useful.
Profiling / Mapping Information gathered from process of stakeholder identification was captured in a database with detail description of stakeholder identity, roles, networking capacity, interests and influence to the toll road project. This information formed the base data for stakeholder profiling. The stakeholders were classified upon their position, strength, interests and influences as the party who will be affected or who will be affecting the development of toll roads.
Analysis Each stakeholder identified was profiled and analysed in terms of their strength, position and interests relative to the proposed toll road development project. Strength can be defined as the capacity of the stakeholder for networking, level of knowledge and education, political position and economic asset. Position defined as whether the stakeholder support or oppose to the project, while interests usually refer to having direct or indirect impact of the project, benefit acquired from the execution of the project and motive behind the interest (politic, economic, social, ecologic, etc.). Analysis was undertaken base on professional judgement of consultants.
After defining the project area, a technique referred to as ‘snow-ball’ sampling was used to identify project affected stakeholders. This technique involved
PT ERM Indonesia PROJECT Code: 0143051//April 2012 14
the use of in-depth interviews with respondents at the local, Sub-district and provincial levels.
Information on issues related with the development of the Proposed Cikampek (Cikopo) – Palimanan Toll Road is relatively limited, mostly on government officials. The selection of respondents was determined through key respondents that were interviewed the first time. The first respondent will be asked to recommend anyone or institution who has information regarding to other respondents. This process commonly called as snowballing sampling technique.
The first respondent was determined covering local, regency and province level of respondents. At local level the first respondent was the head of the village or community leader directly related to the proposed toll road development. At regency level the first respondent was the staff of land acquisition team and secretariat committee of land acquisition. At province level the first respondent was the head of land acquisition team at the province level.
Result of Stakeholder Identification
The result of this process is a list of stakeholders included in Appendix E.
In total, 130 respondents or stakeholders were identified of which, 91 were from the government departments/agencies, 28 were ‘individuals’ and 11 were from private sector. See Figure 2-2.
Figure 2-2 - Stakeholders by Category
On the regional level, 68 respondents were from the Regency level, 50 from the local level and the remaining 12 were from the provincial level as shown in the table below.
PT ERM Indonesia PROJECT Code: 0143051//April 2012 15
Figure 2-3 - Stakeholder by Region
Stakeholders were identified across six locations as defined in the Project Area. More specifically, the percentage of stakeholders identified in the various locations included Cirebon Regency (29%), Majalengka Regency (19%), Indramayu Regency (12 %), Subang Regency (26%), Purwakarta Regency (15%) and from the city of Bandung as the capital of West Java Province (9%). See Figure 2-4.
Figure 2-4 - Stakeholders by Location
2.1.1.1 Result of Stakeholder Mapping The next stage of stakeholder identification involved mapping strength and influence of the stakeholders in/on the Toll Road Project.
Profiling / Mapping – obtain the detail description of the identity, characteristics, roles, interests and influence of stakeholders.
Results of this process are detailed in Appendix F which describes individual stakeholders and their interest and influence in/on the Toll Road Project, broken down by Province and Regency
PT ERM Indonesia PROJECT Code: 0143051//April 2012 16
2.2 Issues Identification and Mapping In order engagement and consultation activities remain relevant to the Toll Road Proposed Project, it is important to firstly identify all potential issues that may have an impact on the schedule, scope and reputation of LMS and/or the Project. The following section details the methodology used and results of the Toll Road Project issues identification process.
2.2.1 METHODOLOGY AND RESULTS
Method
Issues identification, mapping and analysis has been carried out following the steps below:
Framing issues from mass media coverage and initial information from LMS and head of land acquisition team. From this step the main issues categories were determined, and will be analysed further through in- depth interviews with the respondents; In-depth interviews resulted in detailed issues from each category and identified critical issues in each regency. In each of these issues the key stakeholders directly involved were identified; and The identified issues were then analysed based on location, actors, potential impacts and risks associated with the proposed toll road development.
Result of Issues Identification Results of this initial process included the identification of several ‘groups’ of issues as shown in Appendix G.
Result of Issues Mapping
The key concerns of stakeholders are agrarian (30%) and economic issues (27%). Political (18%) and infrastructure (14%) issues appear to be of medium concern to stakeholders and environment (6%) and labour (5%) issues appear to be of some concern.
Based on the categories of interest issues, the role and interests of stakeholders are dominated by the agrarian issues (30%) and economic issues (27%). Most of the stakeholders are concerned with agrarian issues, such as land acquisition problems, conflicts on the price of land compensation, land disputes which led to the court, communication and coordination issues related to land. Economic issues mainly related to agricultural issues. Majority of the land that will be converted to the toll road are agricultural land, plantation and forestry. Therefore their concerns related to the economic issues are fears of decreased agricultural production and plantation.
PT ERM Indonesia PROJECT Code: 0143051//April 2012 17
Political issues (18%) appear primarily on the social movement of individuals, groups or organizations that claim to play their interests to defend the communities who are considered will be impacted by toll road development. Another political issue is related with the problem of inter-institutional relationships among government. Some of the institutions feel less involved or less embodied in the proposed toll road project.
Other important issue is infrastructure (14%), some of the local government officials have concerns that there is potential for damage to local infrastructure. This relates to village roads and irrigation facilities, which might be impacted by the construction of toll road, i.e. due to mobilization of heavy equipment during the construction phase.
Environmental (6%) and employment issues (5%) are minor issues. The environmental issue is mainly about the decreasing forest area, while the labour issue is in the interests of local workers to ensure benefits by joining as labour workers during the construction phase of the toll road development.
Figure 2.5 - Stakeholders by Issue
Environment Labour 6% 5% Agraria Infrastructure 30% 14%
Politics 18% Economy 27%
2.3 Summary of stakeholder identification and issues mapping Table 2.6. below are summary of stakeholder identification and issues mapping in each of different 5 Regency affected by toll road project.
PT ERM Indonesia PROJECT Code: 0143051//April 2012 18
Table 2-5 Summary of major stakeholder identification and issues mapping
Province / Regency Stakeholder Issue Phase of Project Description West Java Province DPP Gerakan Politic Land acquisition The position of GMBI basically is supporting the proposed toll road Masyarakat Bawah construction, given the settlement of land acquisition is in accordance with Indonesia (DPP. GMBI) the requested price by the community. The consultation approach is to conduct a dialogue and lobby in order to meet the best solution. If there is not agreed solution, then they will be opposing the proposed toll road construction. KADIN (Chamber of Economic Construction and Operation West Java KADIN has the potential to be involved in mechanisms building Trade and Industry) between themselves and their internal entrepreneur networks, for West Java coordination of fair and transparent investment. The patterns of partnership are the right form to be implemented with KADIN to overcome unfair competition among local companies, regarding their involvement during the toll road construction phase. Provincial TPT(Land Agrarian Land acquisition Strong partnership is the primary key in relationship with the Provincial Land Acquisition Team) Acquisition Team (TPT). This is an important aspect to get the land acquisition process completed on time without leaving unsolved problems for toll road construction management. Office of Perhutani West Agrarian Land acquisition Perum Perhutani West Java and Banten Region supervise 3 forestry Java Province management areas (KPH) that will be exposed by the toll road construction, i.e. KPH Purwakarta, KPH Indramayu dan KPH Majalengka. Perhutani West Java Regional has the potential to conduct coordination both in the process of licensing and in the process of construction, where a critical interface will occur between construction activities and routine activities of Perhutani. Partnership Pattern is the right form for the relationship with Perhutani West Java. Office of Agriculture and Agrarian Land acquisition The agriculture office has a concern regarding the decreasing of food Food Crops production and horticulture along the toll road route; this will disrupt their production targets. The consultation pattern is the right form, especially to provide clear information for agriculture office about the benefit of the toll road, also to give a chance of discussions in order to reach understanding between the importance of infrastructure construction and the development of agriculture. Regional Board of Environmental Land acquisition and BLHD West Java is an important institution because they have the authority in Environmental (BLDH) construction monitoring the environmental and social impact in accordance with AMDAL West Java (Environmental Impact Assessment) document and its supplement. Partnership is an appropriate model because BLHD has a significant authority, and needs to be maintained in order to avoid missed communication in the process of the toll road construction, related with aspects of environmental
PT ERM Indonesia PROJECT Code: 0143051//April 2012 19
Province / Regency Stakeholder Issue Phase of Project Description impact Purwakarta Squatters Economic Land acquisition The Consultation pattern is the right choice, regarding the organization real Regency (group of informal position which is not to refuse the toll road but only a matter of compensation kiosks) quantity. However if the compensation does not meet their expectation, they will oppose. GAPENSI (Gabungan Economic Construction Gapensi is the strongest association in the domain of construction services Pelaksana Konstruksi companies in Purwakarta, thus building a partnership is necessary. Nasional Indonesia) Nevertheless, it needs to maintain a balance between the association's interest and the corporate individuals, especially in establishing a transparent mechanism for tenders and cooperation. Agriculture and Forestry Economic and Land acquisition The agriculture and forestry office has a concern on the decrease in food Office Infrastructure production, as well as the problem of disconnected irrigation canals. With the involvement of the provincial agriculture office, the communication pattern is quite representative in building a relationship with the agriculture office in Purwakarta Perum Perhutani Agrarian Land acquisition Perhutani is an important party that need to be invited as a partner to resolve land dispute along the track of the Toll Road. Perhutani-Puwakarta will have a more synergic cooperation on the toll road construction. Village government of Agrarian Land Acquisition, Empowerment to the village authority, especially in involving the villagers in Cimahi, Campaka Construction and Operations taking advantage of the toll road because the village authority is a strategic District position that has influence to consolidate interest and coordinate villagers in the development of the toll road. Village government of Agrarian Land Acquisition, Empowerment to the village authority, especially in involving the villagers in Ciparungsari, Cibatu Construction and Operations taking advantage of the toll road because the village authority is a strategic District position that has influence to consolidate interest and coordinate villagers in the development of the toll road. Subang Regency DPP Gerakan Economic Land Acquisition GMBI in Subang is an advocation group that is involved in advocating the Masyarakat Bawah land disputes of the 6 families in Jabon Village. This group is part of a network Indonesia (DPP. GMBI) that resides in the capital of the province and has the ability to develop issues, Regency of Subang. mobilize the mass and conduct legal procedures.Consultation is the best course to take to ensure that the issues would not be developed into matters that will put the toll road management in a difficult situation. Agriculture and Food Economic and Land Acquisition They are concerned with the reduction in crops productivity due the toll road Crops Office Infrastructure construction. A consultative measure is the right way to explain the benefit of the toll road for agriculture and to ensure they understand the importance for the two developments to work together, the infrastructure and the agriculture MPC. Pemuda Pancasila Labour Construction and Operation The consultation pattern with the local construction entrepreneurs is the right Subang Regency choice, with an opportunity of Partnership model if there is a qualified track record company is identified for cooperation. PP has an interest to supply
PT ERM Indonesia PROJECT Code: 0143051//April 2012 20
Province / Regency Stakeholder Issue Phase of Project Description labor during the toll road construction.
Environmental Board Environmental Land Acquisition and BLHD Subang has a concern on the issue of environmental impact, however a Subang Regency Construction partnership together with the provincial BLHD will make a communication pattern sufficient to answer the relation pattern with BLHD at regency level
Majalengka BAPPEDA(Regional Agrarian Land acquisition and Bapeda has significant authority specifically in Majalengka Regency. Bapeda Regency Planning & Development construction becomes the very instrument of Majalengka Regent who pays a strong Board) attention over this toll road construction, so it needs to develop a partnership
PT. Perhutani Agrarian Land Acquisition Unlike the Perhutani office of Purwakarta, the office of Perhutani Majalengka has a positive perception. Therefore, the pattern of consultation needs to be developed primarily related to changes to the realignment of toll road that will expose their territory.
Village government Agrarian Land acquisition and Empowerment to the village authority, especially in involving the villagers in construction taking advantage of the toll road because the village authority is a strategic position that has influence to consolidate interest and coordinate villagers in the development of the toll road.
Indramayu Kadin (Chamber of Economic Construction and operations The pattern of consultation with the local entrepreneurs is the right choice, Regency Trade and Industry) with an opportunity for partnership model if there is a qualified track record Indramayu company identified for cooperation.
Association of North Economic Operations This is a group of restaurant traders who feel economically threatened because coast road Restaurants of the impact of the toll road construction. There are thousands of food stalls Traders and restaurants along the north coast road in Indramayu. They will experience an economy decrease as a consequence of displacement of most traffic to Cikampek (Cikopo) – Palimanan toll road. Communication becomes the right choice, mainly because it is related with the investment restructuring along the rest area and interchange line towards Indramayu
Perum Perhutani KPH Agrarian Land Acquisition and Unlike the office of Perhutani in Purwakarta, the office of Perhutani Indramayu Construction Majalengka has a positive perception. Therefore, the pattern of consultation needs to be developed mainly related to the synergy and coordination regarding toll road construction phase that will affect the regular activity of
PT ERM Indonesia PROJECT Code: 0143051//April 2012 21
Province / Regency Stakeholder Issue Phase of Project Description Perhutani Indramayu.
Cirebon Regency Religious group in Social Land acquisition It needs to establish a partnership in order to involve the religion leader and Pegagan groups as a dialogue bridge with the villagers in a conducive atmosphere without bringing up the potential of broader conflicts escalation. A Board Member of Economic Land acquisition Nahdlatul Ulama (PB NU) has a strong influence to the local community. It is Nadlatul Ulama necessary to establish a form of partnership so that the project of toll road construction has an explicit support, to overcome the complexity of the political and economic aspect related to the toll road construction in Cirebon Board Member and Economic Land Acquisition GP Ansor Cirebon Regency is a part of NU organization that has influences at Chairman of Ansor the youth level. Building a partnership with GP Ansor will bridge the gap of communication between generations regarding issues surrounding the toll road construction. The Kuwu of Ciwaringin, Politic, Economic Land Acquisition Village chief (Kuwu) of villages has the power to influence the people at the Budur, Babakan, local level. They need a consultation as a treatment choice, in order to turn his Walahar Village negative potential become positive benefits regarding the land dispute settlement in their villages. Pemuda Pancasila Economic Construction and Operation The pattern of consultation with the mass organizations in the domain of construction is the right choice, with opening an opportunity for partnership model if a company that has potential qualification and track record is identified for cooperation. PP has an interest to supply labour for toll road construction. Babakan-Ciwaringin Economic, Politic Land Acquisition A partnership pattern is needed to be established, especially to reduce the religious group and potential conflict that might emerge during the construction of the Toll road. islamic boarding school
Local companies in Economic Land Acquisition These are local entrepreneurs who joined Kadin and have a networking and Ciwaringin influence among other entrepreneurs. Consultation and open opportunities for partnership if a company with a good credibility, qualification and good tracking is found Source:Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
PT ERM Indonesia PROJECT Code: 0143051//April 2012 22
3 PREVIOUS CONSULTATION AND DISCLOSURE
This section outlines the main phases in the ESHIA public consultation process prior to construction. Consultation during this period is focused on the development of the ESHIA’s. However, many other areas of the project are also engaged in what could be classed as consultation activities, including discussing project design issues with State Authorities, and the land team who are actively consulting with land owners and users on possible acquisition and compensation. The consultation process is designed to enable communities and other stakeholders to make a meaningful contribution towards the ESHIA and hence toward the proposedToll Road Project, in particular through the development of potential mitigation.
The proposed Cikampek (Cikopo) – Palimanan Toll Road Project ESHIA was initiated through consultation and information disclosure at both national and community level.
Table 3-1 ESHIA Consultation undertaken by LMS Date Activity Issues Covered/Raised Location/Stakeholder(s) September Consultation with: Scoping of social Every village in 5 Regency – October • State Authorities issues: who are affected by the toll 2011 • NGOs • Information road development • Residents regarding project • Project affected • Land Acquisition people Procedure • Potential impact of the project affected people November Consultation with: Consultation and Villages affected by the toll 2011 • Project affected Social baseline data road project in 5 regency people and residents collection with (Purwakarta, Subang, • NGOs communities in the Majalengka, Indramayu • State Authorities vicinity of toll road and Cirebon). (Province, Regency project, including and Village) meetings with village Details in Appendix H. leaders and interviews with a sample of community members. (SIA)
November Consultation with: Consultation regarding Villages affected by the toll 2011 • State and preliminary road project in 5 regency local/village assessment of (Purwakarta, Subang, authorities environmental and Majalengka, Indramayu • NGOs social impact and Cirebon) • Project affected People.
February Discussion with TPT • Updated Purwakarta, Subang, 2012 and P2T on the information Indramayu, Majalengka, province, regency, and regarding progress Cirebon Regency village level of land acquisition and the status of asset which has not been acquired; • Discussion on the compensation framework for the
PT ERM Indonesia PROJECT Code: 0143051//April 2012 25
Date Activity Issues Covered/Raised Location/Stakeholder(s) affected asset; • Identify the compliance and gap between the LAQ process which has been conducted by TPT/P2T with national regulation and ADB/IFC requirements;
February Consultation with • The Project • Purwakarta Regency 2012 affected people to timeframe to be (Cikopo and Cimahi identify the land commenced; village) acquisition impact: • Increased land • Subang Regency • Affected people values, which cause (Marengmang, with loss of housing difficulty for the Kaliangsana, and farming land; affected people to Wanakerta, Balingbing buy replacement Village) • Squatters; asset with equal • Indramayu Regency • Sharecroppers condition with the • within the Majalengka Regency acquired asset; government-owned (Pasir Malati Village) • The compensation land; • Cirebon Regency framework for • Affected people and (Pegagan and squatters and business in the Ciwaringin Village) sharecroppers realignment area within the which has not been government and compensated. private land;
Employment and business opportunity due to the Project development
4 SUMMARY OF CONSULTATION TO DATE
The historical consultation of Cikampek-Palimanan Toll Road Project undertaken LMS to date are as follows in table 4.2:
PT ERM Indonesia PROJECT Code: 0143051//April 2012 26
Table 4-1 Summary of historical consultation and disclosure undertaken by LMS to date
How the issue been addressed/ responded Time Location Issues Covered / Raised Stakeholder Involved (Committment by LMS) July – • Office of Campaka District, Consultation on the result of • Head of villages • LMS will design public consultation plan which September Purwakarta Regency. Environmental Impact Analysis • Head of Sub-districts include the grievance mechanism procedure to 2007 • Office of Sukamelang village, (EIA/AMDAL) Study and its • Head of Regencies address the environmental impact along the Subang Regency. mitigation measures. • Environmental Agency project duration. • Office of Jatiwangi District, (Regency) Majalengka Regency. • Representative of villages. • LMS will develop integrated management and • Office of Secretary of Regency • House of Representatives monitoring plan as part of the project of Indramayu. (Regency). commitment to ensure the process of • Office of Palimanan District, • The National Land Agency environmental restoration program for the Cirebon Regency. (Regency) affected areas and people. • Project Affected People • Local media • Local NGOs
2007 – 2008 West Java provincial government Information on the update phase of State Officials at Provincial, Regency LMS will prepare and publicly disclose information and 2011 and 5 regency government the development of Cikampek- and Village level. on its activities to local communities, government (Purwakarta, Subang, Majalengka, Palimanan Toll Road Project. partners at various levels, and the general public. Indramayu and Cirebon) Such reports will take the form of LMS Semi-Annual Reports, community newsletters and similar reporting tools 2007-2008 Every villages in 5 Regency who are Information on the update phase of NGOs, Residents, Project Affected LMS will prepare and publicly disclose information affected by the toll road the development of Cikampek- People on its activities to local communities, government development Palimanan Toll Road Project. Details in Appendix H. partners at various levels, and the general public. Such reports will take the form of LMS Semi-Annual Reports, community newsletters and similar reporting tools 2011 Every villages in 5 Regency who are Key social and environmental Land owners and users affected by • For employment recruitment LMS can offer affected by the toll road issues identified during the the Toll Road Project suitable qualified Affected Peoples (Aps) caused development consultations included local labour, Details in Appendix H. by land acquisition first opportunity. loss of livelihood, loss of village’s main commodity, accessibility • LMS will collaborate with government and third being cut off, air and water party in implementing livelihood assistance pollution, and time schedule to start program for affected peoples (Aps) and should the toll road. in line with government program.
• LMS should support social investment program
PT ERM Indonesia PROJECT Code: 0143051//April 2012 26
How the issue been addressed/ responded Time Location Issues Covered / Raised Stakeholder Involved (Committment by LMS) in works/facilities, including free medical support, scholarship, sanitation facilities, and educational facilities.
• LMS should provide special rent out package of the commercial area within the proposed ‘rest area’ to the project APs.
• LMS should have a community relation and community development person who will work with communities to resolve any issues/concerns regarding livelihood.
• LMS should develop and continually improve Grievance Mechanism Procedure and intensive consultation with the affected communities and develop strategic engagement with key stakeholders
2008-2010 Every villages in 5 Regency who are Determining the form and amount Land owners and users affected by • The land committee, TPT and P2T have affected by the toll road of indemnification. the Toll Road Project conducted the land acquisition process to comply development to the national regulatory framework
• LMS had conducted a series of socio-economic baseline surveys in the affected-communities to establish baseline information were undertaken to identify potential impact of the Project to permanent loss of land for the affected communities.
• To establish a grievance mechanism policy and procedure which includes grievance redress unit (GRU) in order to address grievance from the affected communities
• LMS committed to intensive consultation with the affected communities and develop strategic engagement with key stakeholders
PT ERM Indonesia PROJECT Code: 0143051//April 2012 27
How the issue been addressed/ responded Time Location Issues Covered / Raised Stakeholder Involved (Committment by LMS)
2008-2009 Every villages in 5 Regency with Land price determination Land owners and users affected by TPT and P2T have conducted the land acquisition residents who are affected by the the Toll Road Project. process to comply to the national regulatory toll road development. framework, in which for land valuation TPT commissioned an independent consultant to undertake an appraisal process to the land acquired by the project. As for the price for the structures and plantations, the valuesrefer to The Regent Decree which is based on the valuation conducted by related government agency.
PT ERM Indonesia PROJECT Code: 0143051//April 2012 28
How the issue been addressed/ responded Time Location Issues Covered / Raised Stakeholder Involved (Committment by LMS) 2008 - 2010 Every villages in 5 Regency who are Land acquisition and compensation Land owners and users affected by • For employment recruitment LMS can offer affected by the toll road regarding the disclosure of the the Toll Road Project suitable qualified Affected Peoples (Aps) caused by development result of asset inventory and land acquisition first opportunity. valuation, and to discuss the compensation. • For land compensation LMS will subject and follows the guidance of the land appraisal team. • For assets compensation (e.g. loss of infrastuctures and crops) LMS will subject and follows the guidance of Regencial regulation on land acquisition.
• LMS should develop and continually improve Grievance Mechanism Procedure which include grievance redress unit (GRU)and intensive consultation with the affected communities and develop strategic engagement with key stakeholders
• In relation to squatters in Purwakarta Regency, The Decree of The Chairman of land Acquisition Committee (P2T) regarding compensation for illegal settlers has been establishedrecently at year 2011. Based on the decree, due to their illegal status, these settlers will only receive 30% of total structure value.
2010 Majalengka and Cirebon Regency. Supplementary AMDAL/ EIA for Consultation with stakeholders LMS committed to intensive consultation with the the realignment area and the regarding the establishment of affected communities and develop strategic mitigation measures for the AMDAL engagement with key stakeholders. identified potential social and environmental impact due to the Project development 2010 – to Affected villages in the realignment Project development plan, design, Affected people in the realignment LMS committed to intensive consultation with the present area at Majalengka and Cirebon and land acquisition process for the area affected communities and develop strategic Regency Project. engagement with key stakeholders.
PT ERM Indonesia PROJECT Code: 0143051//April 2012 29
How the issue been addressed/ responded Time Location Issues Covered / Raised Stakeholder Involved (Committment by LMS) 2011 – to Affected villages in the realignment Result of asset inventory, valuation, Affected people in the realignment LMS committed to intensive consultation with the present area at Majalengka and Cirebon and compensation area affected communities and develop strategic Regency engagement with key stakeholders. September – Every villages in 5 Regency who are Scoping of social issues including State Authorities, NGOs, Residents, LMS committed to intensive consultation with the October affected by the toll road community level consultation and and Project Affected People. affected communities and develop strategic 2011 development preparation for baseline data engagement with key stakeholders. collection (SIA)
November Villages affected by the toll road Consultation and Social baseline Project Affected People and LMS committed to intensive consultation with the 2011 project in 5 regency (Purwakarta, data collection with communities in Residents, NGOs and State affected communities and develop strategic Subang, Majalengka, Indramayu the vicinity of toll road project, Authorities (Province, Regency engagement with key stakeholders. and Cirebon). including meetings with village andVillage) leaders and interviews with a sample of community members. Details in Appendix H. (SIA) November Villages affected by the toll road Consultation regarding preliminary State and local / village authorities, LMS should prepare and publicly disclose 2011 project in 5 regency (Purwakarta, assessment of Environmental and NGOs, Project Affected People. information on its activities to local communities, Subang, Majalengka, Indramayu Social Impact. (ESIA). government partners at various levels, and the and Cirebon) general public. Such reports will take the form of LMS Semi-Annual Reports, community newsletters and similar reporting tools. In addition, the following reports will be disclosed publicly and will be made available for public comment: • Community Social Assessment Report • Stakeholder Mapping • Cultural Heritage Preservation Plan • Indigenous People Preservation Plan • Compensation Framework for Land Acquisition. • Land Acquisition and Resettlement Plan
PT ERM Indonesia PROJECT Code: 0143051//April 2012 30
4.1 Monitoring and Reporting of Previous Consultation
4.1.1 MONITORING LMS has monitored public consultation and disclosure activities undertaken to date by documenting each activity as described in section below. All issues have also been monitored and responded to via conducting more intensive consultation with affected communities on the development of the project, potential environmental and social impacts associated with the construction and operation of the toll road project, continually improve grievance mechanism. LMS has also established strategic engagement with key stakeholders.
4.1.2 REPORTING Reporting on public consultation and disclosure will be undertaken at these relevant stages throughout the project:
• Prior to Construction
Prior to the beginning of the construction phase, Community Project Information Disclosure Meetings had been the primary platform for relaying information to project-affected communities about the impacts, hazards and risks associated with construction activities and for gaining community insights into planned benefits-sharing arrangements.
• During Construction
Community Project Information Disclosure Meetings shall continue throughout the construction phase. As described above, the primary means for relaying information between LMS and the project-affected communities shall be the CLO-Community Representative engagement sessions, although public community consultations on special topics shall occur from time to time.
• During Operations
Whilst public community-level socialisations and information meetings are linked to LMS information disclosure activities prior to and during the construction phase, such extensive engagement may not be required during the operations phase—due mostly to the relative decrease and uniformity of the Project activities. Accordingly, Community Project Information Disclosure Meetings during the operation phase may continue on an as needed basis.
PT ERM Indonesia 31
4.1.3 RECORD KEEPING Minutes of all stakeholder engagement activities have been recorded in the stakeholder database with attachment of photo documentation and list of participants.
PT ERM Indonesia 32
5 GRIEVANCE MECHANISM GUIDELINES
A project-level grievance mechanism is a locally based, formalized way for a company to accept, assess, and resolve community complaints related to company activities. It offers a package of widely understood and effective procedures for solving problems that are culturally appropriate, in combination with specially trained personnel, and aims to help parties reach speedy, efficient, and acceptable resolutions with dignity, justice, and finality.
A grievance mechanism should be in place throughout the entire project cycle, beginning with the planning phases and continuing through construction and operations, until the end of the project life. While the grievance mechanism may evolve as the project moves through various phases, the dual goals of accountability to stakeholders and risk reduction remain constant.8
LMS is currently in the process of developing and finalising a mechanism to receive and facilitate resolution of affected peoples’ concerns, complaints, and grievances about the project’s environmental and social performance. The grievance mechanism will be scaled to the risks and adverse impacts of the project. It will address affected people's concerns and complaints promptly, using an understandable and transparent process that is gender responsive, culturally appropriate, and readily accessible to all segments of the affected people at no costs and without retribution. The affected people will be appropriately informed about the mechanism. Details of this mechanism are provided in the following sections.
5.1 Grievance Procedure for Community Complaints Although LMS will seek to minimise potential negative impacts arising from the Project and to operate strictly according to its good practice guidelines, it is inevitable that queries, and grievances will arise throughout the construction and operation phases. LMS recognises that systematic, professional, rules-based procedures for handling grievances and appeals are essential to minimise and manage risks. This Grievance Tracking and Redress Mechanism (GTRM) aims to provide a process for resolving grievances expeditiously, effectively and in a transparent manner.
To the greatest extent possible, LMS will treat complaints confidentially and in all cases grievances will be addressed without prejudice. As a central location for receiving, processing, and resolving grievances, a Grievance Redress Unit (GRU) will be established.
8 The Office of the Compliance Advisor/Ombudsman; Advisory Note: A Guide to Designing and Implementing Grievance Mechanisms for Development Projects; 2008.
PT ERM Indonesia 33
5.2 Grievance Tracking and Review The Grievance Tracking and Redress Mechanism (GTRM)is triggered at the instance a community complaint is received by LSM or its contractors.
Figure 5-1 Summary Overview of the Grievance Tracking and Redress Process
Receipt of Record / Resolution / Feedback / Fact-finding Grievance Delegate Appeal Closeout
Submission, Grievance Investigation Implement Get feedback reporting or recorded; of remedial from indirect assigned complaint— actions. Claim aggrieved. capture of case number; including remains open Claim can be grievance and gathering for potential closed upon delegated to inputs and appeals. satisfactory resolution perspectives outcome. agent from parties
In general, grievances are communicated to LMS through three primary channels:
Oral communications, such as to Community Representative or to LMS on-site Project teams (including contractors).
Written communications to the LMS Communications Department; these include grievances registered with the Village head (Kepala Desa) and/or at village community centres.
Inferred understanding of a grievance (e.g. on-going problems raised during visits to program sites by program staff, independent monitors, NGOs, supervision teams, media, government officials, etc.) or alert of grievance via direct public action (e.g. protest).
5.2.1 RECEIPT OF GRIEVANCE
The initial procedure for grievance redress differs slightly for each channel, as detailed stated in above paragraph. Common to all of the channels for receipt of a grievance is the need to register a formal entry into the GTRM database— a centralised grievance log and tracking system that will equip LMS
PT ERM Indonesia 34
management to identify, understand and address vulnerabilities in Project implementation. The GTRM database will be utilised to: a) register, track and recall information about specific grievances; b) generate summary reports of grievances by type and frequency, and c) allow the Project to proactively respond to common grievances.
5.2.2 DELEGATION OF GRIEVANCE REDRESS
The Grievance Redress Unit (GRU) will assume primary responsibility for responding to grievances and overseeing redress. Many situations, however, may necessitate that the GRU coordinate with other LMS managers under whose jurisdiction a particular grievance is levied (e.g. in the case of this Toll Road Project is the TPT and P2T for grievances relating to land claims). In such situations where a coordinated response to grievances is necessary, the GRU will ensure the effective and timely communication of receipt of grievance notifications, fact-finding inquiries, and will facilitate forums for remediation and restitution decisions.
5.2.3 INITIAL REPORTING
A generic report of the grievance is generated from the initial GTRM database entry by the GRU in coordination with delegated LMS manager, as appropriate. This report will include all details known at the time that the grievance is registered, and will indicate what, if any, information is needed before a full account of the grievance can be logged. This initial report will also serve to provide context and guidance for the ensuing fact-finding investigation. Timelines for fact-finding and implementation of possible actions will be established as appropriate for the type and severity of the grievance.
5.2.4 FACT-FINDING
Fact-finding investigations shall seek to establish a clear picture of the circumstances surrounding a particular grievance. Investigations shall verify the information contained in the initial grievance report about i) the identity of the complainant and nature of complaint; ii) the status of the complaint, including if it has been resolved by any immediate remedial actions, if the aggrieved expects that any particular actions need to be implemented, if no action toward resolution is known or expected, etc.; and iii) supporting evidence for any disputed claims. For grievances that involve a large number of people or entire villages, community meetings will be held with both open sessions for people to air their complaints and facilitated sessions to help collaboratively identify potential redress actions.
Fact-finding investigations shall rely on consultation that is free of discrimination and coercion.
PT ERM Indonesia 35
5.2.5 RESOLUTION
Resolution involves decision-making about grievance redress actions. Resolution would also be undertaken with the hope that agreement on grievance resolution could be achieved at the Project level (i.e. preventing complainants from proceeding to higher levels, such as government authorities). In some cases, redress actions may necessitate coordination with the legal authorities, such as when a local law has been violated (e.g. corruption).
Resolution processes and approaches will rely, whenever possible, on local approaches to conflict resolution. When appropriate, local authorities and/or respected personages will be consulted for their insights and advice on the grievance and its proper resolution.
Upon reaching agreement with the aggrieved, all such understandings shall be put in writing and a statement signed by both sides shall be distributed to all sides in the grievance.
5.2.6 APPEAL
If a complainant is not satisfied with the implementation outcomes of an agreed-upon grievance resolution measure, he/she may appeal the outcome. Written appeals may be registered with the LMS Communications Department directly, or complainants may express their desire for an appeal to their Kepala Desa, Community Representative, or village CLO. When an appeal is registered, it is incumbent upon LMS to investigate the cause for dissatisfaction with the implemented resolution measure and to identify follow-up actions that are agreeable to the aggrieved party. No grievance shall be considered closed if an appeal process is pending or active. If, however, the Company has acted in good faith to resolve a grievance, and the aggrieved party refuses to acknowledge satisfactory resolution after 3 separate appeal and resolution processes, the Company reserves the authority to list the grievance as “intractable” and to terminate the appeals process.
5.2.7 FEEDBACK
Once a grievance has been resolved, the complainant shall be invited to give feedback about the resolution process and asked to indicate their level of satisfaction with the mitigation measures once such measures have been implemented. In all cases, the aggrieved must be aware of the outcome of his/her complaint. If the complainant is anonymous, information on resolution of the complaint shall be posted in the relevant village bulletin boards.
Following resolution decision, the GTRM database shall be updated to reflect the status on-going redress measures and the perception of the aggrieved in regard to these measures.
PT ERM Indonesia 36
5.2.8 CLOSE-OUT REPORTING
Close-out reports are generated upon completion of the grievance resolution process. Reviewing the information logged into the GTRM database, the GRU coordinator—working with the GRU field team and any LMS managers engaged in the grievance resolution process—generates a summary write-up of the resolution process. Close-out reports should: • Contain details of the duration of time it took for each step of the grievance resolution process
• List resolution measures agreed-upon and describe the implementation process
• Provide an evaluation of the resolution process by the GRU
• Provide the feedback of the aggrieved on the resolution process
• If appeals were registered, indicate the cause for dissatisfaction with the implementation of the initial resolution measures and explain what was done differently during the appeals resolution process
• Reflect on lessons learned
5.3 PERIODIC REVIEW OF THE GRIEVANCE DATABASE
The GTRM database is an indicative complaint handling and grievance redress registry. A periodic (semi-annual) review of this database will be generated to assess GRU performance and to identify any systemic or recurrent causes for grievance. Where systemic or recurrent grievances are identified, LMS will implement pro-active measures to resolve these issues. Any grievances that were not resolved within an appropriate timeframe will also be further investigated with the goal of arriving at immediate resolution.
5.4 TIMEFRAME LMS undertakes to respond to all complaints with 30 days of submission, and more quickly in cases where there is an urgent need for rapid resolution.
Initial processing of grievances—including entry into the GTRM and delegation for redress—received shall occur within 3 working days. Acknowledgement9 of LMS receipt grievance shall be issued to the complainant no later than 6 days from its initial receipt. The aggrieved will be asked to sign and date a written acknowledgement of receipt of notification. If
9Written responses will always be issued, but these responses may also be delivered verbally to the aggrieved at the times that the hard copy is served, as appropriate.
PT ERM Indonesia 37
more time is required to implement appropriate actions, the GRU field team will inform the complainant.
Fact-finding shall be carried-out over a period typically lasting about 5 days, though the duration of the fact finding can be extended for especially sensitive or severe issues.
The process of determining appropriate mitigation measures and confirming these with the aggrieved shall typically occur within a period of 15 days from the initial receipt of a grievance (including the fact-finding period), though more time may be necessary for especially sensitive or severe issues that require lengthy and repeated consultations with aggrieved parties.
LMS shall issue a follow-up notification to the complainant within 6 days of the completion of redress implementation, allowing another 6 days for the complainant to provide feedback. This notification shall clearly detail the appeals process.
PT ERM Indonesia 38
Figure 4.2: Quick-reference Guide to the GTRM Process
MEANS OF NOTIFICATION OF GRIEVANCE:
Where possible and appropriate, LMS staff and/or contractors first to encounter grievance should:
Step 1: Engage to fully understand grievance Step 2: Take notes of context of grievance and key contacts Step 3: Invite suggestions for potential redress Step 4: Implement immediate redress
In all cases, LMS staff and/or contractors shall, upon return to office, meet with the GRU to:
Step 1: Log details of the grievance into the GTRM database Step 2: Issue written acknowledgement of receipt of grievance
DELEGATION:
Identify appropriate LMS personnel to manage redress and coordinate throughout redress process.
INITIAL REPORTING:
Generate initial report of grievance context, issues, and key contacts. Note any redress actions implemented or promised.
FACT-FINDING:
Seek to clarify and verify context and key issues.
RESOLUTION / APPEAL:
Determine implement mitigation measures that are agreeable to all parties concerned—notifying complainant once redress actions have been implemented.
The appeals shall be triggered if the complainant is not satisfied with implementation of grievance resolution actions, and shall necessitate a renewed resolutions process.
CLOSEOUT:
Get feedback from the complainant about the resolution process. Generate closeout report.
PT ERM Indonesia 39
6 PUBLIC CONSULTATION AND DISCLOSURE GUIDELINES
This PCDP has been voluntarily developed according to the requirements of the IFC Performance Standards and the ADB Guidelines. As such, LMS is committed to a public consultation strategy that focuses on “free, prior, and informed consultation of the affected communities….leading to broad community support for the project within the affected communities…”.
The remainder of this section provides LMS guidelines on public consultation and disclosure.
6.1 Guidelines for Public Consultation Relative to project-affected communities, consultation activities focus on effective systems for information exchange to ensure that the local communities are kept informed of Project-related activities in their area in a timely manner. Where aspects of Project design and implementation may have a potential positive or negative impact, community members shall be afforded opportunities to voice their concerns and opinions, and LMS shall take these community inputs into consideration when planning appropriate risk mitigation and compensatory measures.
6.1.1 CONSULTATION OBJECTIVES In addition to key objectives of this PCDP listed in Section 1.2.2, future consultation activities will be aligned with the various phases of the Road Toll Project. These phases include construction and operations.
LMS commits to ensuring consultation objectives are reviewed and updated in accordance with the relevant phase of the project.
6.1.2 CONSULTATION APPROACHES As stated earlier in this PCDP, consultation and engagement activities related to the Toll Road Project will be in a state of constant flux and will need to be investigated according to the social, economic and environmental conditions of the day. As such, consultation approaches will need to be tailored according to the specific stakeholder, phase of the Project and/or Regency in which the activity will take place. Potential consultation/engagement methods that could be used by LMS include (but are not exclusive to):
Method* Use Briefings and presentations Provide information on a specific issue/initiative to those that may be affected. Public displays Increase accessibility of information to community. Include Fact Sheets/Newsletters and staff to answer questions. Media coverage (both Raise awareness amongst wide audience. editorial and advertising) Open days Informal event designed to raise awareness and provide
PT ERM Indonesia 40
Method* Use vehicle for addressing community concerns. Include printed material and staff for further information. Printed/website materials Provide updates to reach wide audience. (external) Printed/intranet materials Provide updates to reach wide internal audience. (internal) Videos/DVDs Visual depiction of development/activities. Can be used in briefings/presentations, open days, pubic displays and other methods of consultation/engagement. Website Provides regular updates and stores other useful information (such as fact sheets/newsletters etc.). Include feedback mechanism. Community Consultative Made up of relevant interest group representatives in order to Committees provide a vehicle for constructive discussion and good relationships. Community profiling Used to understand the community profile in a specific geographical area or community of interest. Can assist in better understanding consultation needs. Focus groups Often used to identify specific issues on which to base further research or consultation. Negotiation/mediation Aimed at dealing with conflict and resulting in an agreed outcome. Public meetings Used to raise awareness amongst wide audience and provides a vehicle for community to raise their concerns. Stakeholder interviews Used to gain in-depth understanding of a specific issue. Surveys Used to gain overview of community views or level of community understanding. Community partnerships Provide an opportunity for joint company-community decision making on community projects and initiatives. Social investment Strategic contributions to support areas of identified need in the community. Can lead to good relationships and will enhance corporate reputation.
All methods of consultation/engagement should include details of the grievance mechanism (outlined in Section 4 of this PCDP) in order to comply with IFC guidelines.
6.2 Guidelines for Disclosure LMS views disclosure activities as an opportunity to build constructive relationships with Project stakeholders—affording an opportunity to clearly communicate Project activities, schedules, and associated risks, impacts, and management measures. To the greatest extent possible, LMS commits to transparency regarding Project plans and decision-making processes, and shall maintain open channels of communication for the sharing of Project- related news and information.
6.2.1 PUBLIC NOTIFICATION FOR COMMUNITY AND STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT
PT ERM Indonesia 41
To ensure broad community and stakeholder engagement, LMS shall take steps to inform community stakeholders of the consultative processes open to them.
In advance of all public community consultations and stakeholder engagement activities, LMS shall disseminate advertisements and notifications of such activities in a manner that is culturally appropriate—taking into consideration issues of language, literacy levels, informational access etc.10— and specifically designed with respect to each activity and targeted stakeholder group. Advertisements and notifications shall be repeated multiple times before each engagement activity, and in all cases shall be repeated on at least one occasion during the week prior to the event. All advertisements and notifications shall note the time and location of the event, the location where related documentation may be reviewed in advance of or as follow-up to the event, and should articulate the appropriate channels for public comment and feedback, as well as the deadline for comments.
To ensure meaningful community engagement, in all cases where consultations will address benefits and disadvantages of the Project or changes to Project operations and their implications, LMS shall ensure that discussions of such impacts, risks, benefits and changes are made publically available with sufficient time between the provision of information and the start of consultations.
6.2.2 COMMUNITY SOCIALISATIONS AND INFORMATION MEETINGS LMS commits to informing local stakeholders directly about planned Project activities, impacts and benefits that affect them via Community Project Information Disclosure Meetings. These information meetings (often termed “socialisations” in Indonesia) shall utilise a focus group discussion-style forum. These forums will assist in the dissemination of information and will also focus on gaining community perspectives11 and insights into planned Project activities, mitigation measures, and benefits-sharing programmes. Depending on the nature, urgency,and degree of information to be transmitted, such Disclosure Meetings may be held either in the target villages or other relevant venues. It is anticipated that members of the LMS Community Relations Team will be in attendance during these meetings.
10 Public avenues for such advertisements and notifications may include (but are not limited to) newspapers, posters, radio, television, information centres and exhibitions or other visual displays
11These sessions may engage targeted stakeholder groups or may be conducted on a household basis during which two or three households may be grouped, as appropriate.
PT ERM Indonesia 42
Prior to Construction Prior to the beginning of the construction phase, Community Project Information Disclosure Meetings shall be the primary platform for relaying information to project-affected communities about the impacts, hazards and risks associated with construction activities and for gaining community insights into planned benefits-sharing arrangements.
Construction Phase Community Project Information Disclosure Meetings shall continue throughout the construction phase. As described above, the primary means for relaying information between LMS and the project-affected communities shall be through targeted engagement sessions, although public community consultations on special topics may occur from time to time. In all cases, the disclosure of relevant Project informational documents shall be carried out in advance of public consultations, as described earlier in this section.
Operations Phase Whilst public community-level socialisations and information meetings are linked to LMS information disclosure activities prior to and during the construction phase, such extensive engagement may not be required during the operations phase—due mostly to the relative decrease and uniformity of the Project activities. Accordingly, Community Project Information Disclosure Meetings during the operation phase are likely to continue on an as needed basis only.
6.2.3 DISSEMINATION OF PROJECT DOCUMENTS Disclosure of Project environmental and social documents is integral to effective stakeholder consultation. LMS commits to providing relevant information (documents) to targeted stakeholders in advance of decision- making so that these stakeholder are provided the opportunity to make informed judgments about changes that will impact them. Alongside each document, LMS will explain—in a format and language that is culturally appropriate, readily understandable and tailored to the target stakeholder group12—the significance of the document, reasons for its preparation, any
12 The materials of many documents will be complex and/or technical in nature. LMS will give ample consideration of different formats to present the key issues and risks of all project-related documents to various audiences—especially disadvantaged and vulnerable populations. Such measures may include accompanying technical documents with a video summary to show stakeholders what measures are being undertaken and to introduce issues of risk and mitigation. Points to consider when determining appropriate forms of presentation include: level of technical detail, local language and dialects, cultural sensitivity, roles of women and men, ethnic composition of communities, literacy levels, community leadership structures, and local methods of disseminating information within stakeholder groups.
PT ERM Indonesia 43
anticipated impacts and proposed mitigation measures, as well as next steps and follow-up actions such as ongoing site visits and monitoring programs. Details on the grievance mechanism mentioned earlier in this PCDP will also be included in all documents provided to stakeholders.
Environmental and social impact assessment documents in Bahasa Indonesia will be made publicly accessible, taking into consideration transportation costs, printing and translation costs, the time allowed for viewing the documents, and the timingof access (e.g. at weekends). Summaries of such documents may also be appropriate. Locations might include (but are not exclusive to):
Local community centres;
Offices of Village Heads;
Municipal and central government offices;
Local universities or academic research centres; and
Offices of local NGOs and community-based organisations.
In addition, the Project will disclose such documents to the general public on a LMS website. Future Project social and environmental reporting—including LMS newsletters, annual monitoring reports and other documents submitted to lenders,LMS annual report; LMS or corporate sustainability report—shall be similarly disclosed.
6.2.4 PUBLIC COMMENTS ON PROJECT DOCUMENTS Publically disclosed Project information—including information disseminated via community consultations as well as Project documents—will be open to public comment and feedback. Such documents may include Community Social Assessment, Compensation Framework for land acquisition, and the Indigenous People and Cultural Heritage Preservation Plan.
LMS welcomes responses in all formats (i.e. oral or written) on these documents/consultations to help improve the design and implementation of the future consultation activities and the Project in general. Public comments on consultation activities shall be logged in the project information and disclosure tracking database.
The process of commenting on publically disclosed Project documents involves a more formalised approach. Each publically disclosed document shall be explicit in defining a deadline for public comments and feedback. Comments and feedback received within this period shall inform LMS’s final review of, and revisions to, the document and LMS shall make public an account of responses to comments received.
PT ERM Indonesia 44
Tracking of Public Comments In order to respond appropriately to public comments on Project documents, LMS shall firstly capture all commentsin the project information and disclosure tracking database(a mechanism for recording Company receipt of and responses to comments on public documents). This database/mechanism shall enable:
• Acknowledgement of receipt of comments;
• A record which describes how public comments were incorporated into draft Project documents and/or an explanation of why comments were not able to be adopted, where appropriate. All relevant responses will be provided to the stakeholder/s who raised the initial comment;
• A record which describes how public comments will influence future documents, where appropriate. All relevant responses will be provided to the stakeholder/s who raised the initial comment; and
• For comments received via public consultations, assembly of a list of the location and dates of meetings, workshops, and discussions, a description of the project-affected parties and other stakeholders consulted, and a summary of issues raised (including any LMS actions promised at the time of the consultations).
6.2.5 PUBLIC NOTIFICATION OF GRIEVANCE PROCEDURES The Project will utilise various media to ensure broad community awareness of the grievance procedure (Section 4 Grievance Mechanism), such as:
• Commercial and community radio;
• Posters, to be hung in village community centres and Sub-district government offices;
• A cartoon booklet illustrating grievance procedures, to be distributed to affected communities; and direct communication with project- affected communities, particularly in relation to compensation procedures (e.g. Compensation Framework)
PT ERM Indonesia 45
7 PLANNED FUTURE PUBLIC CONSULATION ACTIVITIES
7.1 Overview LMS believes that public consultation is an ongoing process and plans to continue existing consultation efforts throughout the pre-construction, construction and operational phase of the project. As the stages of the Toll Road Project progresses through these various phases, LMS’s message will change to reflect the issues and concerns of each phase. As such, the PCDP will be continually adapted and updated to reflect this.
The pre-project public consultation and disclosure focused on imparting key messages about LMS and their approach to Toll Road Project development, Permit, Potential impact of the project, land acquisition and compensation.
LMS is committed to maintaining its ongoing program of consultation and disclosure and will:
• Maintain regular communications with all stakeholders, including the media, per LMS’s communication management plan.
• Regularly engage with the compensation negotiations committee concerning all issues concerning land access, compensation and resettlement.
• Provide local residents with regular information on project progress and related implications.
• Provide local residents with information on employment and training opportunities.
• Maintain awareness of safety issues.
• Maintain constructive relationships between local residents and LMS Project development team by continuing regular information meetings and informal interactions.
• Identify and respond to new stakeholder issues and concerns by reviewing the complaints file and listening to stakeholders.
• Monitoring implementation and effectiveness of mitigation measures such as livelihood programs, community development plans, and other social investment programs.
• Monitor community attitudes toward LMS and the project through perception surveys.
• Ensure complaints are addressed according to the established process.
PT ERM Indonesia 46
• Ensure gender sensitive and culturally appropriate processes are used in communication and interactions.
• Monitoring and evaluate the effectiveness of public involvement techniques.
• Continue independent assessments to evaluate the public consultation and disclosure process, as well as the toll road operation, resettlement activities, community development plan, and other social investment programs.
7.2 Key Messages Future public consultation will contain more information about resettlement process, land compensation, local employment and training, safety, accessibility being cut off, impact of heavy equipment utilization during construction phase, decrease of forestry and natural watershed and also mitigation and livelihood programs.
7.3 Timetable
Table 7.1 Summarises the consultation and disclosure activities that will be carried out by the LMS Toll Road Project. Table 7-1 Summary of Planned Future Consultation and Disclosure Activities
Information to Location and Issues to be be provided (the Stakeholder Key Messages Time discussed form and the mean) Location: All Land Agrarian / • Pricing Briefings and villages in 5 Acquisition Land discrepancies presentations regency Committee related to land affected by toll (TPT, P2T), compensation. road Project Affected • Payments not development. People, National in accordance Time: Land Agency, with the extent of Prior to Village land acquired as commencement government, set out in the of construction. Village leaders, certificate. Street vendor • Negative Group in Cikopo public perception surrounding land certificates being held by the Land Acquisition team. Location: Office of Bina Infrastructure • Closed access to Briefings and All villages in 5 Marga and / Building village roads due presentations regency Pengairan, to the new Toll affected by toll Office of Road road Agriculture and development. development. Food Crop, • Irrigation lane Time: Regional being cut off. Prior to Development • Concerns
PT ERM Indonesia 47
Information to Location and Issues to be be provided (the Stakeholder Key Messages Time discussed form and the mean) commencement Strategy Board, surrounding the of construction. The family to impacts of using which access is heavy equipment limited on regency and (Sukamelang village roads and Gembor), during the village construction government. phase. Location: Office of Environmental Decrease of Briefings and Subang and Agriculture and forestry zone, presentations Purwakarta Food Crop, natural fresh Regency. Local water and Time: Environmental decrease of the Prior to Agency, watershed area commencement Forestry Agency, of construction. and local Environmental NGOs. Location: Head of villages, Labour Wishing to Community All vilages in 5 community empower the local Consultative regency leaders and people as workers Committees affected by toll residents of and labourers road villages who are during the development. affected by toll construction of the Time: road toll road. Prior to development. commencement of construction. Location: Gerakan Political • Social Negotiation / Subang Masyarakat movement of mediation Regency and Bawah individuals, all 5 Indonesia groups or government (GMBI), Head organisations that regency of villages, claim to fight for Time: community the interests of Prior to leaders and communities who commencement representative of are considered to of construction. project affected have been people. disadvantaged because of the toll road. • Inter- institutional relationships among government, where several of the local stakeholders feel less involved or less embodied in the process of highway construction.
Location: Office of Economic • Decreased Subang , Agriculture and plantation Majalengka Food Crop. production due to and Indramayu the changing of Regency land function
PT ERM Indonesia 48
Information to Location and Issues to be be provided (the Stakeholder Key Messages Time discussed form and the mean) Time: from agriculture Prior to land to Toll Road. commencement • The power that of construction. high scale investors may have on economic benefits as a result of the Toll Road. Location: Government Environment Findings of Briefings and All villages in 5 officials from 5 and Social Environmental presentations regency Regency, all and Social Impact affected by toll districts and all Assessment and road villages who are mitigation development. directly affected measures. Time: by the toll road Prior to project. Local commencement level NGOs and of construction. CBOs and all project affected people. Location: Government Environment The release of • Briefing and Time: official at the and social. final draft ESHIA presentation Prior to level of West document. • Printed commencement Java Province, 5 report of construction. Regency and • Website villages who are • Community affected by the consultative toll road Committees projects, community leaders, and project affected people.
PT ERM Indonesia 49
8 PCDP IMPLEMENTATION
LMS acknowledges that to ensure effective stakeholder engagement, disclosure and grievance mechanism to be implemented, it must dedicate sufficient human, financial and information resources.
In addition, effectiveness of the PCDP relies on a continuous improvement cycle of monitoring, reporting and evaluations.
A description of dedicated resources and monitoring, reporting and evaluation commitments is provided in the following sections.
8.1 Resources and Responsibilities
LMS maintains dedicated teams to manage community relations, disclosure and grievance resolution activities. The primary responsibility of these teams is to build positive relationships with local communities and other Project stakeholders throughout the construction and operations phases.
LMS has committed the following resources which are considered essential to the project:
PT ERM Indonesia 50
Figure 8-1 Administrative Framework for Managing Community Relations, Disclosure and Grievances
Project Director Stakeholder Relation Director
Social and Environment Manager a) Stakeholder Relation Manager b) Grievance Redress Unit (GRU) Manager
Social and Environmental Superintendent a) Stakeholder Relation Officer (Coordination with Project Management b) GRU Superintendant Consultant and EPC Contractors)
Environmental Site and Community Development GRU Coordinator Operation Coordinator Coordinator
Environmental Officer Community Development Database GRU Database GRU Field Team Officers (CROs) Administrator Administrator
PT ERM Indonesia 52
8.2 Monitoring, Reporting and Evaluation
8.2.1 MONITORING Oversight and monitoring of PCDP activities against set objectives will be implemented via continuous progress reporting by designated LMS management team members. The generation and distribution of these internal monitoring reports is the responsibility of the Communications Department, which shall ensure that all relevant information on PCDP implementation passes through the Communications Manager for further dissemination to the other appropriate members of the LMS Project management and administration team.
In addition to internal monitoring, the Project will engage an external monitoring team to assess the operation of the project grievance mechanism, mitigation programs (such as the Compensation Framework), and benefits sharing efforts (such as the Community Development Plan), as well as how and when the results of stakeholder engagement efforts are reported back to affected stakeholders and broader stakeholder groups. Such assessments will be conducted on a semi-annual basis.
8.2.2 REPORTING LMS will prepare semi-annual reports on its operations throughout the Project lifecycle. These reports will focus particularly on those activities which directly affect communities in the Toll Road-impacted regencies.
LMS will also prepare and publicly disclose information on its activities to local communities, government partners at various levels, and the general public. Such reports will take the form of LMS Semi-Annual Reports, community newsletters and similar reporting tools. In addition, the following reports will be disclosed publicly and will be made available for public comment:
• ESHIA Report incorporates: o Community Social Assessment o Cultural Heritage Assessment o Indigenous People Screening and Validation o Public Consultation and Disclosure Plan • Land Acquisition and Corrective Action Plan Report
• Community Development Plan Report
PT ERM Indonesia 53
8.2.3 EVALUATION
LMS will maintains an active file regarding all public consultation and disclosure documentation collected throughout the Project, which are available for public review upon request.
The outcome of the public consultation and disclosure plan will be evaluated against the following sets of criteria:
• The LMS Social Responsibility Standard concerning Monitoring and Evaluation which is currently in the process of developing and finalising. • Principal / Indicators in the IFC Guidance Notes on public consultation and disclosure.
Tabel 8-1 IFC principal13 for public consultation and disclosure and how the LMS will meet the criteria.
IFC Principal How will LMS meet the criteria Written and oral communications in LMS will prepare and continually evaluate local languages and readily appropriate forms of presentation and executive understandable formats. summary of the document with consideration given to level of technical detail, local language and dialects, cultural sensitivity, roles of women and men, ethnic composition of communities, literacy levels, community leadership structures, and local methods of disseminating information within stakeholder groups.
Easy accessibility to both written LMS will prepare and continually evaluate culturally information and to the consultation appropriate advertisements (with consideration of process by relevant stakeholders. language, location, literacy, level, etc.) for all public consultation and disclosure activities. Announcements or advertisements will also explain when and where the project documents may be reviewed in advance of consultation activities and any deadlines for comments. Mean of disseminating information may include; local and national newspapers, posters, broadcast media, information centres, exhibitions and direct channels for information sharing between LMS and project affected communities (such as via CLOs and Community Representatives).
Use of oral or visual methods to LMS will give ample consideration of different explain information to non-literate formats to present the key issues and risks of all people project-related documents to various audiences— especially disadvantaged and vulnerable
13The International Finance Corporation Procedure for Environmental and Social Review of Projects; Guidance Note F: Guidance for Preparation of a Public Consultation and Disclosure Plan.
PT ERM Indonesia 54
IFC Principal How will LMS meet the criteria populations. Such measures may include accompanying technical documents with a video summary to show stakeholders what measures are being undertaken and to introduce issues of risk and mitigation.
Respect of local traditions of LMS will facilitate the establishment of a body for discussion, reflection, and decision joint decision-making among representatives of the making. community, the local governments and the Company.
In every public consultation and disclosure activities, LMS will give consideration to level of technical detail on local language and dialects, cultural sensitivity, roles of women and men, ethnic composition of communities, literacy levels, community leadership structures, and local methods of disseminating information within stakeholder groups.
Care in assuring that groups being LMS will continually provide and update an consulted are representative (with inventory of key stakeholder groups with regard of adequate representation of women, cultural sensitivity, roles of women and men, vulnerable groups, and ethnic or vulnerable groups, ethnic composition of religious minorities, and separate communities who will be informed and consulted meetings for various groups, where about the project. necessary.
Clear mechanisms to respond to LMS will develop and manage project information people’s comments, concerns, and disclosure tracking database (a mechanism for suggestions and grievances. recording Company receipt of and responses to comments on public documents). This will be managed by the Local Development Support department – using community liaison officers (CLOs) as focal points for community-company dialogue.
LMS will also established Grievance Tracking and Redress Mechanism (GTRM) and a Grievance Redress Unit (GRU)to provide a process for resolving grievances expeditiously, effectively and in a transparent manner.
Evaluation will be qualitative as well as quantitative, using interviews and focus groups as well as questionnaires and desktop reviews, and will take place on a regular basis as well as at project milestones. Regular evaluations will be undertaken by LMS’s Evaluation and Monitoring Unit as well as evaluations by external independent evaluators. The result of ongoing evaluation will be made available to stakeholders by various means, and will be used as a basis for revising the PCDP where necessary.
LMS will collaborate with independent social assessors to conduct monitoring and evaluation. In addition to the public consultation and disclosure programme, monitoring and evaluation will also focus on the resettlement
PT ERM Indonesia 55
activities, implementation for livelihood and community development programs, and any other social investment programs.
PT ERM Indonesia 56
Appendix A
International Agreements Applicable to Indonesia Regarding Disclosure, Consultation, and Grievance Redress.
International Labour Organisation (ILO) – Fundamental Conventions
The Government of Indonesia is party to the eight ‘fundamental’ ILO conventions—four of which contain provisions relevant to Project public consultation and disclosure activates. These are:
C 29: Forced Labour [1930]
Convention 29 contains the following provisions which outline requirements for community consultation, disclosure, and grievance redress: Article 2e states that communities, or their direct representatives, must be first consulted about the necessity of a particular community service before being compelled and obligated to perform that community service.
Article 23 stipulates that any person from whom forced or compulsory labour is exacted must be allowed to forward to the authorities all complaints relative to labour conditions. Labour Regulations must be in place to ensure that such complaints are examined and taken into consideration.
Article 24 mandates that any authorities, who are extracting forced or compulsory labour, must notify the labourers of all the regulations governing the lawful extraction of forced or compulsory labour.
C 111: Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) [1958]
Convention 111 contains the following provisions on community consultation, disclosure, and grievance redress:
Article 3 requires state parties to seek both employer and worker cooperation in promoting the acceptance and observance of the convention’s anti-discrimination employment policy. It obligates states to “enact legislation and promote such educational programmes as may be calculated to secure the acceptance and observance of the policy.”
Article 5 specifies that measures designed for the special protection of vulnerable populations shall not be deemed as discrimination, and enables state parties to establish such measures in consultation with representative employers’ and workers’ organisations
PT ERM Indonesia 57
C 138: Minimum Age [1973]
Convention 138 contains the following provisions for public consultation and disclosure:
Article 2 (para. 4) stipulates that state parties whose economy and educational facilities are insufficiently developed may initially specify a minimum working age of 14 years only after consultation with the organisations of employers and workers concerned
Article 3 (paras. 1-3) requires regulating authorities to consult with concerned employer and worker organisations when determining types of employment likely to jeopardise the health, safety or morals of young persons. These types of employment require a minimum working age of either 16 or 18 years, depending
Article 5 requires state parties whose economy and administrative facilities are insufficiently developed to publically consult with concerned employer and worker organisations should they wish to initially limit the scope of application of this convention.
Article 8 stipulates that only after consultation with the organisations of employers and workers concerned may a competent authority, by permits granted in individual cases, allow exceptions to the prohibition of employment or work outlined within this convention for such purposes as participation in artistic performances.
Article 9 (para. 3) requires state parties to enact national laws or regulations that require employers to keep and make available a register of all employees under 18 years of age that contains their names and ages.
C 182: Worst Forms of Child Labour [1999]
Convention 182 contains the following provisions which outline requirements for community consultation:
Article 4 (paras. 1-3) requires state parties to consult with concerned organisations of employers when determining and reviewing types of work that by its nature or the circumstances in which it is carried out, is likely to harm the health, safety or morals of children, taking into consideration relevant international standards and particularly paragraphs 3 and 4 of the Worst Forms of Child Labour Recommendation, 1999.
Article 5 Each Member shall, after consultation with employers' and workers' organisations, establish or designate appropriate mechanisms
PT ERM Indonesia 58
to monitor the implementation of the provisions giving effect to this Convention.
Article 6 (paras. 2) Requires that programmes of action to eliminate as a priority the worst forms of child labour shall be designed and implemented in consultation with relevant government institutions and employers' and workers' organisations, taking into consideration the views of other concerned groups as appropriate.
Convention on Biological Diversity14
The 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) is an international legally binding treaty, signed and ratified by the Government of Indonesia.15The Convention has three main goals:
1) conservation of biological diversity
2) sustainable use of its components
3) fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from genetic resources
Within the convention, the following passages relate to community consultation and participation:
Article 8: In-situ Conservation
Article 8(j) specifies that, subject to national legislation, party states must:
“respect, preserve and maintain knowledge, innovations and practices of indigenous and local communities embodying traditional lifestyles relevant for the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity and promote their wider application with the approval and involvement of the holders of such knowledge, innovations and practices and encourage the equitable sharing of the benefits arising from the utilisation of such knowledge, innovations and practices”
This article carries with it the implicit requirement that for projects affecting indigenous and local communities, such communities need to be consulted with and studied regarding their practices of biodiversity conservation. Indigenous participation is critical not only in regards to gathering this information, but also in terms of deciding equitable recompense for the benefits accrued from the utilisation of indigenous knowledge.
Article 14: Impact Assessment and Minimising Adverse Impacts
Article 14(c) notes that parties to the conventions must promote informed consultation on activities that are likely to cause significant adverse effects on the biological diversity of other States or areas beyond the limits of their own
14http://www.cbd.int/
15http://www.cbd.int/convention/parties/list/
PT ERM Indonesia 59
national jurisdiction. Such promotion may be achieved by encouraging the negotiation of bilateral, regional or multilateral arrangements.
Decisions of the Conference of Parties
In addition to the CBD itself, the Decisions of the Conference of Parties (COP) must also be taken into account—intended as they are to determine the policy, strategy and programme priorities within the framework of the COP.
At the Fifth Conference of Parties, a Decision16 was adopted reiterating the necessity of the participation of Indigenous Peoples in the development of guidelines for benefits sharing. In addition, the Decision clearly states that women and women’s organisation must be fully incorporated in the consultation process and given full access to participation. To achieve these aims, the Decision mandates that various mediums of communications should be used to most effectively reach, inform, and include the view and concerns of target indigenous populations. The Decision also states that Indigenous People should be engaged to develop a register of knowledge on traditional practices and lifestyles relevant to conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity and about ways to strengthen legislation, customary practices and traditional systems of resource management and methods of protecting their knowledge against unauthorised use. It requires that women’s knowledge be of conservation and methods of sustaining biological diversity be specially documented and preserved. Finally, the Decision of the Fifth Conference of Parties states that Indigenous Peoples and local communities must be consulted and encouraged to participate in the development of cultural, environmental and social impact assessments regarding any development proposed to take place on sacred sites and on lands or waters occupied or used by indigenous and local communities.
Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination17
The UN International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) is a second-generation human rights instrument that commits its members to the elimination of racial discrimination and the promotion of understanding among all races. The Government of Indonesia
16Decision V/16, Annex: Programme of Work, 1 General Principles 5, 139–42; Available at: http://www.cbd.int/decision/cop/?id=7158
17http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/cerd.htm
PT ERM Indonesia 60
acceded to this convention on 25 Jun 199918 (with the reservation that it does not consider itself bound by the provision of Article 22).
While the ICERD itself does not contain specific requirements on community consultation, it establishes the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination19, and empowers it to make general recommendations to the UN General Assembly.
Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination20
The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) is a body of human rights experts tasked with monitoring the implementation of the Convention. It consists of 18 independent human rights experts, elected for four-year terms, with half the members elected every two years. The CERD holds regular thematic discussions on issues related to racial discrimination and the Convention. The Committee its then publishes its interpretation of the content of human rights provisions, in the form of general comments (referred to as "general recommendations" in the practice of this committee) on thematic issues.
All parties are required to submit regular reports to the CERD outlining the legislative, judicial, and executive policies and other measures they have taken to give effect to the Convention. The first report is due within a year of the Convention entering into effect for that state; thereafter reports are due every two years or whenever the Committee requests.The Committee examines each report and addresses its concerns and recommendations to the state party in the form of "concluding observations".
Based on, and in response to, the initial three reports21 submitted by the Government of Indonesia (2000, 2002, and 2004), the CERD in 200722made recommendations to amend Indonesia’s domestic laws, regulations so as to integrate the economic and social interests of Indigenous People into the country’s overall Modernisation, Economic, and Social Development Plan. The aim of such reform and integration is recognition and respect of the important
18http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IV- 2&chapter=4&lang=en
19The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination is a body of human rights experts tasked with monitoring the implementation of the Convention.
20http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/cerd/
21http://daccess-dds- ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G06/412/70/PDF/G0641270.pdf?OpenElement
22CERD/C/IDN/CO/3.Seventy-first session, Geneva: 30 July-18 August 2007. Available at: http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/cerd/docs/CERD.C.IDN.CO.3.pdf
PT ERM Indonesia 61
contributions of Indigenous People’s cultures to national identity. Indigenous Peoples should also be provided with the means for sustainable economic and social development. Consultation and cooperation with Indigenous Peoples is deemed necessary to achieve these goals.
The Committee also prescribes certain measures to ensure the protection and recognition of Indigenous Peoples’ communal land. Before the commencement of land development projects, the possession and ownership rights of local communities should be secured. This process should be based on meaningful consultation and should ensure the participation and consent of Indigenous Peoples.
Finally, the Committee strongly recommends efforts to prevent the resurgence of ethnic conflicts. The Committee recommends assessments of the adverse impact of the transmigration programme—particularly on the rights of local communities—and encourages initiatives to promote mutual understanding between communities and mutual knowledge and respect for their histories, traditions and languages.
PT ERM Indonesia 62
Appendix B
Indonesia Laws Relevant to Public Consultation and Disclosure
Law (UU) No 23 of 1997 re: Environmental Management
Indonesian Law 23/1997 revokes Law 4/1982 re: Basic Provisions on Environmental Management. Law 23/1997 outlines the scope and mechanisms of the government's environmental management authority, including the delegation of authority to local communities to develop their own environmental management plans. The law also requires all businesses and persons to comply with the regulations established at local levels of government.
Under Law 23/1997, local communities are encouraged to actively supervise and participate in all aspects of environmental management. Specific regulations for such public participation, however, are not clearly defined. Relative to obligation of companies, requires disclosure of environment impact analyses and environmental management plans. Specifically, before initiating work in any area of its concession area, a mining company must prepare an Environmental Assessment (AMDAL) that documents the social and environmental impacts of all stages (construction, mining, closure) of the proposed mining activity. Within thirty (30) working days of the date of the announcement of the activities, community members have the right to propose suggestions, opinions and provide input to the proponent.
Law (UU) No. 41 of 1999 re: Forestry
Law 41/1999 introduces the concept of ‘social forestry’ as a way for communities to jointly manage their forest resources. In the framework of economic empowerment of the community, every business entity is required to obtain permission to manage forests in cooperation with local community cooperatives. Management of forest and land rehabilitation utilise participatory approaches to help develop and empower local communities.
Government Regulation (PP) No. 27 of 1999 re: Environmental Impact Assessment
Government Regulation 27/199 acknowledges that the local governments (under BAPEDAL23 supervision) will be responsible for AMDAL review. This
23Environmental Impact Management Agency; BAPEDALDA as it is referred at provincial level
PT ERM Indonesia 63
law also greatly increases the necessity of in-depth public consultation during the AMDAL drafting process.
Head of Environment Impact Control Agency (BAPEDAL) Decree (KepKa24) No. 8 of 2000 re: Public Participation in and the Disclosure of Information on the AMDAL Process
Decree 8/2000 relates to public involvement and information disclosure regulations under the AMDAL Process. The Decree includes requirements for all development projects to improve communications with the public as a means toward greater project transparency and accountability25—including via public advertisements and invitations for public comment on the Terms of Reference for a project’s Environment Impact Assessment (Analisis Mengenai Dampak Lingkungan; AMDAL). Stakeholders with interests in this proposed activity region, express their aspirations, needs, and community values in a public meeting, and also can give their suggestions for addressing impacts. The local community must be represented on the AMDAL Commission.
Minister of Environment Regulation (LH) No. 08 of 2006 re: Guidelines for the Preparation of the Environmental Impact Assessment (AMDAL)
Regulation 8/2006also to public involvement and information disclosure regulations under the AMDAL process. Specifically, Annex 1 requires that a company must publically disclose information about project activities and seek public comment and response as inputs into project decision-making processes. This section also identifies the importance of community social and environmental resources and values and indicates the company’s responsibility for protection and preservation of community values. Section 8 notes that community inputs are vital in project risk assessments and definitions of the project zone of social impact (social boundaries). Chapter II reiterates the need for stakeholder engagement in project scoping. Chapter IV discusses consultation requirements for the assessment process (especially socialization of planned project activities) and requirements for disclosure of the EIA document (especially disclosure of project risks).
24Keputusan Kepala
25Previously, only the government was formally notified of the project, the proposed activities, and its potential impacts.
PT ERM Indonesia 64
Law (UU) No. 32 of 2009 re: Environmental Protection and Management
Law 32/2009 requires elements of transparency, participation, accountability and fairness factor into every process of formulation and implementation of environmental law enforcement. The law strengthens measures for access to information, access, participation, and access to justice, and strengthening the rights of communities in environmental protection and management. It provides that companies must disclose environmental and social documents submitted to DOME to interested parties upon request. Quarterly and annual reports are announced and made publicly available through Sponsors mining, and BAPADAL (national) / BAPADALDA (local) offices.
PT ERM Indonesia 65
Appendix C
IFC Performance Standards Requirements for Consultation and Disclosure
PS1: Social and Environmental Assessment and Management System
Among other issues, Performance Standard 1 establishes the importance of effective community engagement through disclosure of project-related information and consultation with local communities on matters that directly affect them. Community engagement is defined as “an on-going process involving the client’s disclosure of information… free of external manipulation, interference, or coercion, and intimidation, and conducted on the basis of timely, relevant, understandable and accessible information”. The purpose of such engagement is “to build and maintain over time a constructive relationship with these communities.” The nature and frequency of community engagement must reflect the project’s risks to and adverse impacts on the affected communities.
IFC articulates three general topics within the framework of community engagement: Disclosure, Consultation and Grievance Mechanisms.
Disclosure
IFC requires that clients publicly disclose the Assessment document. If communities face potential risks or adverse impacts from the project, clients must provide such communities with access to information on the purpose, nature and scale of the project, the duration of proposed project activities, and the nature of such potential risks and impacts. Disclosure should occur early in the Social and Environmental Assessment process and in any event before the project construction commences; disclosure must also be continued on an ongoing basis.
Consultation
If affected communities may be subject to risks or adverse impacts from a project, IFC requires that clients undertake a process of consultation in a manner that provides the affected communities with opportunities to express their views on project risks, impacts, and mitigation measures. Such consultation should also allow the client to consider and respond to community inputs. Effective consultation:
(i) should be based on the prior disclosure of relevant and adequate information, including draft documents and plans
(ii) should begin early in the Social and Environmental Assessment process
(iii) must focus on the social and environmental risks and adverse impacts, and the proposed measures and actions to address these
PT ERM Indonesia 66
(iv) must be carried out on an on-going basis as risks and impacts arise.
Consultation must be undertaken in a manner that is inclusive and culturally appropriate—tailoring the consultation process to the language preferences and decision-making process of the affected communities and to the needs of disadvantaged or vulnerable groups.
For projects with significant adverse impacts on affected communities, consultation must ensure their free, prior and informed consultation and facilitate their informed participation. Informed participation involves organised and iterative consultations that ascertain the views of affected communities on matters that affect them directly (such as proposed mitigation measures, the sharing of development benefits and opportunities, and implementation issues) and then incorporates community inputs directly into the Client decision-making process. The consultation must be documented— particularly the measures taken to avoid or minimise risks to, and adverse impacts on, the affected communities.
Grievance Mechanism
IFC mandates that clients respond to communities’ concerns. If anticipating ongoing risks to or adverse impacts on affected communities, the client must establish a grievance mechanism to receive and facilitate resolution of communities’ concerns and grievances. The grievance mechanism should be scaled to the risks and adverse impacts of the project. It should address concerns promptly using an understandable and transparent process that is culturally appropriate and readily accessible to all segments of the affected communities—at no cost and without retribution. The mechanism should not impede access to judicial or administrative remedies.
The client must inform the affected communities about the project grievance mechanism in the course of its community engagement process.
Reporting
In terms of external reporting, IFC requires clients to disclose to affected communities an Action Plan describing specific mitigation measures and actions necessary for the project to comply with applicable laws and regulations and to meet the requirements of the Performance Standards. Clients must also provide periodic reports that describe progress with Action Plan implementation on issues that involve ongoing risk to, or impacts on, affected communities, and on issues of concern identified via the consultation process or grievance mechanism. These reports must also be in a format accessible to the affected communities and in a frequency proportionate to the concerns of affected communities (but not less than annually).
PT ERM Indonesia 67
PS 2: Labour and Working Conditions
Performance Standard 2 requires consultation to be carried out in cases where large-scale retrenchment is necessary (e.g. at the end of the project operation phase). In these cases, the client must ensure consultation with employees, their representative organisations and the government (where appropriate) in a manner that is absent of discrimination.
IFC PS 2 also stipulates the need for a grievance mechanism for workers (and their organisations, where they exist) to raise reasonable workplace concerns. This mechanism should involve an appropriate level of management and address concerns promptly, using an understandable and transparent process that provides feedback to those concerned, without any retribution. The mechanism should not impede access to other judicial or administrative remedies that might be available under law or through existing arbitration procedures, or substitute for grievance mechanisms provided through collective agreements. IFC obligates clients to inform their workforce of the grievance mechanism at the time of hire, and make it easily accessible to them.
PS 5: Land Acquisition and Involuntary Resettlement
Performance Standard 5 also requires consultations that evidence the informed participation of affected persons and communities in decision- making processes. It stipulates that consultation “will continue during the implementation, monitoring, and evaluation of compensation payment and resettlement”.
For instances of physical displacement, consultations must help clients to offer displaced persons choices among feasible resettlement options, and provide relocation assistance suited to the needs of each group of displaced persons— with particular attention to the needs of the poor and the vulnerable. Consultations are also necessary to inform clients’ determinations of relocation assistance that suffice to restore the standards of living of affected people and communities.
IFC also mandates that clients establish special grievance mechanisms for receive and addresses concerns specific to compensation and relocation.
PS 6: Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Natural Resource Management
For Performance Standard 6, the need for community consultation is understood as integral to defining an appropriate system of independent certification for the sustainable management of the resources.
PT ERM Indonesia 68
PS 7: Indigenous Peoples
Information disclosure, consultation and informed participation are key issues in IFC Performance Standard 7. When a project initiative will affect communities of Indigenous Peoples, the Client is to establish an ongoing relationship from as early as possible in the project planning stage and to maintain it throughout the life of the project. In projects with adverse impacts, the consultation process will ensure the free, prior, and informed consultation of affected communities of Indigenous Peoples and facilitate their informed participation on matters that affect them directly. Processes of community engagement must be culturally appropriate and commensurate with the risks and potential impacts to the Indigenous Peoples.
To ensure these aims, IFC mandates the following steps:
involve Indigenous Peoples’ representative bodies (e.g. councils of elders or village councils, etc.) be inclusive of both women and men and of various age groups in a culturally appropriate manner provide sufficient time for Indigenous Peoples’ collective decision- making processes facilitate the Indigenous Peoples’ expression of their views, concerns, and proposals in the language of their choice, without external manipulation, interference, or coercion, and without intimidation ensure that the grievance mechanism is culturally appropriate and accessible for Indigenous Peoples
For projects affecting communities of Indigenous Peoples, IFC also requires clients to “seek to identify, through the process of free, prior, and informed consultation with, and the informed participation of, the affected communities of Indigenous Peoples, opportunities for culturally appropriate development benefits.” Such opportunities and benefits should be commensurate with the degree of project impacts, with the aim of improving their standard of living and livelihoods in a culturally appropriate manner, and to fostering the long- term sustainability of the natural resources upon which Indigenous Peoples communities rely. The client must document identified development benefits and make them accessible to Indigenous Peoples communities in a timely and equitable manner.
PT ERM Indonesia 69
PS 8: Cultural Heritage
Performance Standard 8 states that where a project may affect cultural heritage, clients must consult with affected communities who use, or have used within living memory, the cultural heritage for longstanding cultural purposes and must incorporate the views of the affected communities on such cultural heritage into the client’s decision-making process. Consultation will also involve the relevant national or local regulatory agencies that are entrusted with the protection of cultural heritage.
PT ERM Indonesia 70
Appendix D
ADB Safeguard Requirements for Consultation and Disclosure
Safeguard Requirement 1: Environment
Safeguard Requirements 1 outlines the requirements that borrowers/clients are required to meet when delivering environmental safeguards for projects supported by the Asian Development Bank (ADB). It discusses the objectives and scope of application, and underscores the requirements for undertaking the environmental assessment process. These requirements include assessing impacts, planning and managing impact mitigations, preparing environmental assessment reports, disclosing information and undertaking consultation, establishing a grievance mechanism, and monitoring and reporting. The document also includes particular environmental safeguard requirements pertaining to biodiversity conservation and sustainable management of natural resources, pollution prevention and abatement, occupational and community health and safety, and conservation of physical cultural resources. The applicability of particular requirements is established through the environmental assessment process and compliance with the requirements is achieved through implementation of environmental management plans agreed to by ADB and the borrower/client.
Consultation and Participation
The borrower/client will carry out meaningful consultation with affected people and other concerned stakeholders, including civil society, and facilitate their informed participation. Meaningful consultation is a process that (i) begins early in the project preparation stage and is carried out on an ongoing basis throughout the project cycle;1 (ii) provides timely disclosure of relevant and adequate information that is understandable and readily accessible to affected people; (iii) is undertaken in an atmosphere free of intimidation or coercion; (iv) is gender inclusive and responsive, and tailored to the needs of disadvantaged and vulnerable groups; and (v) enables the incorporation of all relevant views of affected people and other stakeholders into decision making, such as project design, mitigation measures, the sharing of development benefits and opportunities, and implementation issues. Consultation will be carried out in a manner commensurate with the impacts on affected communities. The consultation process and its results are to be documented and reflected in the environmental assessment report.
Information Disclosure
The borrower/client will submit to ADB the following documents for disclosure on ADB’s website:
(i) a draft full EIA (including the draft EMP) at least 120 days prior to ADB Board consideration, and/or environmental assessment and review frameworks before project appraisal, where applicable;
PT ERM Indonesia 71
(ii) the final EIA/IEE;
(iii) a new or updated EIA/IEE and corrective action plan prepared during project implementation, if any; and
(iv) the environmental monitoring reports.
Grievance Redress Mechanism
The borrower/client will establish a mechanism to receive and facilitate resolution of affected peoples’ concerns, complaints, and grievances about the project’s environmental performance. The grievance mechanism should be scaled to the risks and adverse impacts of the project. It should address affected people's concerns and complaints promptly, using an understandable and transparent process that is gender responsive, culturally appropriate, and readily accessible to all segments of the affected people at no costs and without retribution. The mechanism should not impede access to the country’s judicial or administrative remedies. The affected people will be appropriately informed about the mechanism.
Safeguard Requirements 2: Involuntary Resettlement
Safeguard Requirements 2 outlines the requirements that borrowers/clients are required to meet in delivering involuntary resettlement safeguards to projects supported by the Asian Development Bank (ADB). It discusses the objectives, scope of application, and underscores the requirements for undertaking the social impact assessment and resettlement planning process, preparing social impact assessment reports and resettlement planning documents, exploring negotiated land acquisition, disclosing information and engaging in consultations, establishing a grievance mechanism, and resettlement monitoring and reporting.
Consultation and Participation
The borrower/client will conduct meaningful consultation with affected persons, their host communities, and civil society for every project and subproject identified as having involuntary resettlement impacts. Meaningful consultation is a process that (i) begins early in the project preparation stage and is carried out on an ongoing basis throughout the project cycle; (ii) provides timely disclosure of relevant and adequate information that is understandable and readily accessible to affected people; (iii) is undertaken in an atmosphere free of intimidation or coercion; (iv) is gender inclusive and responsive, and tailored to the needs of disadvantaged and vulnerable groups; and (v) enables the incorporation of all relevant views of affected people and other stakeholders into decision making, such as project design, mitigation measures, the sharing of development benefits and opportunities, and implementation issues. Consultation will be carried out in a manner commensurate with the impacts on affected communities. The
PT ERM Indonesia 72
borrower/client will pay particular attention to the need of disadvantaged or vulnerable groups, especially those below the poverty line, the landless, the elderly, female headed households, women and children, Indigenous Peoples, and those without legal title to land.
Information Disclosure
The borrower/client will submit the following documents to ADB for disclosure on ADB’s website:
(i) a draft resettlement plan and/or resettlement framework endorsed by the borrower/client before project appraisal;
(ii) the final resettlement plan endorsed by the borrower/client after the census of affected persons has been completed;
(iii) a new resettlement plan or an updated resettlement plan, and a corrective action plan prepared during project implementation, if any; and
(iv) the resettlement monitoring reports.
The borrower/client will provide relevant resettlement information, including information from the documents in a timely manner, in an accessible place and in a form and language(s) understandable to affected persons and other stakeholders. For illiterate people, suitable other communication methods will be used.
Grievance Redress Mechanism
The borrower/client will establish a mechanism to receive and facilitate the resolution of affected persons’ concerns and grievances about physical and economic displacement and other project impacts, paying particular attention to the impacts on vulnerable groups. The grievance redress mechanism should be scaled to the risks and adverse impacts of the project. It should address affected persons’ concerns and complaints promptly, using an understandable and transparent process that is gender responsive, culturally appropriate, and readily accessible to the affected persons at no costs and without retribution. The mechanism should not impede access to the country’s judicial or administrative remedies. The borrower/client will inform affected persons about the mechanism.
Safeguard Requirements 3: Indigenous Peoples
Safeguard Requirements 3 outlines the requirements that borrowers/clients are required to meet in delivering Indigenous Peoples safeguards to projects supported by ADB. It discusses the objectives and scope of application, and underscores the requirements pertaining to (i) undertaking the social impact assessment and planning process; (ii) preparing social impact assessment reports and planning documents; (iii) disclosing information and undertaking consultation, including ascertaining consent of affected Indigenous Peoples
PT ERM Indonesia 73
community to selected project activities; (iv) establishing a grievance mechanism; and (v) monitoring and reporting. This set of policy requirements will safeguard Indigenous Peoples' rights to maintain, sustain, and preserve their cultural identities, practices, and habitats and to ensure that projects affecting them will take the necessary measures to protect these rights.
Consultation and Participation
The borrower/client will undertake meaningful consultation with affected Indigenous Peoples to ensure their informed participation in (i) designing, implementing, and monitoring measures to avoid adverse impacts on them or, when avoidance is not possible, to minimize, mitigate, and compensate for such effects; and (ii) tailoring project benefits that accrue to them in a culturally appropriate manner. Meaningful consultation is a process that (i) begins early in the project preparation stage and is carried out on an ongoing basis throughout the project cycle; (ii) provides timely disclosure of relevant and adequate information that is understandable and readily accessible to affected people; (iii) is undertaken in an atmosphere free of intimidation or coercion; (iv) is gender inclusive and responsive, and tailored to the needs of disadvantaged and vulnerable groups; and (v) enables the incorporation of all relevant views of affected people and other stakeholders into decision making, such as project design, mitigation measures, the sharing of development benefits and opportunities, and implementation issues. Consultation will be carried out in a manner commensurate with the impacts on affected communities. The consultation process and its results will be documented and reflected in the Indigenous Peoples plan (IPP).
To carry out meaningful consultation with affected Indigenous Peoples, the borrower/client will establish a context-specific strategy for inclusive and participatory consultation, including approaches of identifying appropriate Indigenous Peoples representatives, and consultation methods appropriate to the social and cultural values of the affected Indigenous Peoples communities. The borrower/client will pay special attention to the concerns of indigenous women and youth. When the borrower/client and the affected Indigenous Peoples have serious differences and disagreements in relation to the project, its components, or the IPP, the borrower/ client will undertake good faith negotiations to resolve such differences and disagreements.
Information Disclosure
The borrower/client will submit to ADB the following documents to disclose on ADB’s website:
(i) a draft IPP and/or Indigenous Peoples planning framework, including the social impact assessment, endorsed by the borrower/client, before appraisal;
(ii) the final IPP upon completion;
PT ERM Indonesia 74
(iii) a new or updated IPP and a corrective action plan prepared during implementation, if any; and
(iv) the monitoring reports.
The borrower/client will provide relevant information, including information from the above documents in a timely manner, in an accessible place and in a form and language(s) understandable to the affected Indigenous Peoples and other stakeholders. If the Indigenous Peoples are illiterate, other appropriate communication methods will be used.
Grievance Redress Mechanism
The borrower/client will establish a mechanism to receive and facilitate resolution of the affected Indigenous Peoples communities’ concerns, complaints, and grievances. The grievance mechanism will be scaled to the impacts of the project. It should address concerns and complaints promptly, using an understandable and transparent process that is culturally appropriate, gender responsive, and accessible to the affected Indigenous Peoples communities at no cost and without retribution. The mechanism should not impede access to the country’s judicial or administrative remedies. The affected Indigenous Peoples communities will be appropriately informed about the mechanism.
PT ERM Indonesia 75
Appendix E
Respondent and Stakeholder Lists
RESPONDENT LIST BY PROVINCE/REGENCY
West Java Province
• Fidel Giawa (GMBI)
• Dede Mulyanto (Anthropogy, Padjajaran University)
• Indri (Akatiga)
• Poppy FA (West Java Office of Agriculture and Food Crops)
• Hendi Jatnika (Office of Plantation)
• Eten Roseli (Head of Land Acquisition Team, Bina Marga)
• Edi Kusnadi (Perhutani)
• Dedi Efendi (Regional Environmental Board)
• T. Harrie Murti (Regional Development Strategy Board)
• Adang (West Java Chamber of commerce)
• Budharta Abunawan (STIH)
• Mulyanto (National Land Agency)
Regency of Purwakarta
• Hadian (Kepala Bidang Pemerintahan Umum and land acquisition team task force of Purwakarta).
• Asep Suhali (Chief of Regional Infrastructure – Bappeda)
• Iwan Subarna (Chief of Environment and planology – Bappeda)
• Nandar (PTIP task force – National Land Agency of Regency Purwakarta)
• Sofian Iskandar ( Chief of Wasdal Bina Marga) Pengawas dan Pengendalian Dinas Bina Marga (Supervisory and Control Department of Bina Marga)
• Nurjaman (Head of Environmental Assessment – Environmental Board)
• Rukma Junaedi (Head of Forestry Department – Office of Agriculture and Forestry)
PT ERM Indonesia 76
• Dadang (Head of Agraria department – Perhutani Area III)
• H. Sopro Sopy. SH. MH (Chief of Development – Development Coordination Board, Area II, West Java Province)
• Kusnendar (“Pikiran Rakyat” Newspaper contributor)
• Budi Benyamin (Head of Kesbang Linmas/ Kesejateraan Pembangunan dan Perlindungan Masyarakat.)(Welfare Development and Public Protection).
• Adang Subekti (Head of Internal Affair Politic – Kesbang Linmas)
• Riesye Sarigantini (Treasurer of GAPEKNAS Regency of. Purwakarta)
• Yayan (Head of Plantation PTPN VIII Cikumpay)
• Yoseph (Head of Plantation PTPN VIII Cikumpay)
• Rodihat (Village Chief of Cimahi, Campaka District)
• Rasam (Village Secretary of Ciparungsari, Cibatu District)
• Asri (Marengmang Community leader, land acquisition team task force)
• Mista (Village Secretary of Cinangka, Bungursari District)
• Sembiring (Entrepreneur, Street Hawker/Informal kiosk Association in Cikopo)
Regency of Subang
• Hendi (Land Acquisition team)
• Andre M Priatna (Development head, Office of Bina Marga)
• Fakhrudin (Agrarian Department head, First Sub-district Assistant, Subang land acquisition team task force)
• Andi Andreas (Head Natural Resources, Office of Agriculture and Food Crops, member ofland acquisition team task force)
• Tatang Gustian (Horticulture Head- Office of Agriculture and Food Crops)
• Ilyas (Head of Production Development – Office of Forestry)
• Hadi (Secretariat of Development board)
PT ERM Indonesia 77
• Radi Abdul Rais (Head of infrastructure and spatial planning- Regional Development Strategy Board)
• Dedi Suhardi (Inter Institution Head, Kesbang Linmas)
• Budi (Head of Kesbang, Kesbang Linmas) (Welfare Development and Public Protection).
• Dedi (Staf Kantor Pertanahan Nasional Subang)
• Cece Rahman (Chairman (NGO) Advocation Institution for Subang People)
• Sugandi (Indonesia Grass Root Movement/ GMBI)
• Dali (Reporter, Pikiran Rakyat Newspaper, Subang)
• Budi Syahbudin (Sekertary of Businessman Association of Subang)
• Syahrim (Treasurer of Jambong Village, Pagaden District)
• Endang (Batusari Village Chief)
• Aceng (Sub-village Chief, Pada Asih Village)
• Darwinah (Cisaga Village Chief)
• Ara (Cisaga Village administratif staff)
• Surya (Head of authority, Gembor Village)
Regency of Majalengka
• Abidin (Office of Transportation)
• Devid (land acquisition team)
• Ndang Hermawan (Secretary land acquisition team, Head of Estate – First Sub-district Assistant)
• Tono (President of the Student body, Universitas Majalengka)
• Adam Mubarok (“Sentra Indonesia Advokasi” – an NGO)
• Nurul Khusna (PMII - Majalengka)
• Odoi (Majalengka Aktivist)
• Abang Encang (Pancasila Youth, Patrio Party, Owner of NAZ FM)
PT ERM Indonesia 78
• Maksun (Kutawinangun Village Chief)
• Nursis Wijaya (Dawuhan District Chief/former Kertajati District chief)
• Ijen (Pasir Malati village chief)
• H. Ili (Roof Tile business owner)
• H. Tarma (Roof Tile business owner)
• Bongas Kulon Village Chief
Regency of Indramayu
• Wendy Irawadi (Department head of Land/Agraria-First Sub-district Assistant, land acquisition team)
• Amas Wijaya (Manager, Perhutani, Indramayu)
• Deden Muchsin (Head of Physic and Infrastructure-Regional Development Strategy Board )
• Takmid Sarbini (Head of Food Crops –Office of Agriculture)
• Suratman (Head of Labor Supervision –Office of Manpower)
• Briari (Secretary Office of Bina Marga)
• Dedi Agus Permadi (Head of Environmental Assessment – Environmental Assesment Board)
• H. Juju (Indramayu Association of Restaurant Business Owner)
• H. Maman (Indramayu Chamber of Commerce)
• Iing Rohimin (Kompi – an NGO, Indonesia Journalist Association Secretary, Member of Nadlatul Ulama branch and member of Lakpesdam NU)
• Pak Ujang (Bantarwaru village head of general affair/ Gantar)
• Maman Firmansyah (Bantarwaru village admin staff, toll road task force)
• Sartawi (Bantarwaru village head of economy and development)
• Narsan Sumaryana (Cikalongvillage head of economy and development /Terisi)
• Eman supriatna ( Sanca Village, Gantar District)
PT ERM Indonesia 79
Regency of Cirebon
• Didi Junaidi (Head of land acquisition team)
• Ahmad (land acquisition team task force)
• Aan Setiawan (Head of Man Work and Spatial Management Office – Secretary of land acquisition team)
• Jamal (Secretariat coordinator of land acquisition team)
• Novi Hendrianto (Secretariat staff – land acquisition team task force)
• Ujang Amas (Head of National land Agency in Cirebon)
• Suratman (Dept of land charting, National Land Agency – land acquisition team task force)
• Lukman (land acquisition department, National land Agency in Cirebon – land acquisition team task force)
• Ibu Rita (Head of Environment Management-Environmental Board)
• Nasimin (Office of Agriculture, Plantation, Fisheries and Forestry – land acquisition team task force)
• Bejo Kasiono (Head of Commission III DPRD)
• Ahmad Sugiono (Head of Cirebon Chamber of Commerce)
• Faqih (Coordinator of Fahimina Institute)
• Roziqoh (Gender Activist Fahmina Institute)
• Hamzah (Sekretary GNPK (Anti Corruption movement) – Babakan Village Youth Leader, Ciwaringin)
• Nurruzaman (Head of GP Ansor (youth movement) – Youth Leader in Babakan Village)
• H. Dedi Suadi Rasidi (Head of Pancasila Youth of Cirebon)
• KH. Ja’far Agil Siroj (Kempek village community leader – Head of MUI in Cirebon)
• KH. Muhaimin As’ad (Babakan village community leader – Legislation member from PKB/National )
• KH. Marzuki Ahal (Babakan village community leader – Chairman Muallimin Islamic Boarding institution).
PT ERM Indonesia 80
• Kang Agus (Babakan village youth leader – grandson of Kyai Amin Sepuh)
• Semaun Dodo Sugondo (Former village head -Kuwu - Penjalin Kidul Village)
• Qosim (Village Chief of Babakan)
• Katmari (Village Chief of Walahar)
• Sambudi (Village Chief of Kempek)
• H. Slamet (Village Chief of Kedung Bunder)
• Sutrisno (Village Chief of Pegagan)
• Engkus Kusnadi (Sekretaris Desa Ciwaringin)
• Sodikin WA (boing) (Village Chief of Desa Budur)
• Rasdira (Village Chief of Galagamba)
• Suwandi (acting Village Chief of Lungbendo – Village Secretary)
STAKEHOLDER LIST BY PROVINCE/REGENCY
West Java Province
• Regional Development Strategy Board (Bapeda) – West Java
• Province Land Acquisition Team
• Office of agriculture and food crop
• Office of plantation
• West Java’s Perum Perhutani (State Owned Forestry Company)
• West Java National Land Agency
• West Java Environmental Board
• PTPN VIII
• Bina Marga Office
• Office of Transportation
• West Java Chamber of Commerce
• Regional Office of GMBI
PT ERM Indonesia 81
Regency of Purwakarta
• Land Acquisition Committee
• Regional Development Strategy Board
• Bina Marga dan Pengairan
• Environmental Board
• Office of Agriculture and Forestry
• Perum Perhutani Unit III Jawa Barat dan Banten
• National Land Agency
• Perkebunan PTPN VIII Cikumpay.
• GAPENSI
• GAPEKNAS - Gabungan Pengusaha Kontraktor Nasional Indonesia (National Contractors Association of Indonesia)
• GAPEKSINDO - Gabungan Perusahaan Konstruksi Nasional Indonesia (Joint National Construction Company of Indonesia)
• ASPEKSINDO - Asosiasi Pelaksana Konstruksi Seluruh Indonesia (Construction of All-Indonesia Association Executive)
• PT. KENCANA NIAGA UTAMA
• PT. SARI INDAH TEGUH
• PT. ZIDAN PRATAMA
• PT. SUKASARI INDAH
• Gerakan Masyarakat Bawah Indonesia (GMBI) Distrik Purwakarta
• Government of Cimahi village, Sub-district Campaka
• Government of Ciparungsari village, Kecamatan, Cibatu
• Street vendor Group in Cikopo
Regency of Subang
• Land Acquisition Committee
• Office of Bina Marga and Pengairan
• Office of Agriculture and Food Crop
PT ERM Indonesia 82
• Environmental Board
• National Land Agency
• Regional Development Strategy Board
• Perusahaan Jasa Konstruksi 1
• Perusahaan Jasa Konstruksi 2
• Pengusaha Jasa Konstruksi 3
• PT. Fajar Parahiyangan
• Former Chairman Chamber of Commerce of Regency of Subang
• Gerakan Masyarakat Bawah Indonesia Distrik Subang
• Lembaga Advokasi Masyarakat Subang
• Youth Organization Regency of Subang
• Gabungan Pengaman Preman Pasar. (GAPERMAS)
• Gabungan Inisiatif Barisan Anak Siliwangi (GIBAS)
• MPC. Pemuda Pancasila Regency of Subang
• The family to which access is limited due to the construction of toll roads in the Village Sukamelang
• The family to which access is limited due to the construction of toll roads in the Village Sukamelang
• The family to which access is limited due to the construction of toll roads in the Village Gembor
• The family to which access is limited due to the construction of toll roads in the Village Gembor
Regency of Majalengka
• Land Acquisition Team
• Land Acquisition Committee
• Office of Agriculture and Plantation
• Bina Marga
• Regional Development Strategy Board
PT ERM Indonesia 83
• National Land Agency
• Environmental Board
• Perhutani
• Pertamina
• Bupati Majalengka
• Community leader of Desa Bongas Wetan
• LBH Majalengka, Lawyer of ANKOT
• BEM Universitas Majelengka (Student Association)
• Leader of Pemuda Pancasila
• Village Chief Bongas Wetan
• BPD Bongas Wetan (Community Forum)
• Village Chief Kertawinangun
Regency of Indramayu
• Land Acquisition Committee
• Office of Bina Marga
• Regional Development Strategy Board
• Office of Agriculture and Food Crop
• Office of manpower
• Perum Perhutani KPH Indramayu
• National Land Agency of Indramayu
• Environmental Board
• Chamber of Commerce of Indramayu
• Asosiasi Rumah Makan Pantura
• Construction Services Local Entrepreneurs
• Chairman Pemuda Pancasila, Chairman DPP Golkar Indramayu
• LSM SIKLUS
PT ERM Indonesia 84
• Lakpesdam NU
• Village government of Bantarwaru village/Sub-district of Gantar
• Village government of Cikalong/Sub-district Terisi
• Partisan Siliwangi
Regency of Cirebon
• Land Acquisition Team Regency of Cirebon
• LAND ACQUISITION COMMITTEE Regency of Cirebon
• Office of Cipta Karya and Tata Ruang
• Office of Bina Marga Regency of. Cirebon
• NATIONAL LAND AGENCYRegency of Cirebon
• BLHD Regency of Cirebon
• Office ofAgriculture, perkebunan, HusbandryandForestryRegency of. Cirebon
• Office of manpowerRegency of Cirebon
• Regional Development Strategy Board of Cirebon
• Commission III Legislature Regency of Cirebon
• Village Authority of Babakan
• Village Authority of Karang Bendo
• Village Authority of Lung Bendo
• Village Authority of Budur
• Village Authority of Walahar
• Village Authority of Ciwaringin
• Chamber of Commerce of Cirebon
• Entrepreneurs for construction services at Cirebon
• Entrepreneurs for Rattan at Ciwaringin
• CSR PT Indocement
• Owner CV Dua Putra
PT ERM Indonesia 85
• Owner CV Buah Batu
• LeaderOf Religion Desa Pegagan
• Chairman Umum PB NU
• Fahmina Institute
• Gerakan Nasional Pemberantasan Korupsi (GNPK)/ National Movement for the Eradication of Corruption
• GP Ansor
• Pemuda Pancasila
• Laskar Merah Putih
• Leader of Religion in pesantren Kempek, Chairman MUI Cirebon
• Leader of Religion in Pesantren at Galagamba village
• Leader of Religion in pesantren at Babakan village
• Owner tanah di desa Budur
• Local leader at Ciwaringin village
• Local businesses venture backfill soil in Ciwaringin
• Komunitas Seni Santri desa Babakan/Community Art Students at Babakan village
PT ERM Indonesia 86
Appendix F
Individual or institutional stakeholders and their interest and influence
Province/ Stakeholders Interest and Influence Regency Province BAPEDA Interested to ensure the physical toll road construction is in accordance with the input from Bapeda Regency on (Regional Planning & Development the consultations basis between the toll road construction managers, Land Acquisition Team (TPT) and Bapeda. Board) The main concern is on the village road infrastructures, irrigation canals and public facilities that would be affected by the toll road construction. Provincial TPT Interested to ensure the overall land acquisition process would be well accomplished, with disputes and conflicts (Land Acquisition Team) settlement regarding land acquisition. Perhutani West Java and Banten Region Interested on the matters of production forest area that would be exposed by the toll road, which should be granted by a loan-use permit from the Ministry of Forestry. The main concern is on the land within the scope of the KPH Purwakarta that has not been granted with a permit and dispensation from the Ministry of Forestry. Regional Board of Environmental (BLHD) Interested to implement monitoring on AMDAL(Environmental Impact Assessment) document supplements of West Java PT LMS that has been followed after, regarding the realignment of toll road lane that crossing in Majalengka and Cirebon Regencies. The main concern is the environmental and social impact monitoring on the important points of the new lanes based on the AMDAL (Environmental Impact Assessment) document supplements. DPP GMBI Interested to speed the settlement of land dispute cases from 6 families in Subang with Land Acquisition Team (TPT), where LBH GMBI has been assisting its legal process. Purwakarta P2T(Land Acquisition Team), Purwakarta To ensure the land procurement for the benefit of toll road construction to be accomplished on schedule with the Regency Regency time target Perhutani KPH Purwakarta Interested in the forestry land replacement that will be exposed by the toll road construction with ration of 1:2 in Purwakarta Regency and has connectivity with their management area Village Government Interested to get the toll road construction immediately implemented in order to absorb working labour and to get economic benefit for the community. Construction Service Companies and Interested to be chosen as sub-contractor during the toll road construction. Companies Association Group of informal kiosks Implement consolidation and influence to these informal kiosks vendors that are impacted by the toll roadconstruction, in order to get their compensation money. Subang P2T (Land Acquisition Committee) To ensure the land procurement for the benefit of toll road construction to be accomplished on schedule with the Regency Subang Regency timetarget
PT ERM Indonesia 87
Province/ Stakeholders Interest and Influence Regency GMBI Interested to speed the settlement of land dispute cases from 6 families in Subang with Land Acquisition Team (TPT), where LBH GMBI has been assisting its legal process. Construction Service Companies and Interested to be cooperated as sub-contractor during the toll road construction on the construction activities Companies Association phase. Indramayu P2T (Land Acquisition Committee) To ensure the land procurement for the benefit of toll road construction to be accomplished on schedule with the Rergency Indramayu Regency timetarget Perhutani KPH Indramayu To ensure the synergy between Perhutani Indramayu with toll road construction management, in order to get the construction process undisturbed the routine operational work of Perhutani. Village Government Interested to get the toll road construction immediately implemented in order to absorb working labour and to get economic benefit for the community. Bina Marga (Road Management) Office Interested to get the regency roads will not be damaged by the mobilizationof heavy equipments during toll road construction phase. Majalengka P2T (Land Acquisition Committee) To ensure the land procurement for the benefit of toll road construction to be accomplished on schedule with the Regency Majalengka regency timetarget TPT (Land Acquisition Team) Interested to ensure the overall land acquisition process for the toll road construction run smoothly and to settle any disputes within all parties that have not been agreed with TPT. Village Government Interested to get the toll road construction immediately implemented in order to absorb working labor and to get economic benefit for the community. Bina Marga (Road Management) Office Interested to get the regency roads will not be damaged by the mobilizationof heavy equipments during toll road construction phase. Perhutani KPH Majalengka Interested within their managing forestry area that would be exposed by the toll roadconstruction due to the realignment area, to get immediate principal permit and land areal replacement with ratio of 1:2 Majalengka Regency Government In specific in Majalengka, the regency government has direct interest to support the speed of toll road construction; it has connection interest between Airport Construction Program and Cikampek (Cikopo) Palimanan toll road. Ciberon Bina Marga (Road Management) Office Interested to get the regency roads will not be damaged by the mobilization of heavy equipment during toll road Regency construction phase.
PT ERM Indonesia 88
Province/ Stakeholders Interest and Influence Regency Chairman and Executive board member of Land ownership and appropriate land compensation NU (land owner at Budur, Babakan, Ciwaringin and Kempek Villages)
Villagers at Pegagan village, the owner of To be granted with land compensation at their requested price. 20 pieces of land who defensively refused the land compensation
PT ERM Indonesia 89
Appendix G.
Issues identification
Issue Literature Review Description Stakeholder Description Agrarian / Issues surrounding land restitution, land disputes, customary rights / • Pricing discrepancies related to land compensation. Land customary endowments / waqaf land affected by the construction of the • Payments not in accordance with the extent of land acquired as set out in the certificate. Toll Road, land swap, plantation and forestry. • Negative public perception surrounding land certificates being held by the Land Acquisition team. Economic Including stakeholder interest in gaining economic benefit from the • Decreased plantation production due to the changing of land function from agriculture construction of the Toll Road, the impact on food production and estates, land to Toll Road. investment interests and the role of local entrepreneurs, as well as • The power that high scale investors may have on economic benefits as a result of the Toll economic consequences due to the construction of the Toll Road. Road. Political Including interest from political elites at the village, Sub-district and • Social movement of individuals, groups or organisations that claim to fight for the provincial levels, the socio-political movement that involves a mass refusal interests of communities who are considered to have been disadvantaged because of the of toll roads, tug of war in on the interest between institutions, as well as toll road. the role of Non-Government Organisations, CBOs (Community Based- • Inter-institutional relationships among government, where several of the local Organizations) and local leaders in the formation of opinion, advocacy stakeholders feel less involved or less embodied in the process of highway construction. and campaigning of other interests. Infrastruct The affect of the Toll Road on existing roads, irrigation canals, residential • Closed access to village roads due to the new Toll Road development. ure / communities as well as fears of damage to infrastructure caused by the • Irrigation lane being cut off. Building mobilization of heavy equipment. • Concerns surrounding the impacts of using heavy equipment on regency and village roads during the construction phase.
Environm The change and alteration on environmental functions and ecological • Decrease of forestry zone, natural fresh water and decrease of the watershed area. ental purposes such as water catchment areas, forest areas, and the impact of Issues environmental degradation due to the Toll Road, including attention to the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). Labour Interest in local employment opportunities during construction of the Toll • Wishing to empower the local people as workers and labourers during the construction Road. of the toll road.
PT ERM Indonesia 90
Appendix H.
Individual and group consultation undertaken by LMS to date.
How the mitigation Stakeholders How the issue been No Timing Location Information Shared Issues Discussed action communicated to Involved addressed/ responded related stakeholders 1 Tuesday/ 15 Mulyasari, Cikopo, Kosim Zaenal: There is a toll road Concerns to access to There is no response. Small consultation November 2011 Bungursari, Purwakarta Community project, possibly connecting road between The villagers does not especially regarding the leader increased land price villages will be cut off. see any action from the compensation Pollution and exposure to local authority villages 2 Wednesday 2 Sub-village of Ciomas, Marna There will be toll Concerns on road cut off, No response yet The consultation process November 2011 Cimahi village, Sub- Sumarna: road project loss of land and access to did not go well, dialogues district of Cempaka, Community farm land. only happens in the Leader community level. 3 Thursday, 3 Sub-village of Cinangka Mista, There is an increase Migrants will trigger Village authority There is no government November 2011 RT 07/04, Cinangka Community of land price due to security issue. Access accommodate the role in relation with the Village, Sub-district of Leader the toll road project between each area must complaints of the project management Bungursari, Purwakarta information be considered, pollution people and discuss with Regency. (noise and air), priority them. Village authority on local labours. and the residents are not satisfied with how the project management inform the project development and handle complaints. 4 Tuesday 15 Sub-village of Ciruluk, Nariom, There will be toll Public road will be cut Village organization is Village authority are November 2011 Ciruluk Village, Sub- Community road project off, issues of the place for dialogues seldom invited to be district of Kalijati, Subang Leader compensation is not involve in the forum or Regency. appropriate, there is no discussion about the incentives for village project development. authority, claim on toll road acquisition, priority for local employment, environmental damages, assistance for village developments need to be considered.
PT ERM Indonesia 91
How the mitigation Stakeholders How the issue been No Timing Location Information Shared Issues Discussed action communicated to Involved addressed/ responded related stakeholders 5 Thursday, 10 Sub-village of Taslam, There will be toll Access road will be cut The government and It seems that the November 2011 Marengmang III, Community road project running off, there is new job local organization invite government does not have Marengmang III Village, Leader through their village opportunity, the the community to any authority in the Sub-district of Kalijati, government cannot discuss the project management and Subang Regency. facilitate the public in the environmental impact execution. Like in offering price for land renegotiating the price of compensation. Impacts compensation. like flood will arises 6 Monday, 07 Village of Wantilan, Sub- Sayim, Respondents admit Loss of farming land, Village organization Terrible communication November 2011 district of Cipeundeuy, Community that he have known access and mobility cut invite the and coordination, seems Subang Regency. Leader about a toll road off, issues of local labour community/residents there is no one to bridge project traversing in priority, replacement of to discuss on the the gap. The community their village remaining land that decision making related held their discussion but cannot be utilize to the toll road projects never gone through the anymore. management so it seems like its disengage. 7 Monday/15/11/201 Sub-village of Caracas II Komalasari Toll road The project construction Not Significant General information is 1 RT 08/04, Caracas Village, Ekayani, development in their must not disrupt the enough but has not touch Sub-district of Kalijati, Women village and community well-being the subject of the project Subang Regency. Leader/Youth information from the (dust, noise, puddles, impact to the community people that they will environmental damages), be included as difficult access to cross, labourer competition with the migrants will rise (investors has come in), 8 Monday/15/11/201 Sub-village of Ciparung Rasam Supendi, There will be toll New working Social organization role The project issues has 1 RT 05/01, Ciparungsari Community road project opportunity, security is strong, especially the been well informed. village, Sub-district of Leader becomes a threat, a large youth organization. There is no preparation Cibatu, Purwakarta flow of migrant coming The project need to for future problems Regency. to the area, and threat to involve the community the local community and business
PT ERM Indonesia 92
How the mitigation Stakeholders How the issue been No Timing Location Information Shared Issues Discussed action communicated to Involved addressed/ responded related stakeholders 9 Wednesday/2/11/2 Sub-village of Cisaat RT Achya Rohyana, Involving the community The government Tends to be passive and 011 12/04, Cisaat Village. tokoh Women in the development. /community’s social unresponsive Threat of crime and organization does not health rises, there is no have special attention to information from the the project problem project management, competition for living is rises, old public access (road) must be considered 10 Monday/7/11/2011 Village of Kaliangsana RT Rusnata, Information that Economic activities will These organization has They will be active when 05/01, Sub-district of Community there will be toll road flourish, important in not seen any problem serious issues arises Kalijati, Subang Regency. Leader project coordination with local arises yet authority, need alternative road, high competition with immigrants, toll road will give positive impact 11 Monday/7/11/2011 Sub-village of Ciomas RT Ruhadi, Toll road Shift of economic Community Well communicated 07/04, Karangmukti Community development activities, need good organization has some village, sub-district Leader coordination with the role Cipeundeuy, Subang community on project Regency. impacts. The community need support for village infrastructures. Higher job competition, access to cross the toll road 12 Tuesday/1/11/2011 Sub-village of Nogrog RT Wowo Budiarto, There will be toll There will be new Not yet, because the Communication/informat 02/01, Kertamukti tokoh pemuda road project opportunities as well as current discussions are ion has gone well Village, Sub-district of new competition. There light discussion Campaka, Purwakarta are ones who will achieve between residents. The Regency. and ones who will be government has not omitted, toll road will taken a role yet as there block the community’s is no crucial issues access, social inequalities. arises
PT ERM Indonesia 93
How the mitigation Stakeholders How the issue been No Timing Location Information Shared Issues Discussed action communicated to Involved addressed/ responded related stakeholders 13 Tuesday/8/11/2011 Sub-district Cihanja RT H. Asep, Toll road The opportunity to work Social organization is Coordination with the 12/04, Sawangan village, Community development in the project. Shift in actively campaigning government and the Sub-district of Leader cultures, pollution, need for the attention for residents went well Cipeundeuy, Subang access for the residents, livelihood, hopes for Regency. need to improve the higher land price, community’s demands for work infrastructure (sewages) opportunity. 14 Tuesday/8 Sub-village of Balingbing Bapak Sa’ir Have known the Expect in maintaining There has been talk on Government effort on November 2011 RT 16/04, Balingbing (BPD Desa information of the and developing village protecting the toll road informing and doing village, Sub-district of Balimbing) toll road since 1996 infrastructures. Need project. Threats on socialization to the Pegaden Barat, good communication health issues has not community was not wide- between the migrants been responded yet. spread and the locals. Poor land acquisition system. Attention on the farmers’ welfare, residents’ mobility and working opportunity 15 Saturday/5 Sub-village of Haniwung, Karnali (Head There will be toll Hopes to have the village Need to involve the The village authority has November 2011 Gembor village, Sub- of Haniwung) road project potentials involved (HR local community. The had a great role to district of Pegaden, and Natural resources). contractor needs to be communicate about the Subang Regency. On the project road responsible on the project and to security, disappointment health/environment accommodate the on the low price. Access impacts. Management villagers complaints. The to cross the toll road. should put the village community hopes the infrastructure into higher authority can also consideration. Villagers give a complete are ready to information demonstrate in protest to the low price of the land acquisition 16 Sunday/13 Sub-village of Sukajaya, Bapak Adi There will be a toll Health problem and The community need to Government role in doing November 2011 Sumurbarang village, sub- (leader Dusun road project. After problem with migrants be involve in the project socialization is not district of Cibogo, Subang Sukajaya) the toll road there will cause social friction. development and good. Regency. will be 10 new Roads and irrigation execution of the project. factories systems must be Village infrastructure considered. Respect to need to fixed. Need to the local traditions and have good
PT ERM Indonesia 94
How the mitigation Stakeholders How the issue been No Timing Location Information Shared Issues Discussed action communicated to Involved addressed/ responded related stakeholders cultures. communication with the migrants
17 Tuesday/15 Sub-village of Cinangka Bapak Sadi Improvement on village’s Health issues has been Communication did not November 2011 RT 10/04, sub-village of (head of public facility, but road discussed with the local go well with the villagers Cilembang, Wanasari governance of and irrigation are cut off, Health Authority Village, Sub-district of Wanasari) work opportunity, social Cipunagara, Subang friction with the Regency. newcomers
18 Thursday, 10 Sub-village of Babakan Bapak Amin Nil November 2011 Royom, Batusari Village, Mulyana (RW Sub-district of Dawuan, head) Subang Regency.
19 Friday, 11 Sub-village of Bapak Asep Tol akan dibangun Positive impact is being There is no response Communication and November 2011 Bantarsema, Cisaga Tarmedi, questioned, and attention from the project transparency is not village, sub-district of Community compensation has not government on the good Cibogo, Subang Regency. Leader been resolved, damage to community’s needs village’s infrastructures due to the project, health and security threat due to migrants in the area. Access to livelihood are closed, needs discussions with the community about the future.
PT ERM Indonesia 95
How the mitigation Stakeholders How the issue been No Timing Location Information Shared Issues Discussed action communicated to Involved addressed/ responded related stakeholders 20 Tidak ada tanggal Sub-village of Babakan Bapak Rasli There will be toll Problems regarding the No information Government are not active Sawah, Cidahu Village. (Mantan Badan road project project execution will in communication Perwakilan have health impact. The Desa-BPD) land price was decided halfway (by the toll road only). Involving the community for work, access for the heavy machineries going in and out of the villages 21 11-Nov-11 Sub-village Salahaur RT Bapak Sahrim There will be toll Land price is not fair. No explanation Village authority has 07/02, Jabong Village. (Kaur Ulis Desa road project The remaining land was worked well Jabong & not acquired. Closed of Kolektor PBB) local road 22 12-Nov-11 Sub-village of Cihurip RT Bapak Aceng There will be toll The villagers refuse to let There is no closure and 16/07, Padasih Village. (Kepala Dusun road project go their land because anticipation on the land III) price was not met. that was not acquired Access of the local road is cut off 23 Tidak ada tanggal Village of Cibogo Bapak Damo, NILL Community Leader 24 Monday/ 7 Sub-village of Pasir Ceuri Bapak Sukwali There will be toll The villagers/residents No responses yet Government socialization November 2011 RT 18/03, Sukamelang (ketua RW.03) road project regret that there is no and communication with Village, Subang Regency. development coordination with the the community does not residents and the go well villagers on the project planning. The villagers are worried about the threat of increase crime rate due to migrants. Need to make sure that the irrigation are not affected and access of the residents with other community separated by the toll road.
PT ERM Indonesia 96
How the mitigation Stakeholders How the issue been No Timing Location Information Shared Issues Discussed action communicated to Involved addressed/ responded related stakeholders 25 Wednesday, 09 Sub-village of Gardu RT Bapak Uding There will be toll Dust/pollution. The village authority The government are quite November 2011 12/06, Wanakerta Village, (ketua Rt.06) road project Criminality threat from accommodate the good at defending the Sub-district of Purwadadi, new-comers/migrants. villagers aspiration and interest of the community Subang Regency. Threat on the social try to fight for it relationships. Access and mobility will be cut off. 26 Saturday 5 Village of Balida RT 02/02 Didi Suhendi, Toll road Change of livelihood. There is no responses The village authority has November 2011 Community development Local organization has done a good job in Leader accommodate villagers accommodating the aspiration, uses local HR residents’ complaints and natural resources, negative environmental effect 27 Wednesday 16 Village of Bantarwaru RT Erum, Toll road Labour and migrant Social organization and The government has make November 2011 13/03 Block Cijambe. Community development workers, improve village organization a good socialization of the Leader infrastructures, decrease help each other to project of farmland resolve the problems
28 Wednesday, 09 Sub-village of Sukamaju Idris, Youth Toll road Higher flow of migration, Was not clearly Socialization was only a November 2011 RT 07/03, Babakan leader development remaining land along the explained small portion village, Sub-district of toll road cannotbe utilize Kertajati, Majalengka Regency. 29 Monday, 14 Sub-village of Nana Rasyana, Information that Issues of new working There is no clear and There is not consultation November 2011 Cikamurang RT 17/05, Community there is a toll road and business thorough explanation or information yet Cikawung Village, Sub- Leader development opportunity. New district Terisi, Indramayu investors. Land along the Regency. toll road will become unproductive. Use of local labour in the project 30 Sunday, 06 Village of Kertawinangun Ase Tarna, Toll road Not clear about the Does not show any Information and November 2011 RT 14/02 , Sub-district of Community development village’s land effort to resolve consultation is not Kertajati, Majalengka Leader compensation. Security is satisfactory Regency. better if involving the locals as workers, the toll road has no significant impact so the community
PT ERM Indonesia 97
How the mitigation Stakeholders How the issue been No Timing Location Information Shared Issues Discussed action communicated to Involved addressed/ responded related stakeholders does not really care as long there is no negative impact. Use local HR
31 Tuesday, 11 Village of Palasah, Block Drs. Iding Toll road Future usage of the toll Hopes for job Not maximum November 2011 Antranaya, Sub-district of Sahidin, development road are questioned, opportunity for the Kertajati, Majalengka anggota LPM development must have community/villagers Regency. the community leader put in to consideration. The land acquisition team is not on the community’s side. Negative impact is industry 32 Tuesday, 15 Village of Sanca, Sub- M. There will be toll Special attention the No description No description november 2011 district of Gantar, Sukmawinata, road project needs of the farmers and Indramayu Regency. Kuwu Desa hopes the project will Sanca bring positive impact.
33 Tuesday, 8 Village of Sukawana, Sub- Hj. N. Saroh, There will be toll Hopes that the Invites all of the The developer response November 2011 district of Kertajati. tokoh Women road project development will rise involving parties to sit are great, every complaint economic growth. No down and talk isresolved problem on project preparation, the land was well executed, no social unrest. Local community should be involved in the project.
PT ERM Indonesia 98
How the mitigation Stakeholders How the issue been No Timing Location Information Shared Issues Discussed action communicated to Involved addressed/ responded related stakeholders 34 Saturday , 5 Village of Anyar, Block Badrun, There will be toll Toll road can close the No responses Everything was done November 2011 Kamis, Sub-district of Community road project irrigation system but will through village authority, Dawuhan, Majalengka Leader cause flooding. There is never directly to the Regency. no social impact yet villagers because at the moment the discussion has only reach about the location
35 2-Nov-11 Village of Mandapa, Sub- Aris syiri sakti, There will be toll Flooding, decrease of The government got The communicate but district of Dawuhan, tokoh muda road project farmland, competition involved unresponsive Majalengka Regency. with the migrants, work opportunities 36 Thursday 10 Sub-village Mekarjaya RT Tarwin Information on the Hopes for new work and Government and local Socialization was done November 2011 01/01, Mekarjaya Village, Setiawan toll road business opportunity, organization is pro- nicely Sub-district of Kertajati. development infrastructure active to fight for the improvements, villagers dissatisfaction on the project management’s way of work 37 Monday 7 november Village of Pakubeureum, Samhudi, There are Land price was not as Government and social Coordination, 2011 Block Pangumbahan, Sub- Community information on the accordingly. Loss of farm organization assist to consultation and district of Kertajati. Leader toll road land, how the resolve socialization has been development development is done well supported by many stakeholders. Village infrastructure needs to be improve. Priority to local workers. 38 Friday, 4 November Village of Pasir Malati, Maman There will be toll Use of local labor, loss of No information Communication has not 2011 Sub-district of Dawuhan. Rasiman, road project livelihood/loss of farm gone well Community land. Communication Leader with the villagers needs to be maintain
PT ERM Indonesia 99
How the mitigation Stakeholders How the issue been No Timing Location Information Shared Issues Discussed action communicated to Involved addressed/ responded related stakeholders 39 Saturday/12 Village of Beusi, Block Mohammad The toll road Need to build access road Assist to resolve Government has assist November 2011 Entuk RT 05/05, Sub- Ramdan development will be to connect villages, well on land settlement. district of Ligung, (general affair executed problem with migrant as There is a special official Majalengka Regency. official of farmer lost their land to take care of it Dusun Entuk) they will compete with the migrants for work. Low price on land compensation 40 11 November 2011 Village of Bongas Kulon, Karsiman The toll road Loss of jobs for cropper Pancak Suji Block, Sub- (Development development will be and farm hands, roads district of Sumber Jaya, supervisor of executed are cut off, concern of Majalengka Regency. Desa Bongas environment issues and Kulon) use of local labour 41 12 November 2011 Village of Bangas Wetan, Kadsari (Head The toll road Loss of jobs for croppers The community consult Kamis Block RT 06/04, of RT 06, Desa development will be and farm labour, loss of with village authority Sub-district of Sumber Bongas Wetan) executed access to farm land and Jaya, Majalengka livelihood, pollution, low Regency. price on land compensation 42 09 November 2011 Village of Cisambeng, Juanta (Head of The toll road Use of local labour. Kamis Block, Sub-district Blok Kamis, development will be Irrigation being cut off Palasah, Majalengka Dusun Koja) executed may cause flooding, Regency. and Jaja access to local road, noise (Sesepuh and air pollution Dusun) 43 05 November 2011 Village of Jatisura, Kliwon Maman The toll road Use of local labour. Block RT 03/09, Sub- Suherman (RW. development will be Irrigation being cut off district of Jatiwangi, Blok Kliwon) executed may cause flooding, Majalengka Regency. access to local road, noise and air pollution. Decrease in farming produce
PT ERM Indonesia 100
How the mitigation Stakeholders How the issue been No Timing Location Information Shared Issues Discussed action communicated to Involved addressed/ responded related stakeholders 44 03 November 2011 Village of Jatiwangi, Ahad Anah (RT.04 The toll road Use of local labour. Block RT 03, Sub-district Blok Ahad) development will be Irrigation being cut off of Jatiwangi, Majalengka executed may cause flooding, Regency. access to local road, noise and air pollution. Decrease of land production (farming products) 45 13 November 2011 Village of Maja Mulia, E. Sulaeman The toll road Access to farm Maja Mulia Block RT (Head of Blok development will be land/garden are cut off. 04/02, Sub-district Maja Mulia) executed Use of local labour. Palasah, Majalengka Irrigation being cut off Regency. may cause flooding, access to local road, noise and air pollution. Decrease in land production. Irrigation stopped 46 04 November 2011 Village of Salawana, Wakmad The toll road Access to farm Kliwon Block, Sub-district sudarja (head of development will be land/garden are cut off. of Jatiwangi, Majalengka Blok Salasa) executed Use of local labour. Regency. Irrigation being cut off may cause flooding, access to local road, noise and air pollution. Decrease in land production. Irrigation stopped 47 06 November 2011 Village of Surawangi, Toyo (head of The toll road Change of livelihood, air Facilitates the needs of Wage Block RT 002/004, Blok Wage) development will be and noise pollution. The the villagers and the Sub-district of Jatiwangi, executed price of land land acquisition team Majalengka Regency. compensation was not satisfactory (cheap), use of local labour. Flooding due to the toll road project
PT ERM Indonesia 101
How the mitigation Stakeholders How the issue been No Timing Location Information Shared Issues Discussed action communicated to Involved addressed/ responded related stakeholders 48 08 November 2011 Village of Sutawangi, Doni Rhamdan The toll road Change of livelihood, air Salsa Block RT 01/10, (head of Blok development will be and noise pollution. The Sub-district of Jatiwangi, Salasa, Dusun 5) executed price of land Majalengka Regency. compensation was not satisfactory (cheap), use of local labour. Flooding due to the toll road project. Irrigation will be cut off 49 10 November 2011 Village of Tegal Aren, Halid (Head of The toll road Change of livelihood, air Serang Block RT 08/03, Blok Serang) development will be and noise pollution. The Sub-district of Ligung, executed price of land Majalengka Regency. compensation was not satisfactory (cheap), use of local labor. Flooding due to the toll road project 50 2 November 2011 Village of Pegagan, Sucipto (Head There will be toll Road access between Cirebon Regency. of RW 1 and road project villages will be cut off. food merchant) Lost of livelihood 51 3 November 2011 Village of Lung Benda, Suyono (duck There will be toll Opening new working Cirebon Regency. farm) road project opportunity, cut of irrigation, waterways, electricity and roads 52 4 November 2011 Village of Tegal Karang, Anonim/Comm There will be toll The project did not use Cirebon Regency. unity Leader road project local labour
53 14 November 2011 Village of Kedung Toni/Head of There will be toll Use of local labour. Cut Bunder, Cirebon Regency. dusun 1 road project off on irrigation and road access to other villages. Air pollution
54 14 November 2011 Village of Ciwaringin, H. Apandi There will be toll Air pollution and roads Cirebon Regency. /Community road project being cut off by the toll Leader: religion road
PT ERM Indonesia 102
How the mitigation Stakeholders How the issue been No Timing Location Information Shared Issues Discussed action communicated to Involved addressed/ responded related stakeholders 55 14 November 2011 Village of Galagamba, H. Wira There will be toll This project did not use Cirebon Regency. /Farming road project local labour. Decrease in assistance land production due to air pollution, lack of irrigation water, cut off electricity. Access to farm land are closed 56 14 November 2011 Village of Budur, Cirebon Bp. Tatang There will be toll It’s hard to get to the Regency. Suardi and road project farm land. Air pollution. Haryanto Noise pollution. Village roads damaged by the heavy equipment
57 7 November 2011 Village of Kempek, Bp. Karnadi, There will be toll Limits of land to herd Village authority gives Cirebon Regency. Sumharto and road project ducks and cattle, roads a solution to cut off the Kempek village are cut off and access to land right in the middle chief farm land are difficult. Use of local labour. Loss of irrigation. Low land compensation compared with other village 58 5 November 2011 Village of Lung Benda, Bp. There will be toll Loss of irrigation. Loss Cirebon Regency. Sami’an/Comm road project of access to local road, unity Leader use of local labour. Pollutions,
59 12 November 2011 Village of Penjalin Kidul, Bp. There will be toll Loss of access to local Majalengka Regency. Samsudin/Com road project road. Local labour, munity Leader pollutions. Damages to the road due to heavy equipment and carrying of heavy materials 60 15 November 2011 Village of Garawangi, Omay There will be toll Local labour and air and Sub-district of Komar/mercha road project noise pollutions Sumberjaya, Majalengka nt Regency.
PT ERM Indonesia 103
How the mitigation Stakeholders How the issue been No Timing Location Information Shared Issues Discussed action communicated to Involved addressed/ responded related stakeholders 61 12 November 2011 Village of Panjalin Lor, Adi There will be toll Local labour and air and Sub-district of Sumarno/farme road project noise pollutions Sumberjaya, Majalengka nr Regency.
62 10 November 2011 Village of Walahar, Sub- Samian There will be toll Local labour and air and Village authority are district of Gempol, road project noise pollutions quite active because for Cirebon Regency. the goods of the community 63 31-Oct 2011 palimanan h.totok Is there any IP History, tradition, community economy 64 1-Nov 2011 cirebon ahnad Is there any IP History, tradition, community economy 65 1-Nov 2011 palimanan ntin/khusnun Is there any IP History, tradition, community economy 66 1-Nov 2011 palimanan ustad munawir Is there any IP Religious tradition and history 67 1-Nov 2011 palimanan pak Is there any IP History, tradition, sumadi/kobil community economy 68 1-Nov 2011 babakan nurzaman Is there any IP Religion, economy and pesantren’s role 69 1-Nov 2011 babakan yuk masrifah Is there any IP Religion, economy and anfa' pesantren’s role 70 1-Nov 2011 IISIP Nurul huda Is there any IP Religion, economy and pesantren’s role 71 1-Nov 2011 IISIP Asrie Is there any IP Religion, economy and pesantren’s role 72 1-Nov 2011 Bandung Achmad West Java IP map Definition, category and IP mapping in West Java 73 1-Nov 2011 Bandung Ria Andayani West Java IP map Definition, category and IP mapping in West Java 74 2-Nov 2011 Bandung Endang West Java IP map Definition, category and IP mapping in West Java 75 2-Nov 2011 Jatinangor Ira Indra West Java IP map Definition, category and Wardhana IP mapping in West Java 76 2-Nov 2011 Jatinangor Dede Mulyanto West Java IP map Definition, category and
PT ERM Indonesia 104
How the mitigation Stakeholders How the issue been No Timing Location Information Shared Issues Discussed action communicated to Involved addressed/ responded related stakeholders IP mapping in West Java 77 2-Nov 2011 kec. Ciwaringin Mulyadi Is there any IP History, tradition, community economy 78 2-Nov 2011 desa babakan sumarno Is there any IP History, tradition, community economy 79 2-Nov 2011 koramil Ciwaringin karnita Is there any IP History, tradition, community economy 80 2-Nov 2011 babakan Jahari Is there any IP History, tradition, community economy 81 3-Nov 2011 Bandung Ade Makmur West Java IP map Definition, category and IP mapping in West Java 82 3-Nov 2011 majalengka David Susandi key informant Community’s response on the project 83 3-Nov 2011 Unima (via telpon) Muhammad Is there any IP Community’s response Ridwan on the project 84 3-Nov 2011 pasir malati majalengka Ono Sudarsono Is there any IP History, tradition, community economy 85 3-Nov 2011 pasir malati majalengka Nono Sartono Is there any IP History, tradition, community economy 86 3-Nov 2011 dinas sosial majalengka Dedi Supriadi data/information on Is there any IP and its IP map 87 3-Nov 2011 dinas sosial majalengka yoyok data/information on Is there any IP and its Sugiyanto IP map 88 3-Nov 2011 desa sanca, gantar, Mulus Is there any IP History, tradition, Indramayu community economy 89 4-Nov 2011 dinas sosial Cirebon H. Ahmad Rifaii data/information on Is there any IP and its IP map 90 8-Nov 2011 desa jabong, kec.pagaden, Syahrim Is there any IP History, tradition, Subang community economy 91 9-Nov 2011 Kab. Subang H. Yoyo data/information on Is there any IP and its Suharyono IP map 92 9-Nov 2011 STSI (via telpon) Aton R. Is there any IP History, tradition, Mulyana community economy 93 9-Nov 2011 Cigadung, Subang H. Edith Is there any IP History, tradition, community economy 94 9-Nov 2011 Desa Gembor Karnali Is there any IP History, tradition, community economy
PT ERM Indonesia 105
How the mitigation Stakeholders How the issue been No Timing Location Information Shared Issues Discussed action communicated to Involved addressed/ responded related stakeholders 95 9-Nov 2011 dinas Sosial Subang Dedi Harianto data/information on Is there any IP and its IP map 96 9-Nov 2011 dinas Pariwisata Asep Ruchiat data/information on Is there any IP and its Indramayu IP map 97 9-Nov 2011 dinas sosial Indramayu Abdul Kalim data/information on Is there any IP and its IP map 98 10-Nov 2011 Bandung Eddy Sunarto data/information on Peta dan pengertian IP IP menurut Dinas Sosial 99 10-Nov 2011 desa Cisambeng, kec. sadi Is there any IP History, tradition, palasah, majalengka community economy 100 10-Nov 2011 desa majasuka, kec. wahyudin Is there any IP History, tradition, Palasah, majalengka community economy 101 10-Nov 2011 desa majasuka, kec. Nasihin Is there any IP History, tradition, Palasah, majalengka community economy 102 10-Nov 2011 desa majasuka, kec. Sutarsah Is there any IP History, tradition, Palasah, majalengka community economy 103 10-Nov 2011 desa majasuka, kec. Endang Is there any IP History, tradition, Palasah, majalengka Sulaiman community economy 104 10-Nov 2011 Purwakarta Yuyun data/information on History, tradition, IP community economy 105 10-Nov 2011 Purwakarta Toni Budiasa data/information on History, tradition, IP community economy 106 10-Nov 2011 Purwakarta Ahmad Sanusi data/information on History, tradition, IP community economy 107 10-Nov 2011 Purwakarta Rohdiat data/information on History, tradition, IP community economy 108 11-Nov 2011 Bandung Yoki Suwardi data/information on History, tradition, IP community economy 109 11-Nov 2011 Purwakarta Ondo data/information on History, tradition, IP community economy 110 11-Nov 2011 Purwakarta Rasam data/information on History, tradition, IP community economy 111 11-Nov 2011 Purwakarta Timan data/information on History, tradition, IP community economy 112 11-Nov 2011 desa tegal aren, kec. Bastam Is there any IP History, tradition, Ligung, majalengka community economy 113 11-Nov 2011 desa Beusi, kec. ligung, Didi Is there any IP History, tradition,
PT ERM Indonesia 106
How the mitigation Stakeholders How the issue been No Timing Location Information Shared Issues Discussed action communicated to Involved addressed/ responded related stakeholders majalengka community economy 114 11-Nov 2011 desa Beusi, kec. ligung, Karsono Is there any IP History, tradition, majalengka community economy 115 16-Nov 2011 Jakarta Annas Ladins data/information on IP Map and definition in Syarif IP West Java according to AMAN 116 17-Nov 2011 Garut, Jabar (via Yayan data/information on IP Map and definition in telephone) Hermawan IP West Java according to AMAN 117 17-Nov 2011 Jabar (via telephone) Muhtarom data/information IP Map and definition in West Java according to AMAN 118 3 November 2011 Home of village 14 people (7 Access to farm land and chief/Desa Cimahi/Kec. Male and 7 to family graveyard are Campaka/Kab. Female)/Vulner disrupted especially to Purwakarta able Group the one across the toll road. Certainty of the time schedule to start the toll road construction because many villagers are still using the land that were acquired and compensated so they are worried that the they might lose their crops or crops cannot be harvested on harvest time Environmental issues. There is air pollution, noise pollution due to the traffic of the project Labor issues. Worries that the labor for the project will not be from the Cimahi village
PT ERM Indonesia 107
How the mitigation Stakeholders How the issue been No Timing Location Information Shared Issues Discussed action communicated to Involved addressed/ responded related stakeholders Health; regarding the free health facilities. 119 8 November 2011 rumah kepala desa/Desa 9 people (8 Lost of livelihood. Due Cimahi/Kec. Female and 1 to loss of land to herd Campaka/Kab. Male)/ livestock, loss of land, Purwakarta Community loss of finding cooking Leader, wood, loss of access to housewife go to the rubber plantation Lost of village’s main commodity. Sengon wood, jengkol, rambutan, jackfruit, kecapi, mango and bamboo Air and noise pollution due to the traffic Access and villagers’ mobility to place of work, school, health facility are cut off due to the toll road Labour issues. Worries that the labour for the project will not be from the Cimahi village 120 10 November 2011 Home of Mr. Yanto/Desa 10 people: livelihood; new work Batusari/ Kec. Female/ RT, opportunity on the Dawuan/Kab. Subang housewife/farm project for the local ers community Air and noise pollution due to the traffic Security issues. Increase of crime with the migrants, construction workers and the large amount of heavy
PT ERM Indonesia 108
How the mitigation Stakeholders How the issue been No Timing Location Information Shared Issues Discussed action communicated to Involved addressed/ responded related stakeholders equipment/machineries
121 10 November 2011 Home of Mr. 14 participants New work opportunity. Suharno//Desa Batusari/ Male/Communi Villagers wants to be Kec. Dawuan/Kab. ty Leader, able to open up business Subang farmers/traders for the project / religious Disruption on irrigation teachers and waterway Air and noise pollution due to the traffic
Safety of the residents
especially children due
to the heavy traffic of
project equipment and materials Village security due to migrants Safety of the livestock because during the dry season the livestock is set free to graze Cannot move the graveyard and graves 122 17 November 2011 Village Hall/Desa 12 participants Industrialization. Bantarwaru/Kec. Male/ Conversion of Gantar/Kab. Indramayu Community agriculture land into Leader, village industries/factories. authority,entrep Residents are worried eneur because most of the villagers are farmers
PT ERM Indonesia 109
How the mitigation Stakeholders How the issue been No Timing Location Information Shared Issues Discussed action communicated to Involved addressed/ responded related stakeholders Environmental issues. Farm land are not productive, the right side of the toll road will suffer drought and on the other side will be flooded because the water is on the left side of the toll road. Economy; change on livelihood for the villagers from farming but they are confuse as they do not have any skills other than farming
123 17 November 2011 Village hall/Desa 11 participants. Access to other village Bantarwaru/Kec. Female/ may be cut off Gantar/Kab. Indramayu housewife, farmers/village authority New work opportunity after to the toll road project Labour issues. Residents are worried that the labour used will not come from the village’s villagers 124 11 November 2011 Blok Kamis, RT. 09 RW. 10 participants: Livelihood declines. 07/ Desa Cisambeng/ Male/ Farm production Kec. Palasah/ Community decreased, farm labour Kab.Majalengka Leader, lost their work, merchants, Road access to other farmers, village villages or to farm area authority are cut off due to toll road development
PT ERM Indonesia 110
How the mitigation Stakeholders How the issue been No Timing Location Information Shared Issues Discussed action communicated to Involved addressed/ responded related stakeholders Noise and air pollution due to traffic
Water way disrupted by the toll road and may cause flooding Loss of local traditions and culture due to the toll road project 125 15 November 2011 Blok Kamis, RT. 09 RW. 10 participants Livelihood decrease. 07/ Desa Cisambeng/ Female/ Farm production Kec. Palasah/ housewife, decreased, farm labour Kab.Majalengka farmers, lost their work, and merchants most farm labour are females, so many woman will be jobless
Labour issues. Using local labour for the toll road project Access to other villages if there is a toll road
Air and noise pollution due to the traffic Environmental issues. Possible of flooding because usually the toll road is build higher than their villages Increase of population due to migrants coming in to the area New work opportunity due to the toll road project
PT ERM Indonesia 111
How the mitigation Stakeholders How the issue been No Timing Location Information Shared Issues Discussed action communicated to Involved addressed/ responded related stakeholders 126 16 November 2011 Village hall/Desa Kedung 15 orang Road access to other Bunder/Kec. Male/Communi villages or to farm area Gempol/Kab. Cirebon ty Leader, are cut off pedagang,petan Irrigation being cut off i, aparat desa due to the project
New work opportunity due to the toll road project Air pollution may cause decrease in farm production The driver’s routes are disrupted 127 16 November 2011 Local Mosque/ Village 9 peserta Air pollution due to dust hall Kedung Bunder/ kec. Female/ petani, Gempol/ Kab. Cirebon pedagang, IRT
Disruption of river flow
Access to other villages closed or cut off due to toll road
PT ERM Indonesia 112
No. Location and Time Activities Issues / Theme Stakeholder Involved
128 Sub-district of Pegaden (village of 2nd phase socialization The development of Cikampek (Cikopo) – P2T Subang Regency, Secretary committee, Gembor ) and Regency of Palimanan Toll Road Project covering: Head of Sub-district of Pagaden and Cipunagara (village of Wanasari) overview, land acquisition and cycle of the Cipunagara, Muspika Sub-district of Pagaden, January 9, 2008 project, compensation, phase and land pricing, village official of Gembor and Wanasari, land and mitigation measures for land acquisition. owners. 129 Sub-district of Cibogo, villages of 2nd phase socialization The development of Cikampek (Cikopo) – P2T Subang Regency, Secretary committee, Padaasih, Sumurbarang dan Palimanan Toll Road Project covering: Head of Sub-district of Cibogo and Subang, Cibogo overview, land acquisition and cycle of the Muspika Sub-district of Cibogo, village official March 6, 2008 project, compensation, phase and land pricing, of Padaasih, Sumurbarang and Cibogo , land and mitigation measures for land acquisition. owners. 130 Sub-district of Dawuan (village 2nd phase socialization The development of Cikampek (Cikopo) – P2T Majalengka Regency , Secretary committee, of Batusari) Palimanan Toll Road Project covering: Head of Sub-district of Dawuan and Subang, December 19, 2007 overview, land acquisition and cycle of the Muspika Sub-district of Dawuan, village project, compensation, phase and land pricing, official of Batusari, and land owners. and mitigation measures for land acquisition. 131 Sub-district of Pagaden Barat, 2nd phase socialization The development of Cikampek (Cikopo) – TPT for the toll road project, P2T of Regency of village Balingbing Palimanan Toll Road Project covering: Subang and the residents of Balingbing January 8, 2008 overview, land acquisition and cycle of the village. project, compensation, phase and land pricing, and mitigation measures for land acquisition. 132 Sub-district of Subang, village of 2nd phase socialization The development of Cikampek (Cikopo) – TPT for the toll road project, P2T of Regency of Jabong Palimanan Toll Road Project covering: Subang and the residents of Cidahu, Jabong January 7, 2008 overview, land acquisition and cycle of the and Sukamelang villages. project, compensation, phase and land pricing, and mitigation measures for land acquisition. 133 Sub-district of Subang, village of 2nd phase socialization The development of Cikampek (Cikopo) – TPT for the toll road project, P2T of Regency of Sukamelang Palimanan Toll Road Project covering: Subang and the residents of Cidahu, Jabong January 7, 2008 overview, land acquisition and cycle of the and Sukamelang villages project, compensation, phase and land pricing, and mitigation measures for land acquisition. 134 Sub-district of Subang, village of 2nd phase socialization The development of Cikampek (Cikopo) – TPT for the toll road project, P2T of Regency of Cisaga Palimanan Toll Road Project covering: Subang and the residents of Cisaga villages January 8, 2008 overview, land acquisition and cycle of the project, compensation, phase and land pricing, and mitigation measures for land acquisition. 135 Sub-district of Pabuaran, village 2nd phase socialization The development of Cikampek (Cikopo) – TPT for the toll road project, P2T of Regency of of Karangmukti Palimanan Toll Road Project covering: Subang and the residents of Karangmukti January 5, 2008 overview, land acquisition and cycle of the villages project, compensation, phase and land pricing,
PT ERM Indonesia 113
No. Location and Time Activities Issues / Theme Stakeholder Involved and mitigation measures for land acquisition.
136 Sub-district of Cipeundeuy, 2nd phase socialization The development of Cikampek (Cikopo) – TPT for the toll road project, P2T of Regency of village of Wantilan and Desa Palimanan Toll Road Project covering: Subang and the residents of Wantilan and Sawangan overview, land acquisition and cycle of the Sawangan villages January 4, 2008 project, compensation, phase and land pricing, and mitigation measures for land acquisition. 137. Sub-district of Kalijati, village of 2nd phase socialization The development of Cikampek (Cikopo) – P2T Subang Regency , Secretary committee, Marengmang. Palimanan Toll Road Project covering: Head of Sub-district ofKalijati, Muspika Sub- December 18, 2007 overview, land acquisition and cycle of the district of Kalijati, village official of project, compensation, phase and land pricing, Marengmang, and land owners. and mitigation measures for land acquisition. 138 Sub-district of Purwadadi, 2nd phase socialization The development of Cikampek (Cikopo) – TPT for the toll road project, P2T of Regency of village of Wanakerta Palimanan Toll Road Project covering: Subang and the residents of Wanakerta January 3, 2007 overview, land acquisition and cycle of the village. project, compensation, phase and land pricing, and mitigation measures for land acquisition. 139 Sub-district of Kalijati, village of 2nd phase socialization The development of Cikampek (Cikopo) – TPT for the toll road project, P2T of Regency of Kaliangsana and Ciruluk Palimanan Toll Road Project covering: Subang and the residents of Kaliangsana and December 18, 2007 overview, land acquisition and cycle of the Ciruluk village. project, compensation, phase and land pricing, and mitigation measures for land acquisition. 140 Sub-district of Majalengka Sosialisasi Tahap I The development of Cikampek (Cikopo) – TPT, Muspida of Majalengka Regency, July 30, 2007 Palimanan Toll Road Project covering: Secretary of Regency of Majalengka, P2T of overview, land acquisition and cycle of the Majalengka Regency, Secretary committee, project, compensation, phase and land pricing, Head of Sub-district of Dawuan and Subang, and mitigation measures for land acquisition. Muspika Sub-district of Dawuan, village official of Batusari, and land owners. 141 Sub-district of Dawuan (village 2nd phase socialization The development of Cikampek (Cikopo) – P2T of Majalengka Regency, Secretary of of Balida, Karanganyar, Palimanan Toll Road Project covering: committee, Head of Sub-district of Dawuan, Mandapa, and Salawana) overview, land acquisition and cycle of the Muspika of Sub-district of Dawuan, village January 24, 2008 project, compensation, phase and land pricing, officials of Balida, Karanganyar, Salawana, and mitigation measures for land acquisition. Mandapa and land owners. 142 Sub-district of Jatiwangi (village 2nd phase socialization The development of Cikampek (Cikopo) – P2T of Majalengka Regency, Secretary of of Sutawangi and Jatisura) Palimanan Toll Road Project covering: committee, Head of Sub-district of Jatiwangi, January 28, 2008 overview, land acquisition and cycle of the Muspika of Sub-district of Jatiwangi, village project, compensation, phase and land pricing, officials of Sutawangi, Jatisura, and land
PT ERM Indonesia 114
No. Location and Time Activities Issues / Theme Stakeholder Involved and mitigation measures for land acquisition. owners.
143 Sub-district of Jatiwangi (village 2nd phase socialization The development of Cikampek (Cikopo) – P2T of Majalengka Regency, Secretary of of Jatiwangi and Surawangi) Palimanan Toll Road Project covering: committee, Head of Sub-district of Jatiwangi, January 28, 2008 overview, land acquisition and cycle of the Muspika of Sub-district of Jatiwangi, village project, compensation, phase and land pricing, officials of Sutawangi, Jatisura, and land and mitigation measures for land acquisition. owners. 144 Sub-district of Majalengka Sosialisasi Tahap I The development of Cikampek (Cikopo) – TPT, Muspida of Majalengka Regency, (village of Balida, Karanganyar, Palimanan Toll Road Project covering: Secretary of Regency of Majalengka, P2T of Mandapa, and Salawana) overview, land acquisition and cycle of the Majalengka Regency. July 30, 2007 project, compensation, phase and land pricing, and mitigation measures for land acquisition. 145 Sub-district of Dawuan (village 2nd phase socialization The development of Cikampek (Cikopo) – P2T of Majalengka Regency, Secretary of Balida, Karanganyar, Palimanan Toll Road Project covering: committee, Head of Sub-district of Dawuan, Mandapa, and Salawana) overview, land acquisition and cycle of the Muspika Sub-district of Dawuan, village January 24, 2008 project, compensation, phase and land pricing, officials of Balida, Karangnayar, Salawana, and mitigation measures for land acquisition. Mandapa, and land owners. 146. Sub-district of Dawuan (village 2nd phase socialization The development of Cikampek (Cikopo) – P2T of Majalengka Regency, Secretary of Pasirmalati) Palimanan Toll Road Project covering: committee, Head of Sub-district of Dawuan, January 24, 2008 overview, land acquisition and cycle of the Muspika Sub-district of Pasirmalati, village project, compensation, phase and land pricing, officials of Pasirmalati, and land owners. and mitigation measures for land acquisition. 147 Sub-district of Ligung (village of 2nd phase socialization The development of Cikampek (Cikopo) – P2T of Majalengka Regency, Secretary Tegalaren and Desa Beusi) Palimanan Toll Road Project covering: committee, Head of Sub-district ofLigung, January 25, 2008 overview, land acquisition and cycle of the Muspika Sub-district of Ligung, village project, compensation, phase and land pricing, officials of Tegalaren, Beusi and land owners. and mitigation measures for land acquisition. 148 Sub-district of Palasah (village of 2nd phase socialization The development of Cikampek (Cikopo) – P2T of Majalengka Regency, Secretary Cisambeung and Majasuka) Palimanan Toll Road Project covering: committee, Head of Sub-district ofPalasah, January 30, 2008 overview, land acquisition and cycle of the Muspika Sub-district of Palasah, village project, compensation, phase and land pricing, officials of Cisambeung and Majasuka and and mitigation measures for land acquisition. land owners.
149 Sub-district of Palasah (village of 2nd phase socialization The development of Cikampek (Cikopo) – P2T of Majalengka Regency, Secretary Cisambeung and Majasuka) Palimanan Toll Road Project covering: committee, Head of Sub-district ofPalasah, January 30, 2008 overview, land acquisition and cycle of the Muspika Sub-district of Palasah, village project, compensation, phase and land pricing, officials of Cisambeung and Majasuka and
PT ERM Indonesia 115
No. Location and Time Activities Issues / Theme Stakeholder Involved and mitigation measures for land acquisition. land owners. 150 Sub-district of Kertajati (village 2nd phase socialization The development of Cikampek (Cikopo) – P2T of Majalengka Regency, Secretary of Sukawana and Babakan) Palimanan Toll Road Project covering: committee, Head of Sub-district ofKertajati, January 23, 2008 overview, land acquisition and cycle of the Muspika Sub-district of Kertajati, village project, compensation, phase and land pricing, officials of Sukawana and Babakan and land and mitigation measures for land acquisition. owners. 151 Sub-district of Kertajati (village 2nd phase socialization The development of Cikampek (Cikopo) – P2T of Majalengka Regency, Secretary of Pakubeureum) Palimanan Toll Road Project covering: committee, Head of Sub-district ofKertajati, February 4, 2008 overview, land acquisition and cycle of the Muspika Sub-district of Kertajati, village project, compensation, phase and land pricing, officials of Pakubeureum and land owners. and mitigation measures for land acquisition. 152. Sub-district of Kertajati (village 2nd phase socialization The development of Cikampek (Cikopo) – P2T of Majalengka Regency, Secretary of Kertawinangun) Palimanan Toll Road Project covering: committee, Head of Sub-district ofKertajati, January 23, 2008 overview, land acquisition and cycle of the Muspika Sub-district of Kertajati, village project, compensation, phase and land pricing, officials of Kertawinangun and land owners. and mitigation measures for land acquisition. 153 Sub-district of Kertajati (village of 2nd phase socialization The development of Cikampek (Cikopo) – P2T of Majalengka Regency, Secretary Mekarjaya) Palimanan Toll Road Project covering: committee, Head of Sub-district ofKertajati, January 22, 2008 overview, land acquisition and cycle of the Muspika Sub-district of Kertajati, village project, compensation, phase and land pricing, officials of Mekarjaya and land owners. and mitigation measures for land acquisition. 154 Sub-district of Kertajati (village 2nd phase socialization The development of Cikampek (Cikopo) – P2T of Majalengka Regency, Secretary of Palasah) Palimanan Toll Road Project covering: committee, Head of Sub-district ofKertajati, January 22, 2008 overview, land acquisition and cycle of the Muspika Sub-district of Kertajati, village project, compensation, phase and land pricing, officials of Palasah and land owners. and mitigation measures for land acquisition. 155. Sub-district of Sumberjaya 2nd phase socialization The development of Cikampek (Cikopo) – P2T of Majalengka Regency, Secretary (village of Panjalin Lor and Palimanan Toll Road Project covering: committee, Head of Sub-district ofSumberjaya, Panjalin Kidul) overview, land acquisition and cycle of the Muspika Sub-district of Sumberjaya, village August 21, 2007 project, compensation, phase and land pricing, officials of Panjalin Lor and Panjalin Kidul and mitigation measures for land acquisition. and land owners. 156. Sub-district of Sumberjaya 2nd phase socialization The development of Cikampek (Cikopo) – P2T of Majalengka Regency, Secretary (village Bongas Kulon) Palimanan Toll Road Project covering: committee, Head of Sub-district ofSumberjaya, August 9, 2007 overview, land acquisition and cycle of the Muspika Sub-district of Sumberjaya, village project, compensation, phase and land pricing, officials of Bongas Kulon and land owners. and mitigation measures for land acquisition. 157. Sub-district of Sumberjaya 2nd phase socialization The development of Cikampek (Cikopo) – P2T of Majalengka Regency, Secretary (village of Bongas Wetan and Palimanan Toll Road Project covering: committee, Head of Sub-district ofSumberjaya, Garawangi) overview, land acquisition and cycle of the Muspika Sub-district of Sumberjaya, village
PT ERM Indonesia 116
No. Location and Time Activities Issues / Theme Stakeholder Involved August 9, 2007 project, compensation, phase and land pricing, officials of Bongas Wetan and land owners. and mitigation measures for land acquisition. 158. Village of Budur, Sub-district of Socialization The development of Cikampek (Cikopo) – Secretary of P2T of Cirebon Regency, TPT and Ciwaringin, Cirebon Regency. Palimanan Toll Road Project covering: land owners. July 23, 2009 overview, land acquisition and cycle of the project, compensation, phase and land pricing, and mitigation measures for land acquisition. 159. Village of Babakan, Sub-district Socialization The development of Cikampek (Cikopo) – Head Sub-district of Ciwaringi as a member of of Ciwaringin, Cirebon Regency. Palimanan Toll Road Project covering: P2T of Cirebon Regency, TPT and land owners. October 13, 2009 overview, land acquisition and cycle of the project, compensation, phase and land pricing, and mitigation measures for land acquisition. 160. Village of Ciwaringin, Sub- Socialization The development of Cikampek (Cikopo) – Head of P2T of Cirebon Regency, TPT and land district of Ciwaringin, Cirebon Palimanan Toll Road Project covering: owners. Regency. overview, land acquisition and cycle of the August 22, 2007 project, compensation, phase and land pricing, and mitigation measures for land acquisition. 161. Village of Galagamba, Sub- Socialization The development of Cikampek (Cikopo) – Head of P2T, TPT of Kanci-Pejagan Toll Road district of Ciwaringin, Cirebon Palimanan Toll Road Project covering: and land owners. Regency. overview, land acquisition and cycle of the March 5, 2008 project, compensation, phase and land pricing, and mitigation measures for land acquisition. 162. Village of Kedungbunder, Sub- Socialization The development of Cikampek (Cikopo) – Head of P2T, TPT of Kanci-Pejagan Toll Road district of Gempol, Cirebon Palimanan Toll Road Project covering: and land owners. Regency. overview, land acquisition and cycle of the March 5, 2008 project, compensation, phase and land pricing, and mitigation measures for land acquisition. 163. Village of Kedungbender and Socialization The development of Cikampek (Cikopo) – Head of P2T, TPT of Kanci-Pejagan Toll Road Kempek, Sub-district of Gempol, Palimanan Toll Road Project covering: and land owners. village of Galamba Sub-district of overview, land acquisition and cycle of the Ciwaringin, Cirebon Regency. project, compensation, phase and land pricing, March 5, 2008 and mitigation measures for land acquisition.
PT ERM Indonesia 117
No. Location and Time Activities Issues / Theme Stakeholder Involved 164. Village of Tegalkarang, Sub- Socialization The development of Cikampek (Cikopo) – Head of P2T, TPT and land owners district of Palimanan, Cirebon Palimanan Toll Road Project covering: Regency. overview, land acquisition and cycle of the June 10, 2008 project, compensation, phase and land pricing, and mitigation measures for land acquisition.
165 Village of Lungbenda and Socialization The development of Cikampek (Cikopo) – Head of P2T, TPT and land owners Pegagan, Sub-district of Palimanan Toll Road Project covering: Palimanan, Cirebon Regency. overview, land acquisition and cycle of the April 21, 2008 project, compensation, phase and land pricing, and mitigation measures for land acquisition. 166. Village Lungbenda and Pegagan, Socialization The development of Cikampek (Cikopo) – Head of P2T, TPT and land owners Sub-district of Palimanan, Palimanan Toll Road Project covering: Cirebon Regency. overview, land acquisition and cycle of the April 21, 2008 project, compensation, phase and land pricing, and mitigation measures for land acquisition.
PT ERM Indonesia 118
Appendix I
Stakeholder Engagement Plan Report
A. Introduction to Stakeholder Engagement Plan
Purpose The purpose of SEP is to:
• Provide baseline data and information on key stakeholders and issues related with the development of The Cikopo-Palimanan Toll RoadProject ;
• Understand and capture the stakeholder’s interest in regards to the development of the Toll Road Project ; and
• Develop the stakeholder engagement plan document for mitigating impacts and social risks associated with the development of the Toll Road Project
Scope The scope of SEP is to:
• Conduct stakeholder analysis on perceptions, interests and critical issues related with The Proposed Toll Road Project ranging from local, district to provincial level;
• Study the stakeholders in the five regencies that The Proposed Toll Project will pass through Purwakarta, Subang, Indramayu, Majalengka and Cirebon; and
• Analyze stakeholders’ interests and critical issues in the current stage of land acquisition, and elaborate the potential impacts and social risks in the future stages, i.e. construction and operations of The Proposed Cikopo-Palimanan Toll Road.
Objectives The objectives of the SEP are to:
Identify key stakeholders and issues ranging from local, regency and provincial level of government related with the development of The Proposed Cikopo-Palimanan Toll Road; Elaborate and map out the stakeholders’ perceptions, interests and influence in each district, where The Proposed Toll Road will pass through, at the stage of current land acquisition phase, and identify potential impacts on future construction and operation phase;
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA 119
Identify potential impacts and social risks associated with the stakeholders’ role, power and interests as considerations to develop mitigation measures and strategy of stakeholder engagement; and Develop the appropriate approach to key stakeholders and critical issues through the stakeholder management plan.
B. Methodology
Secondary Data Review The secondary data review was conducted by:
Tracking information from internet on the media coverage related with issues of the Proposed Toll Road Project; Reviewing available LMS’s documents such as AMDAL document and others; and Reviewing official data from the government: status of land release from Committee of Land Release in each districts, decrees and regulations related with proposed toll road development The purpose of secondary data review is to provide background information on this study. It is also important to elaborate public concerns based on media coverage related to the proposed toll road development.
Stakeholder and Issues Identification and Analysis Data collection methods
The SEP study uses qualitative research methods. Qualitative research is a method of inquiry employed in many disciplines, traditionally in social research. Qualitative research aims to gather in-depth understanding of human behavior and the reasons that govern such behaviour. The SEP study investigates the perceptions and interests of the stakeholders which determine their position of any potential impacts associated with the Proposed Toll Road Project.
The qualitative research typically relies on the methods of gathering information; the most common use is in-depth interview. The SEP study used in-depth interviews to gather information from respondents. In-depth interview is a qualitative research technique that involves conducting intensive individual interview to explore perspective on a particular idea, project or situation. The primary advantage of in- depth interviews is that they provide much more detailed information than what is available through other data collection methods, such as surveys. They may also provide a more relaxed atmosphere in which to collect information—people may feel more comfortable having a conversation about their perspectives, interests and provide sensitive information in particular.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA 120
Selection of respondents
Information on issues related with the development of the Proposed Cikopo- Palimanan Toll Road is relatively limited, mostly on government officials. The selection of respondents was determined through key respondents that were interviewed the first time. The first respondents will be asked to recommend anyone or institution who has information regarding to other respondents. This process commonly called as snowballing sampling technique.
In terms of social research, snowball sampling is a non probability sampling technique. Snowball sampling is a method used to obtain information, from extended associations, through previous acquaintances. Snowball sampling uses recommendations to find people with the specific knowledge that has been determined as being useful. However, the success of this technique depends greatly on the initial contacts and connections made.
In order to reduce bias of snowball technique of information collection, the first respondent was determined based on consideration of position and level, category and representative of group respondents.
The first respondent has been determined covering local, regency and province level of respondents. At local level the first respondent is the heads of villages and community leaders that are directly related with the proposed toll road development. At regency level, first respondent is the staff of land acquisition team and the secretariat committee of land acquisition. At province level the first respondent is the head of land acquisition team at the province level. The snowball technique has been combined with direct interviews with some respondents based on their positions related with the proposed toll road development. The initial information from LMS, Head of Land Acquisition Team and mass media coverage are the sources of information to determine the important institutions to be directly interviewed such as : o Dinas Pertanian (Local Agriculture Official) at the regency and provincial level;
o Badan Pertanahan Nasional/BPN (Land Administration agency) at the regency and provincial level;
o Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Daerah/Bapeda (Agency of Regional Development Planning) at the regency and provincial level; and
o Badan Lingkungan Hidup Daerah/BLHD (Local Environmental Agency) at the regency and provincial level.
The additional first respondents were determined considering the categories and representativeness of respondent in community. Based on the information from LMS, Head of Land Acquisition Team and mass media coverage, there
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA 121
are non-government categories such as civil society groups that are directly related with proposed toll road development, and business association that might be interested in the proposed toll road development such as : o Gerakan Masyarakat Bawah Indonesia (GMBI), advocating groups of civil society which has been involved in accompanying the communities on land acquisition phase;
o Pesantren Babakan-Ciwaringin, a religious group which opposes the proposed toll road development; and
o Kamar Dagang dan Industri Daerah (KADIN Daerah), association of private bussiness that might be interested to be involved in the proposed toll road development.
Issues identification and analysis methods
Issues identification and analysis has been carried out following the steps below:
Framing issues from mass media coverage and initial information from LMS and head of land acquisition team. From this step the main issues categories were determined, and will be analysed further through in-depth interviews with the respondents; In-depth interviews resulted in detailed issues and sub-issues from each category and explained some critical issues in each regency. Then, in each issue, the key stakeholders that are directly involved in this issues were identified; and The identified issues were then analyzed and resulted in detailed issues based on locations, actors, potential impacts and risks associated with the proposed toll road development
Stakeholder identification and analysis methods
The stakeholder identification and analysis was conducted through the following steps:
Identification - based on the interviews with the first respondents as well as other important respondents that were identified through snow balling technique, the key stakeholders were identified. Some of the respondents were the stakeholders, but not all of respondents were identified as the stakeholders. The stakeholders were classified upon their position, interests and influences as the party who will be affected or who will be affecting the development of the proposed toll road; Profiling – obtain the detail description of the identity, characteristics, roles, interests and influence of the stakeholders; and Analysis - measure the strength, position and interests of stakeholders related to the proposed toll road development project.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA 122
The term ‘key stakeholders’ in this study refers to the actor’s power in regards to the formulated variables. There are five parameters to be considered in determining someone as the most prominent actor. Those five parameters are:
Influence capacity, refers to the actor’s power to manage issue or problem; Push capacity, refers to the actor’s power to mobilize people; Position in the community, refers to the actor’s power in the community both at formal or informal position; kinship network, refers to the actor’s kinship power; and Interest network, refers to the actor’s power to establish economic and/or political network. These five variables were scored to determine whether someone was a dominant actor.
Respondent Categories and Distribution The total number of respondents interviewed in this SEP research was 130 respondents (appendix 1), consisting of 91 government officials, 28 individuals and 11 private sectors. The result of snowballing technique contributed to the high number of respondents from the government institution. This was because the sources of information and knowledge regarding the proposed toll road development were mostly found in the government institution.
The distribution of respondents based on their levels, is mostly in the regency level. There were 68 respondents from the regency level, 50 respondents from the local level and 12 respondents from the provincial level.
Figure 1 Respondents based on Regional level
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA 123
Figure 2 Respondent based on category
The distribution of respondents based on their locations is shown in Figure 4 below. Most of the respondents were from the Cirebon Regency (29%) and the least number of respondents were from Bandung, the capital of West Java Province (9%).
Figure 3 Stakeholder distribution based on research location
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA 124
C. Key Stakeholders and Issues
Stakeholder Identification In general, the research found 125 key stakeholders related with the proposed toll road development. The stakeholders are mostly at the regency level with 83 stakeholders. There are 30 stakeholders at local level and 12 stakeholders at the provincial level.
Figure 4 Stakeholders based on the Regional Level Distribution
Based on the category, the highest numbers of stakeholders are from the government (52%) at the local, district and provincial levels. The government officials from various agencies have vested interest and accordingly increased their attention on the proposed Cikopo-Palimanan toll road development project. This is the case as the information of the proposed toll road project is mostly in the hand of the government officials, and is limited to other stakeholders. The second largest layer of the stakeholders is the civil society composed of individuals (15%) and organizations (13%). Meanwhile, the stakeholders from the business sector consist of companies (14%) and business associations (7%)..
From these findings, the Regency has the most number of stakeholders associated with the proposed toll road development project that need to be managed through social intervention by the management of the toll road construction. The stakeholders from the regency level are more interested in the construction phase of the proposed toll road development..
Stakeholders from the civil society are mostly individuals and a few organizations, which mean that the pattern of stakeholders’ management needs to start at the level of community leaders in each district. Meanwhile in the business sector, the stakeholders’ management needs to be made up of business associations and companies that have interest in the potential economic benefits by the presence of the toll road, both during the construction phase and operational phase.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA 125
Figure 5 Stakeholders based on categories
Based on the categories of interest issues, the role and interests of stakeholders are dominated by the agrarian issues (30%) and economic issues (27%). Most of the stakeholders are concerned with agrarian issues, such as land acquisition problems, conflicts on the price of land compensation, land disputes which led to the court, communication and coordination issues related to the land. Economic issues mainly related to the agricultural issues. Majority of the land that will be converted to the toll road are agricultural land, plantation and forestry. Therefore their concerns related to the economic issues are fears of decreased agricultural production and plantation.
Political issues (18%) appear primarily on the social movement of individuals, groups or organizations that claim to play their interests to defend the communities who are considered to be impacted by toll road development. Another political issue is related to the problem of inter-institutional relationships among government. Some of the institutions feel less involved or less embodied in the proposed toll road project. Figure 6 Issues brought up by the stakeholders.
Other important issue is infrastructure (14%), some of the local government officials have concerns that there is a potential damage to local infrastructure. This relates to
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA 126
village roads and irrigation facilities, which might be impacted by the construction of toll road, i.e. due to mobilization of heavy equipments during the construction phase.
Environmental (6%) and employment issues (5%) are minor issues. The environmental issue is mainly about the decreasing forest area, while the labor issue is associated with the local workers being interested to be involved/employed during the construction phase of the toll road development.
PURWAKARTA REGENCY
In Purwakarta Regency, there are 20 important stakeholders, of which 17 are stakeholders at the regency level and the remaining 3 are at the local level. Based on the stakeholder categories, they are dominated by the Government (50%), followed by private sector which consists of the companies (20%), associations (20%) and only a few come from the civil society i.e. individuals (5%) and organizations (5%).
The coordination among the government institutions and the interest of private sectors to be involved in the construction phase becomes major issues in Purwakarta regency.
Figure 7 Stakeholders based on categories in Purwakarta Regency
In Purwakarta, the key issues include economic issues (50%), infrastructure issues (25%) and agrarian issues (15%). Political, environment and labor issues are considered to be minor issues in the regency. Figure 9 shows the distribution of the key issues in Purwakarta Regency.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA 127
Figure 8 Stakeholders based on issues at Purwakarta Regency.
SUBANG REGENCY
In Subang Regency, there are 21 important stakeholders consists of: the government (28%), companies (24%), civil society organizations (29%) and individuals (19%). The role of civil society groups is to balance the role of the government in this area. There are advocate groups and community leaders that have interest and influence to the land acquisition process.
Figure 9 Stakeholders based on categories at Subang Regency
Stakeholder map based on the issues in Subang Regency is dominated by a balanced attention between the economic issues (29%) and the agrarian issues (29%), as shown in Figure 11. A political issue in the form of civil organization movement that claims to stand behind the people’s interests related with the proposed toll road construction is quite prominent (19%). The infrastructure, environment and labor issues are regarded as minor issues in the Regency.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA 128
Figure 10 Stakeholders based on issues at Subang Regency
INDRAMAYU REGENCY
Out of the 17 stakeholders in Indramayu, most of them come from the Government (59%), while other stakeholders in a much smaller proportion come from individuals (11%), association of companies (12%), companies (11%) and organizations (6%). In Indramayu the area that will be passed through by the toll road is mostly production forest area with a small number of community lands. This situation contributes to the map of stakeholders that is mostly dominated by government institutions.
Figure 11. Stakeholders based on categories it Indramayu Regency
From the perspective of the stakeholders’ involvement issues, the highest percentage is the issue with regards to agrarian problems (29%) and economic issues (29%). Meanwhile, the other stakeholders are involved in environmental issues (12%), infrastructure (12%), politics (12%) and labor (6%). The agrarian issues in Indramayu are concentrated on the issues of the legal land release process from PERHUTANI (national forest production company) to the authority of toll road development. The economic issues are mostly dominated by the potential negative economic impacts on north coast road (Jalur PANTURA) as a consequent to the operation of the new toll road.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA 129
Figure 12 Stakeholders based on issues at Indramayu Regency
MAJALENGKA REGENCY
In Majalengka regency, the dominant stakeholders are the government (70%) as compared to other stakeholders such as individuals (12%), civil society organizations (12%) and companies (6%). The local government in this area has strong interest in the toll road development because they are planning to integrate the toll road as an infrastructure support for the international airport development in this area.
Figure 13 Stakeholders based on categories in Majalengka Regency
Based on the issues, agrarian matters (47%) received the most attention from stakeholders, followed by economic issues (23%), infrastructures (12%), politics (12%), and environment (6%) and there are no key stakeholders related to labor issues (0%).
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA 130
Figure 14 Stakeholders based on issues in Majalengka Regency
MAJALENGKA REGENCY
In Cirebon, out of a total of 38 stakeholders identified, most of them come from the government (45%). However, stakeholders with individual backgrounds (24%) in this regency have the highest number among the other four regencies, and then followed by stakeholders from civil society organizations (16%), companies (13%) and the associations (2%). Even though the role of government is dominant at regional level, the role of civil societies and head of villages is relatively high at the local level. The objectives of Pesantren Babakan Ciwaringin, a strong religious group, to the toll road pathway has contributed to the change of alignment to the south and has resulted in new issues in regard to land acquisition processes.
Figure 15 Stakeholders based on categories in Cirebon Regency
Unlike the other regencies, political issues (34%) dominated the involvement of stakeholders, followed by the agrarian issues (29%), economics (16%), labors (10%), infrastructures (8%) and finally environmental issues (3%) in Cirebon. Political issues combined with agrarian issues in land acquisition process are major issues in Cirebon Regency. The stakeholders in local and regency level are mostly civil society groups, individuals and heads of villages that have strong influence on land
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA 131
acquisition process. This is a sensitive issue where some of the stakeholders leverage advantage their personal and political interests. Cirebon is considered as the most challenging area in relation to the proposed toll road development, particularly in the land acquisition process.
Figure 16 Stakeholders based on issuesat Cirebon Regency
PROVINCIAL LEVEL
At provincial level, there are 12 important stakeholders identified and 83% of them are from the Government, 9% are company associations and 9% are individuals. Based on the issues perspective, 42% of stakeholders are interested and involved in agrarian issues, 25% are concerned in economic issues, 25% in the infrastructures issues and 8% in environmental issues. The stakeholders in the provincial level are dominated by the government officials. This is the case as the other stakeholders do not have a strong network with the local, district and regency government.
Figure 17 Provincial stakeholders based on categories
The agrarian issue related with the land acquisition, economic and infrastructure is a major theme in provincial level. The legal land release of production forest from Perhutani is a major concern in Subang, while in Cirebon, the major concern is land acquisition disputes. The issues on infrastructure is a source of potential conflict
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA 132
among government institutions such as the concern of some government officials to the destruction of local roads, irrigation systems and other public facilities as a consequence of the construction phase of toll the road development, i.e. mobilization of heavy equipments.
Figure 18 Provincial stakeholders based on issues
STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS
Based on the stakeholders’ identification process, the analysis on the issues and the associated potential social risks that these stakeholders raise are explained below according to the different phases of the proposed toll road project.
The analysis of stakeholders can be configured into its regional based, regency or provincial. It can be charted based on their interest on the proposed toll road development which is the land acquisition phase, construction phase and the operational phase. The whole illustration on the stakeholders can be seen on appendix 2.
LAND ACQUISITION PHASE
On the provincial level, the land acquisition process has raised some important issues involving key stakeholders, which include:
• Provincial Land Acquisition Team has a key role on the success of the land acquisition process on the whole route of the proposed toll road. The team will face an important issue especially in the Cirebon and Majaengka Regencies regarding the resistance from the Babakan Ciwaringin Pesantren where the proposed toll road will cross the Pesantren based on the initial plan. A quick land acquisition procedure is the utmost key on the routes in Majalengka and Cirebon.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA 133
• Provincial Forestry Company has a strong concern on its 11.23 Ha where the toll road will pass through the land where the Principal permits or the lease- use permits from the Ministry of Forestry has not been acquired yet.
• DPP GMBI, based in Bandung, is concerned that the payment procedures of 6 families in Subang Regency should be accelerated. Currently the process is being held in court and DPP GMBI has given their legal service to those families. DPP GMBI is arguing that the land price compensated to be the sum requested by the families that they represent.
In Purwakarta Regency, 2 stakeholders have the strongest interest:
The street hawkers associations in Cikopo were the two stakeholders claiming to be the representatives. They assert that their group is entitled for settlement on land acquisition, which is a problem because these merchants trade on state ground, making it difficult to formulate compensation. However, with the cooperation from the Puwakarta government, P2T and TPT team is organizing a constructive communication, which should result in a solution in the near future. It is important to note that these supporters of the street hawker association are not against the proposed toll road project but an agreed settlement for compensation should be resolved.
In Subang Regency, the key stakeholders related to this are:
• Villagers of Gempor and Sukamelang Villages who will be isolated from the public services because their pathways will be intersected by the proposed toll road;
• People of Jabon village, accompanied by GMBI Subang district, who are still in court for the determination of the dispute over the agreed price of compensation; and
• District GMBI in Subang that have a role in organizing and influencing the negotiation process of land restitution
In Indramayu Regency, stakeholders related to this phase are:
• A group in Bantarwaru Village, called Partisan Siliwangi who influenced the people working in the state owned Forestry Company and organized demands for compensation; and
• Indramayu Forestry Company KPH who has as the largest land area, 132.9 Ha, which will be acquired by the proposed toll road
In Majalengka district, the major stakeholders associated with the land acquisition phase are:
• Community group calling themselves the People's Alliance Victim Toll (ANKOT) who raised the issue of land compensation;
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA 134
• Community, People and village officials in Bongas Wetan who have focused considerable attention on the issue of land acquisition;
• Pemuda Pancasila organizations who have a strong influence in relation to the land acquisition problems; and
• KPH Perhutani offices in Majalengka and Cirebon Regencies that also covers the loss of the land area of 11.23 Ha due to the change in the proposed toll road route design
Meanwhile in Cirebon, important stakeholders associated with land acquisition phase are:
• People in some villages such as Pegagaan, Budur and Ciwaringin where the proposed toll road will pass through as a result of the change in the proposed toll road;
• The business owners in the affected village of Ciwaringin particularly during the future toll road construction phase;
• The influential kuwu’s (village leaders) in the village of Babakan, Ciwaringin, Walahar and Pagagan which have direct and indirect interests in land acquisition; and
• Nadhatul Ulama (National Islamic Organization) administrators who own land in the Kempek Village where the proposed toll road will pass. TPT and P2T Cirebon have worked hard to resolve the issue of land compensation in the new lane toll road
Construction Phase In general, the attention of stakeholders in the construction phase is categorized into several areas:
• Attention to economic issues and the involvement of local entrepreneurs in the construction of the toll road;
• Concerns to the issue of employment and involvement of the local people to work in the project during the construction phase; and
• Attention to the issue of infrastructure such as roads in villages / districts where they will be intersected, irrigation channels and fears of damage to rural roads / provincial road because of the mobilization of heavy equipments during the construction of the toll road
At the provincial level, the stakeholders who are most concerned with the construction phase are:
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA 135
• Bapeda Jabar, who is the most knowledgeable at the provincial level on public infrastructure data in relation to toll road construction;
• BLHD Jabar, who has held the EIA report for monitoring the impact of highway construction on the environment;
• Department of Agriculture and Plantation Office which has the concern of the reduction of agricultural production and plantation; and
• The Province’s Chamber of Commerce who conduct provincial coordination in the interest of investment in construction services relating to of the toll road.
The same pattern of involvement occurred in the Regencies where the toll road will pass through starting from Purwakarta, Subang, Indramayu, Majalengka to Cirebon namely as follows:
• Chamber of Commerce, local business associations and construction companies who want to be involved in the construction of the toll road;
• The village government is concerned that their people should not only be spectators, but be involved as local workforce in the construction phase of the toll road construction;
• Bapeda in all districts that monitor and ensure that development does not harm the existing highway facilities and physical infrastructure in each region;
• Department of Highways throughout the district are concerned that the local roads might be damaged by the mobilization of heavy equipment during the construction phase of the toll road;
• Department of agriculture and plantations in each district who want to ensure that the irrigation channels are not interrupted by the construction of the toll road, as well as concerns about the decline in agricultural and horticultural production;
• Community organizations such as Pemuda Pancasila, youth and some local leaders who want to act as suppliers of local labor;
• In Indramayu, there are organizations (SIKLUS and LAMS) which have affiliations with national NGOs that claim to be monitoring the environmental impacts caused by the toll road construction process; and
• In Cirebon, there are some socio-political organizations that are driven by the interests of local leaders who helped monitor the construction of the toll road.
OPERATIONS PHASE
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA 136
During the operation phase, the attentions of the stakeholders include:
• Interest in investing by the entrepreneurs and business associations in the ‘rest area’ and lane highway interchange;
• revolving impacts (multiplier impact) of the construction of the toll road to external investment and regional development; and
• The stakeholders in Indramayu Regency is especially concerned in the economic decline in the north coast of Java island (along the north coast route) as less traffic is expected to pass this route when the new Cikopo- Palimanan toll road operates.
In the provincial level, the important stakeholders during operation phase are:
• West Java’s Chamber of Commerce, as an association of businessmen and joint entrepreneurs are looking at the provincial level investment opportunities in the ‘rest area’ and toll road interchange;
• The Bina Marga Office, which is the Department of Highways, who want to ensure that the lanes of the toll road will be in accordance with the applicable standard in West Java Province;
• Department of Transportation who will manage the traffic flow along the highway; and
• Bapeda who will be the backbone of the development and spatial planning to be harmonized with the existence of toll road operations Cikopo – Palimanan.
The stakeholders in each Regency that have looked at the highway operations are:
• Department of agriculture, plantation office, Perhutani and PTPN VIII as well as local entrepreneurs who are involved in the production of agriculture, plantation and forestry are concerned with the benefits of toll roads to support the marketing of these products;
• Regional Chamber of Commerce and local entrepreneurs who want to invest in the ‘rest area’ and lane highway interchange;
• BLH in each Regency who pay attention to the impact of rapid investment in the presence of toll roads, especially the impact on the environment;
• The Bina Marga Office who is the Department of Highways in the area who helped prepare the interchange pathway leading to the respective district;
• Bapeda in each region in the context of adaptation planning and spatial development in connection with the operation of the toll road; and
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA 137
• There are Lakpesdam, NU and PWI in Indramayu and Fatimah Institute in Cirebon that have a strong influence in the media who helped examine the impact of the operation of the toll road towards regional development.
ISSUES IDENTIFICATION
The research has discovered several strategic issues regarding the Cikopo-Palimanan toll road project. In general, there are six groups of strategic issues that can be categorized as follow into the map:
• The issue of agrarian/land - related aspects of land restitution, land disputes, customary rights / customary endowments / waqf land affected by the construction of the toll road, land swap, plantation and forestry;
• Economic issues –the interest to gain economic benefit from the construction of the toll road, impact on food production and estates, investment interests and the role of local entrepreneurs, as well as economic consequences due to the construction of the toll road;
• Political Issues –the toll road in relation to the interest of the political elites in of the village, district and provincial levels, its connection with the socio- political movement that involves a mass refusal to toll roads, dispute on the interest between institutions, as well as the role of NGOs, CBOs and local leaders in the formation of opinion, advocacy and campaigning for other interests;
• The issue of infrastructure-building effect of the toll road infrastructures in cutting roads, irrigation canals, residential communities as well as fears of damage to infrastructure caused by the mobilization of heavy equipments;
• Environmental Issues – the change and alteration on environmental functions and ecological purposes such as water catchment areas, forest areas, and the impact of environmental degradation due to the toll road, including attention to environmental impact assessment (EIA); and
• The issue of labor - the interest for local employment in the development process and toll road operational.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA 138
ISSUES ANALYSIS
Based on the categories of issues identified, the study found some general issues that were common to the stakeholders in the 5 regencies. These issues are categorized into sub-issues, such as:
• Agrarian Issues
o Pricing discrepancies on land compensation;
o The issue of land that was excised while the payments are not in accordance with the extent set forth in the certificate; and
o The problem of negative public perception on land certificates that are held by the Land Acquisition team.
• Economic Issues
o Worries on the reduction of plantation/agricultural products due to the change in land function from agriculture land to toll road; and
o The control of high scale investors on the economic benefits due to the toll road construction and development.
• Infrastructure Issues
o Intersected access to village roads due to the new toll road development.
o Keep apart irrigation lane; and
o Fears on the effect of heavy equipments movement on the regency and village roads during the construction phase.
• Employment or Manpower issues
o Desire to empower the local people as labour workers during the construction of the toll road.
• Environmental issues
o Decrease of forestry zone, natural fresh water and decrease of the watershed area.
STAKEHOLDER AND ISSUES MAP
Based on the stakeholder and issues analysis, the study described key stakeholders and issues map. The key stakeholders were analysed based on the distance, strength and influence of the stakeholders to the toll road development.
PROVINCIAL
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA 139
Based on the analysis on the provincial level, there are 5 stakeholders that have a direct interest in the proposed toll road construction, as describe in table 1.
Table 1 Stakeholder, interest and influence in provincial level
Stakeholders Interest and Influence
BAPEDA Interested to ensure the physical toll road construction is in (Regional Planning & Development accordance with the input from Bapeda Regency on the Board) consultations basis between the toll road construction managers, Land Acquisition Team (TPT) and Bapeda. The main concern is on the village road infrastructures, irrigation canals and public facilities that would be affected by the toll road construction. Provincial TPT Interested to ensure the overall land acquisition process would (Land Acquisition Team) be well accomplished, resolving any disputes and conflicts settlement regarding land acquisition. Perhutani West Java and Banten Interested in the matters of production forest area that would Region be converted into toll road, which should be granted a loan-use permit by the Ministry of Forestry. The main concern is on the land within the scope of the KPH Purwakarta, where the required permit and dispensation from the Ministry of Forestry has not been granted. Regional Board of Environmental Interested to implement monitoring based on the (BLHD) West Java AMDAL(Environmental Impact Assessment) document. The main concern is the environmental and social impact monitoring on the important points of the new toll road based on the AMDAL (Environmental Impact Assessment) document. DPP GMBI Interested to escalate the settlement process of the land dispute cases between the 6 families in Subang and the Land Acquisition Team (TPT), where LBH GMBI has been assisting the 6 families through the legal process.
In general, the provincial stakeholders support the development of the proposed toll road, however there is one civil society group, DPP GMBI which tends to oppose the proposed toll road development project. Depending on the outcome of court decision over the dispute on land price between the six families in Subang and the TPT (Land Aqusition Team), the DPP GMBI will then determine if they will support the proposed toll road development project. The DPP GMBI is relatively vocal in media, and has the capacity to mobilize mass to hold a demonstration in expressing their interest. This organization also has the capacity to be involved in any legal processes as they are the advocate for the six families in the land acquisition dispute.
There are stakeholders at the provincial level who are using their influence at a broader level and scope i.e. Provincial TPT (Land Acquisition Team), GMBI and Kadin (Regional Chamber of Trade and Industry) West Java. The Provincial TPT has the formal source of powers i.e. the legality of the government's policy to perform its tasks and authority over land acquisition process up to the provincial level. GMBI uses their political power to form an opinion, implement legal process and mass mobilization to lift local issues to the regency and provincial level. While the West
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA 140
Java KADIN (Chamber of Trade and Industry) has the economic and networking power at the provincial level of West Java, in order to establish consolidation and coordination of investment interest that relates to the proposed toll road construction.
The stakeholders from the government such as the PERHUTANI, BAPEDA and BLHD have interest and influence based on their roles and authorities that are directly connected to the proposed toll road development. PERHUTANI is concerned with the legal process of the land acquisition in their areas, where the relevant permits from the Ministry of Forestry have not been granted. BAPEDA at the provincial level, as the coordination body of the development planning is concerned with the mitigation of the impact of construction phase especially those affecting the public facilities such as irrigation, local road and others. BLHD at provincial level has the authority to monitor and ensure the toll road development process meets the regulation as noted in AMDAL documents.
PURWAKARTA
From the analysis on the stakeholders in Purwakarta Regency, all the stakeholders are in a position to support the proposed toll road construction. There are several stakeholders who have direct interests on the proposed toll road construction, as described in table 2.
Table 2 Stakeholder, interest and influence in Purwakarta Regency
Stakeholders Interest and Influence
P2T(Land Acquisition Team), To ensure the land procurement for the benefit of toll road Purwakarta Regency construction to be accomplished on schedule Perhutani KPH Purwakarta Interested in the forestry land that will be exposed by the toll road construction with ration of 1:2 in Purwakarta Regency and has connectivity with their management area Head of Village Interested to get the toll road construction immediately implemented in order to absorb working labor and to get economic benefit for the community. Construction Service Companies and Interested to be chosen as sub-contractor for the toll road Companies Association construction. Group of informal kiosks The impacted informal kiosks vendors influence one another and stick together in order to strengthen their positions to get compensated.
The stakeholders with a direct interest on the toll road construction in Purwakarta, are using negotiation and cooperation; there is no potential to use political and mass mobilization power. The critical issue is the case of a group of small kiosks in Cikopo that are impacted by toll construction who expect to get compensation. The difficulty is that the small kiosks are situated on government-owned land, and from the
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA 141
perspective of the land acquisition team, there is no scheme of compensation of such case.
The challenge is on the progress to resolve this matter by asking local government in Purwakarta to lead the process and decide the number and scheme of compensation. The role of the Regency Government is to provide a clean area for investor to invest safely and properly.
The head of village and construction companies in Purwakarta have the same interest in getting the economic benefit from the proposed toll road development. Head of villages have expectations on absorption of local working labors on construction phase and multiplier impact of the toll road operation on the local economy. The construction companies hope that the toll road construction phase will prioritize local companies to be involved in the proposed toll road development.
SUBANG
In Subang Regency, there are 3 identified parties that have direct interests in the proposed toll road construction process i.e. P2T, GMBI in Subang Regency and association of the local construction companies. The important finding is that in Subang there are 35 associations of construction service companies, which is the largest number in any regency in Indonesia. It can be anticipated that there will be fierce competition among the groups of construction service companies. The companies hope there will be a transparent and accountable system of tender process related with the appointment of local companies to be involved in the proposed toll road development.
Table 3 Stakeholder, interest and influence Subang regency
Stakeholder Interest and Influence P2T (Land Acquisition Committee) To ensure the land procurement for the benefit of the Subang Regency toll road construction to be accomplished on schedule GMBI – District Subang Interested to accelerate the settlement of land dispute cases between the 6 families in Subang and the Land Acquisition Team (TPT), where LBH GMBI has been assisting its legal process. Construction Service Companies Interested to be cooperated as sub-contractor during and Companies Association the toll road construction.
The GMBI- Subang District has the interest to accelerate the progress of the land dispute cases between the 6 families and the Land Acquisition Team (TPT). At this stage, the case is still being processed in the court, with the 6 families being accompanied by DPP GMBI. The central office of GMBI is located in Bandung. The P2T, acting as a form of coordination among government institutions in Subang, is
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA 142
actively ensuring that the land acquisition process is going well in the regency level. This contributes positively to the acceleration of land acquisition process.
INDRAMAYU
All stakeholders identified in Indramayu regency are in a position to support the proposed toll road construction. Stakeholders that have a direct interest to the proposed toll road construction are described in table 4.
Table 4 Stakeholder, interest and influence Indramayu regency
Stakeholder Interest and Influence P2T (Land Acquisition Committee) To ensure the land procurement for the benefit of toll road Indramayu Regency construction to be accomplished on schedule Perhutani KPH Indramayu To ensure the synergy between the Perhutani Indramayu with the toll road construction management, in order to ensure that the operational work of Perhutani will not be disturbed by the proposed toll road construction. Village Government Interested to get the toll road construction immediately implemented in order to absorb working labor and to get economic benefit for the community. Bina Marga (Road Management Office) Interested to ensure that the local roads will not be damaged by the mobilization of heavy equipments during the construction phase.
The communication and coordination between the land acquisition team and the toll road development authority with any government institutions such as the Perhutani, Village Government and Bina Marga are considered to be important issues in Indramayu.
MAJALENGKA
There are two parties in Majalengka that are identified to have ideological motives to reject the Proposed Toll Road Development Project, i.e. BEM (Students Executive Senate) of Majalengka University, and a group named the Alliance of Toll Road Community (ANKOT). However, these two parties do not have significant power to influence public policy nor are able to give consistent public pressure within their refusal. There are six parties that have direct interests in the proposed Cikopo- Palimanan toll road construction, as described in table 5.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA 143
Table 5 Stakeholder, interest and influence Subang regency
Stakeholder Interest and Influence P2T (Land Acquisition Committee) To ensure the land procurement for the benefit of toll road Majalengka regency construction to be accomplished on schedule TPT (Land Acquisition Team) Interested to ensure the overall land acquisition process for the toll road construction run smoothly and to settle any disputes within all parties that have not been agreed with TPT. Village Government Interested to get the toll road construction immediately implemented in order to absorb working labor and to get economic benefit for the community. Bina Marga (Road Management) Office Interested to ensure the regency roads not to be damaged by the mobilization of heavy equipments during toll road construction phase. Perhutani KPH Majalengka Interested within their managing forestry area that would be exposed by the toll roadconstruction due to the realignment area, to get immidiate principal permit and land areal replacement with ratio of 1:2
CIREBON
Unlike the other regencies where the role and the influence of the stakeholders are more at the institution level, in Cirebon, the stakeholders' influence is more at the individual level. The map of the stakeholders' role in Cirebon Regency is more dynamic, with regards to the toll road realignment plan that relates to the southern path. This is related to the case of rejection from Pesantren Babakan-Ciwaringin (Moslem Boarding School and religious groups) that was originally affected by the initial toll road construction plan. This change makes the stakeholders' role and influence map in Cirebon changes as well from its original position to individual influence of local figures with position and status in the community.
The alliance power for stakeholders group influence in Cirebon Regency belongs to the group of Kuwu (head of village), who has the economic and political motives regarding the land acquisition process, and also belongs to some figures that have affiliation with the Pesantren. There are more than 50 Pesantrens in Cirebon Regency which have strong position in communities, and have connections to national level. Therefore, the interest and influence of stakeholders in Cirebon Regency is even more complex with a combination of socio-economic and political dimensions. The land acquisition process is not as simple as the other regencies regarding the role of local leaders in Cirebon, with motives relating to involvement in and getting benefits from the land acquisition process.
With the complexity of the problems regarding the land acquisition in Cirebon, the number of stakeholders associated with this issue is the highest here, compared to the other regencies. Stakeholders who have a direct interest to the toll road construction are identified in table 6.
Table 6 Stakeholder, interest and influence Subang regency
Stakeholder Interest and Influence
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA 144
Stakeholder Interest and Influence Chairman of Nahdlatul Ulama who Land ownership and appropriate land compensation has land in Kempek Village
Local religious groups from several Interested in social and economic impact of toll road Pesantren in desa Babakan and development, some of them are involved in rejection of the Ciwaringin original plan of the toll road pathway Head of village (Kuwu) Interested to be involved and getting benefit from land acquisition process Civil Society Group such as Interestd to organize working labor to be involved in the toll Pemuda Pancasila road developments Local Private Companies Getting compensation from the impac of the toll road development Villagers at Pegagan village, the To be granted with land compensation at their requested price. owner of 20 pieces of land who defensively refused the land compensation Individual community leaders in Interested in getting benefit from land acquisition process village
The key stakeholders in Cirebon vary in terms of their position, interest and influence. The most influencing figure comes from the local level such as Kuwu (head of village) and community leaders affiliated to the Pesantren (religious leaders). These two kinds of stakeholders should be given more attention by the toll road project authority.
There are local companies in Ciwaringin that will be impacted by the proposed toll road development. One of the local companies has 230 employees who will lose their job if the company should be closed. In Pegagan village there are 20 parcels of land that the owners are rejecting the compensation proposed by the land acquisition teams. In Budur village there are local community leaders that are rejecting the land acquisition. The leader has strongly opposed the original plan of toll road pathway, and has strong affiliation with the Pesantren Babakan Ciwaringin.
One of the important findings in Cirebon shows that there is a parcel of land in Kempek village owned by the chairman of Nahdlatul Ulama, the biggest Moslem Organization in Indonesia which will also be impacted and should be compensated by land acquisition team. This requires prudent and careful process, especially on communication regarding land acquisition process due to his power and influence at national level.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA 145
D. APPROACH TO STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT
PRINCIPLES AND PROTOCOLS OF EFFECTIVE ENGAGEMENT
Undertaking a stakeholder analysis as part of social impact assessment is important in identifying the various parties who may have an interest in the toll road project or be affected by the project in some way. Stakeholder analysis enables broad range of perspectives, interests and influence of power for parties in local, regency and provincial level that are important to be heard and understood. This helps to build a positive relationship between the stakeholders and the project.
There are two dimensions in stakeholder analysis related to effective engagement. First is the impact of the project. This scope will elaborate more details in community social assessment (CSA) report, particularly at the community level. The stakeholder analysis will complete the findings on actor and institution level at local, regency and provincial to describe what is the impact of the project on high level institutions. Secondly is risk, referring to the social risk as a consequence of the interest and power of the key stakeholders, which might contribute to the process of the development of the toll road project. The risk is inherent in issues and stakeholder analysis and if not anticipated will potentially disturb and influence the project.
The effective engagement is developed based on the perspective of impact and risk above. Therefore to build effective engagement, the following principles should be considered: • Define the position of stakeholder regarding the project. The position of stakeholder is an important consideration to build an effective engagement strategy. The model of engagement strategy will depend on the stakeholders’ position whether they are supporting or rejecting the project.
• Describe issues that stakeholder might be interested in and affected by the project. The issues identified will be useful information to develop the strategy of engagement. The stakeholder who is concerned with economic issues is different with the stakeholder who is concerned with agrarian issues, in terms of their expectations, direct or indirect involvement to deliver services and solving the relation problems.
• Understand the phase of the project which stakeholders are interested in. The stakeholder might be interested in different phases of the project, i.e. land acquisition, construction or operations phase. Each stage needs specific strategies of engagement.
• Determine the approach level of engagement. There are four levels of engagement approach, i.e. empowerment, collaboration, consultation or communication. It is important to select the right level of engagement to develop strategy for effective stakeholder engagement.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA 146
• Determine the tool of engagement. There are many options of tool of engagement such as community development, community relation, community services, conflict resolution, etc.
LEVEL OF ENGAGEMENT
Based on the stakeholder analysis, a level of approach related with stakeholder management strategies can be developed. There are four models of engagement outlines that can be developed:
• The first level is empowerment which is the highest of all treatment. With empowerment, the operators of the toll road not only have the obligations but also the awareness to promote and to develop self-sufficiency of the stakeholders.
• The second level is a collaboration or partnership. Stakeholder positions are parallel to the operators of the toll road.
• The third level is the consultation. Consultation was built because the main tasks, functions and roles of the stakeholders have a significant effect to the success of the toll road development.
• Final level is communication. Communication needs to be cultivated with the stakeholders who are not possible to empower, collaborate and consult due to its detachment with the issues or has low influence on the development of the toll road.
STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT PLAN
The stakeholder engagement plan has been developed based on the principle of effective engagement that consists of the name of stakeholder, location, position, issues and phase of the project, approach and tool of engagement. The detailed of stakeholder engagement plan is described in appendix 4.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA 147
Table Stakeholder Engagement Plan
Phase of Tools of Province / Stakeholder Position Issue Approach Description Project engagement regency West Java 1. DPP Opposing Politic Land Consultation The position of GMBI basically is Conflict resolution Province GMBI acquisition supporting the proposed toll road construction, given the settlement of land acquisition is in accordance with the requested price by the community. The consultation approach is to conduct a dialogue and lobby in order to meet the best solution. If there is not agreed solution, then they will be opposing the proposed toll road construction. 2. KADIN Supporting Economic Consturction Partnership Kadın Jabar has the potential to be Public hearing, (Chamber of and involved in mechanisms building workshop Trade and operations between themselves and their Industry) internal entrepreneur networks, for West Java coordination of fair and transparent investment. The patterns of partnership are the right form to be implemented with KADIN to overcome unfair competition among local companies, regarding their involvement during the toll road construction phase. 3. Provincia Supporting Agrarian Land Partnership Strong partnership is the primary Regular coordination l TPT(Land acquisition key in relationship with the meeting Acquisition Provincial Land Acquisition Team Team) (TPT). This is an important aspect to get the land acquisition process completed on time without leaving unsolved problems for toll road construction management. 4. Perum Supporting Agrarian Land Partnership Perum Perhutani West Java and Regular coordination Perhutani acquisition Banten Region supervise 3 forestry meeting West Java management areas (KPH) that will Province be exposed by the toll road construction, i.e. KPH Purwakarta,
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA 148
Phase of Tools of Province / Stakeholder Position Issue Approach Description Project engagement regency KPH Indramayu dan KPH Majalengka. Perhutani West Java Regional has the potential to conduct coordination both in the process of licensing and in the process of construction, where a critical interface will occur between construction activities and routine activities of Perhutani. Partnership Pattern is the right form for the relationship with Perhutani West Java. 5. Agricult Supporting Agrarian Land Consultation The agriculture office has a concern Workshop and ure and Food acquisition regarding the decreasing of food socialization meeting Crops Office production and horticulture along the toll road route; this will disrupt their production targets. The consultation pattern is the right form, especially to provide clear information for agriculture office about the benefit of the toll road, also to give a chance of discussions in order to reach understanding between the importance of infrastructure construction and the development of agriculture. 6. Regional Supporting Environme Land Partnership BLHD West Java is an important Regular coordiation Board of ntal Acquisition institution because they have the meeting Environment and authority in monitoring the al (BLDH) Construction environmental and social impact in West Java accordance with AMDAL (Environmental Impact Assestment) document and its supplement. Partnership is an appropriate model because BLHD has a significant authority, and needs to be maintained in order to avoid missed communication in the process of
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA 149
Phase of Tools of Province / Stakeholder Position Issue Approach Description Project engagement regency the toll road construction, related with aspects of environmental impact Purwakarta 1. (group of Opposing Economic Land Consultation The Consultation pattern is the right Conflict resolution informal acquisition choice, regarding the organization kiosks) real position which is not to refuse the toll road but only a matter of compensation quantity. However if the compensation does not meet their expectation, they will oppose. 2. GAPENS Supporting Economic Construction Partnership Gapensi is the strongest association Workshop, public I (Gabungan in the domain of construction hearing Pelaksana services companies in Purwakarta, Konstruksi thus building a partnership is Nasional necessary. Nevertheless, it needs to Indonesia) maintain a balance between the association's interest and the corporate individuals, especially in establishing a transparent mechanism for tenders and cooperation. 3. Agricultur Supporting Infrastruct Land Communication The agriculture and forestry office Workshop and e and ur & acquisition has a concern on the decrease in socialization meeting Forestry Economic food production, as well as the Office problem of disconnected irrigation canals. With the involvement of the provincial agriculture office, the communication pattern is quite representative in building a relationship with the agriculture office in Purwakarta 4. Perum Supporting Agrarian Land Partnership Perhutani is an important party that Regular coordination Perhutani acquisition need to be invited as a partner to meeting resolve land dispute along the track of the Toll Road. Perhutani- Puwakarta will have a more synergic cooperation on the toll road construction.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA 150
Phase of Tools of Province / Stakeholder Position Issue Approach Description Project engagement regency 5. Village Supporting Agrarian Land Empowerment Empowerment to the village Public participation, government Acquisition, authority, especially in involving CSR of Cimahi, Construction the villagers in taking advantage of Campaka and the toll road because the village District Operations authority is a stategic position that has influence to consolidate interest and and coordinate villagers in the development of the toll road. 6. Village Supporting Agrarian Land Empowerment Empowerment to the village Public participation, government Acquisition, authority, especially in involving CSR of Construction the villagers in taking advantage of Ciparungsari, and the toll road because the village Cibatu Operations authority is a stategic position that District has influence to consolidate interest and and coordinate villagers in the development of the toll road. Subang 1. Indonesi Oppose Economic Land Consultation GMBI in Subang is an advocation Conflct resolution an Movement Aquaisition group that is involved in of Lower advocating the land disputes of the Community 6 families in Jabon Village. This (GMBI) group is part of a network that Subang resides in the capital of the province Distrik and has the ability to develop issues, mobilize the mass and conduct legal procedures.Consultation is the best course to take to ensure that the issues would not be developed into matters that will put the toll road management in a difficult situation. 2. Agricult Supporting Infrastruct Land Communication They are concerned with the Workshop and ure and Food ur and Acquisition reduction in crops productivity due socialization meeting Crops Office Economic the the toll road construction. A consultative measure is the right way to explain the benefit of the toll road for agriculture and to ensure they understand the importance for the two developments to work
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA 151
Phase of Tools of Province / Stakeholder Position Issue Approach Description Project engagement regency together, the infrastructure and the agriculture 3. MPC. Supporting Labor Construction Consultation The consultation pattern with the Workshop and Pemuda and local construction entrepreneurs is socialization meeting Pancasila Operarion the right choice, with an Subang opportunity of Partnership model if Regency there is a qualified track record company is identified for cooperation. PP has an interest to supply labor during the toll road construction. 4. Environ Supporting Environme Land Communication BLHD Subang has a concern on the Regular coordination mental Board ntal Acquisition issue of environmental impact, meeting Subang and however a partnership together Regency Construction with the provincial BLHD will make a communication pattern sufficient to answer the relation pattern with BLHD at regency level
Majalengka 1. BAPPED Supporting Agrarian Land Partnership Bapeda has significant authority Regular coordination A(Regional acquisition specifically in Majalengka Regency. meeting Planning & and Bapeda becomes the very Development construction instrument of Majalengka Regent Board) who pays a strong attention over this toll road construction, so it needs to develop a partnership 2. PT. Supporting Agrarian Land Consultation Unlike the Perhutani office of Workshop and Perhutani Acquisition Purwakarta, the office of perhutani socialization meeting Majalengka has a positive perception. Therefore, the pattern of consultation needs to be developed primarily related to changes to the realignment of toll road that will expose their territory.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA 152
Phase of Tools of Province / Stakeholder Position Issue Approach Description Project engagement regency 3. Village Supporting Agrarian Land Empowerment Empowerment to the village Public participation government acquisition authority, especially in involving and CSR and the villagers in taking advantage of construction the toll road because the village authority is a stategic position that has influence to consolidate interest and and coordinate villagers in the development of the toll road.
Indramayu 1. Kadin Supporting Economic Construction Consultation The pattern of consultation with the Workshop and (Chamber of and local entrepreneurs is the right public hearing Trade and operations choice, with an opportunity for Industry) partnership model if there is a Indramayu qualified track record company identified for cooperation. 2. Associati Supporting Economic Operations Communication This is a group of restaurant traders Workshop and on of North who feel economically threatened socialization meeting coast road because of the impact of the toll Restaurants road construction. There are Traders thousands of food stalls and restaurants along the north coast road in Indramayu. They will experience an economy decrease as a consequence of displacement of most traffic to Cikopo-Palimanan toll road. Communication becomes the right choice, mainly because it is related with the investment restructuring along the rest area and interchange line towards Indramayu
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA 153
Phase of Tools of Province / Stakeholder Position Issue Approach Description Project engagement regency 3. Perum Supporting Agrarian Land Consultation Unlike the office of Perhutani in Workshop and Perhutani Acquisition Purwakarta, the office of Perhutani socialization meeting KPH and Majalengka has a positive Indramayu Construction perception. Therefore, the pattern of consultation needs to be developed mainly related to the synergy and coordination regarding toll road construction phase that will affect the regular activity of Perhutani Indramayu. Cirebon 1. Religious Supporting Social Land Partnership It needs to establish a partnership in Conflict resolution group in acquisition order to involve the religion leader Pegagan and groups as a dialogue bridge with the villagers in a conducive atmosphere without bringing up the potential of broader conflicts escalation. 2. A Board Supporting Economic Land Partnership Nahdlatul Ulama (PB NU) has a Direct Member of acquisition strong influence to the local communication by Nadlatul community. It is necessary to high level Ulama establish a form of partnership so management that the project of toll road construction has an explicit support, to overcome the complexity of the political and economic aspect related to the toll road construction in Cirebon 3. Board Supporting Economic Land Partnership GP Ansor Cirebon Regency is a part Regular coordination Member and Acquisition of NU organization that has meeting Chairman of influences at the youth level. Ansor Building a partnership with GP Ansor will bridge the gap of communication between generations regarding issues surrounding the toll road construction. 4. The Kuwu Supporting Politic, Land Consultation Village chief (Kuwu) of villages has Conflict resolution of Economic Acquisition the power to influence the people at
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA 154
Phase of Tools of Province / Stakeholder Position Issue Approach Description Project engagement regency Ciwaringin, the local level. They need a Budur, consultation as a treatment choice, Babakan, in order to turn his negative Walahar potential become positive benefits Village regarding the land dispute settlement in their villages. 5. Pemuda Supporting Economic Construction Consultation The pattern of consultation with the Workshop and Pancasila and mass organizations in the domain of socialization meeting Operation construction is the right choice, with opening an opportunity for partnership model if a company that has potential qualification and track record is identified for cooperation. PP has an interest to supply labors for toll road construction. 6. Babakan- Opposing Economic, Land Partnership A partnership pattern is needed to Direct Ciwaringin Politic Acquisition be established, especially to reduce communication by religious the potential conflict that might high level group and emerg during the construction of management islamic the Toll road. boarding school 7. Local Supporting Economic Land Consultation These are local entrepreneurs who Conflict resolution companies in Acquisition joined Kadin and have a Ciwaringin networking and influence among other entrepreneurs. Consultation and open opportunities for partnership if a company with a good credibility, qualification and good tracking is found
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA 155
D. CONCLUSION AND RECCOMENDATION
Conclusion
In general the majority of the identified stakeholders are supportive towards the development of the proposed toll road project. The study found that the stakeholders who are opposing the project are found in Subang (GMBI) and Cirebon (some of local leaders affiliated to Pesantren). However the opposing positions are not based on ideological or non negotiable motives, but refer to the pragmatic interest to benefit from the land acquisition dispute.
Changing the route of the toll road in Cirebon Regency on one hand has been able to reduce the long conflict between the project and the boarding school, but on the other hand raises some risks due to the process of negotiation and settlement of land acquisition on a new path where there are: • Perhutani area of 11.23 ha that do not yet have permission of principle permit from the Ministry of Forestry;
• Some factories that have relocated or received compensation; and
• Residential and agricultural areas In general, based on the strategic issues and stakeholders map we found that in five regencies the concerns are related to:
• Land and agrarian issues; disagreement over the price of land acquisition, land that was cut off for the toll road not being replaced according to the extent of completion certificates and licensing issues as well as replacement land owned by Perhutani office;
• Economic issues, in two ways, namely the decrease in agricultural production and plantation due to land conversion to toll roads and local entrepreneurs who are interested in getting involved in economic benefits during the construction phase;
• Infrastructure issues, the local offices in the regencies are very concerned with the problem of shortened rural roads, irrigation canals and concerns about road damage from the impact of the mobilization of heavy equipments during the construction phase;
• Political issues mainly occur in Cirebon, where the interests, influence and power of local leaders realized in various cases of conflict over land and land compensation, which is closely related to social and economic interests of the local leaders both on behalf of individuals and groups;
• Employment issues concerning the entire village government, namely the involvement of local labor in the construction of the toll roads; and
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT 156
• Environmental issues, especially the role of the Environment Agency to monitor the provincial and district environmental impacts of highway construction with reference to the EIA document and supplements.
The study concluded that the main social risks that need to be anticipated are:
• In Cirebon Regency, the local leaders have strong influence over the community. Hence, these local leaders need to be engaged in order to ensure a constructive atmosphere during the construction phase of the proposed toll road development;
• Settlement of dispute cases and land compensation issue becomes critical to be resolved in a timely manner, so it does not create opportunities for social upheaval. This could give legitimacy to the role of the organization or social group that could raise the issue at a higher level; and
• Problems of coordination and communication to local governments, perhutani, groups of employers in the area which if not done properly will lead to misperceptions and erroneous interpretations with respect to the interests of each agency that intersect with the highway construction.
Recommendation
Construction of the Toll road will start from Cikopo to Palimanan across five Regencies with diverse socio-economic characteristics and a range of stakeholders with different issues. This requires a clear approach in the context of highway construction and the results of this study recommend the following: Purwakarta Regency possesses the most stakeholders concerned with economic issues. As a region it is more exposed to interaction with economic development, land acquisition problems such as self- relocation of kiosks who occupied the Cikopo toll gate is the most important issue in the region. Communication with KPH Perhutani Purwakarta is important to agree on the process of replacing the local Perhutani land.
Subang Regency has a balanced stakeholder map between the government, private sector and civil society. The dynamics role of these stakeholders need attention, in terms of: o Coordination and communication among agencies and working units in the local government to reduce the risk of mis- communication and conflict of interest between the toll road construction and service offices in the region
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT 157
o Consultation with the civil society, especially related to land acquisition cases which are accompanied by GMBI, and other civil society groups
o Empower the rural communities, especially the village of Gembor and Sukamelang where there are people who would be isolated from their access to public facilities and other villages due to the toll road project
The Indramayu Regency is the regency with the highest number of privately owned land where the toll road traverse, however it has the potentially largest direct economic impact due to the potential economic downturn along the North highway. Therefore, communication with the local governments and business associations is the key to the highway development process, especially in anticipation of social risks, including labor migration and investment into other areas of Indramayu; There is a great interest from local governments in Majalengka Regency to integrate the toll road with the construction of international airport in the district. This is a significant potential to build partnerships, especially in terms of supporting the role of the P2T to the process of land acquisition for the benefit of these two major projects to be synergistic and not causing potential problems. Another factor is the partnership with local Perhutani, where an area of 11,23 Ha that belongs to them are being traversed by the new toll road, which requires the acceleration of granting in the principle permits from the Ministry of Forestry; and Cirebon Regency is the Regency with high-complexity problems, especially with the new route for the toll road which crosses the lands where acquisition is required. For that reason, the main concentration in the process of land acquisition should be in Cirebon. In addition, as the majority of stakeholders found in Cirebon are individuals, strategic communication needs to be carried out to individuals. The role of figures that are affiliated with schools and village leaders (kuwu), as well as district-level leaders of community organizations should be the main target in the context of social risk reduction associated with the construction of toll roads in the district Cirebon.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT 158 ANNEX D Community Social Assessment (CSA)
The proposed Cikampek-Palimanan
Toll Road Project
Community Social Assessment (CSA)
Prepared for:
PT. Lintas Marga Sedaya
February 2012
Delivering sustainable solutions in a more competitive world
1. Introduction to CSA 1.1. Background and Objective
The Toll Road Regulatory Agency (BPJT) and the Department of Public Works are planning to build an approximately 116.4 kilometer Toll Road from Cikampek (Cikopo) to Palimanan (Project), as illustrated in Figure 1. This Toll Road is a government-owned and operated project. LMS has invested in the project and is responsible for the preparation, construction, and operation activities within the section.
Figure 1. Cikampek (Cikopo) to Palimanan Toll Road Project Planning
Source: LMS Map, 2011
The toll road will administratively fall within five regencies in West Java Province; Purwakarta, Subang, Majalengka, Indramayu and Cirebon. The Toll Road will be routed through a variety of land types, such as irrigated rice fields, agricultural gardens, forests, bush, bare land, rain-fed rice fields, plantations, and residential settlements. The predominant zonings within the vicinity of the Toll Road include Forest Plantation Areas, Agricultural Areas, Industrial Areas, and Settlement Areas.
The Cikampek (Cikopo) – Palimanan Toll Road is considered vital to connect the internal regions in West Java Province, particularly as the existing roads and connections in the Province are experiencing significant degradation due to the high volume of traffic.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 1
ERM Indonesia was contracted by PT Lintas Marga Sedaya (LMS) to undertake a series of social baseline surveys by conducting fieldwork (data gathering) and data processing to support the development of a Social Impact Assessment (SIA) Report. This is undertaken involving Indonesia Center for Sustainable Development (ICSD) as Sub Consultant for the Researcher Team. This Community Social Assessment Report (CSA) document is part of the social baseline studies, which include Land Acquisition Audit Phase 2, Indigenous People Screening and Validation, Cultural Heritage Assessment, and Stakeholder Engagement Plan.
A document review has also been undertaken to complete the analysis process of the primary data collected, which is compared against a set of checklists information needed to develop the report. The findings form the basis of this report, which are based on the information made available to and reviewed by ERM. It is further ERM objective to establish recommendations in the report to address the issues identified during the review process.
The objective of this study, generally to provide sufficient information for the project to prepare a well-formulated and integrated environmental, health, and social impact assessment (ESHIA), while specifically: (1) To develop baseline profile of community along the five project affected regencies; (2) To provide analysis on community perception and knowledge regarding the project and particularly the potential impact of the project; and (3) To identify community expectation towards the project.
1.2. Methodology 1.2.1. Scope of Work
The scopes of work of this study are as follows: 1. Determine the objectives and scope of assessment, develop research instruments (questionnaires, interview guidelines, and focus group discussion guidelines), and design sampling method; 2. Organize and mobilize team to undertake the field work; 3. Data collecting, entry data, and processing; 4. Data analysis; and 5. Writing report including recommendations and key findings.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 2 1.2.2. Scope of Area
The survey was conducted in 62 villages located along the proposed toll road project, which is not focused to the affected household due to land acquisition process, but to the surrounding communities within the affected villages.
The scope of area for data collection includes 5 (five) project affected regencies, 24 sub districts and 62 villages, as presented in the following table:
Tabel 1. Scope Area of Research and Data Collection Techniques Village and data collecting technique No Regency Sub District Questionnaire and In-depth Villages for FGD Interview Bungursari Purwakarta Cikopo, Cinangka 1 Cimahi Campaka Cimahi,Cisaat and Kertamukti Cibatu Ciparungsari Pabuaran Wantilan Cipeundeuy Sawangan, Karangmukti Marengmang, Kaliangsana, Kalijati Caracas, and Ciruluk Purwadadi Wanakerta Pagaden Gembor 2 Subang Jabong Pagaden Barat Balingbing and Cidahu Subang Jabong, Sukamelang and Cisaga Cipunagara Wanasari Cibogo, Pada Asih and Sumur Cibogo Barang Dawuan Batusari Gantar 3 Indramayu Bantarwaru and Sanca Bantarwaru Terisi Cikawung Mekarjaya, Palasah, Sukawana, Kertajati Kertawinangun, Babakan and Pakubeureum Pasir Malati, Balida, Karanganyar Dawuan and Mandapa Salawana, Jatiwangi, Surawangi, Jatiwangi 4 Majalengka Jatisura and Sutawangi Cisambeng Ligung Beusi and Tegal Aren Cisambeng Palasah Majasuka Bongas Kulon, Bongas Wetan, Sumberjaya Panjalin Lor, Panjalin Kidul and Garawangi Budur, Babakan, Ciwaringin and Ciwaringin Galagamba Walahar, Kedung Bunder and 5 Cirebon Gempol Kedung Bunder Kempek Pegagan, Tegalkarang Palimanan And Lungbenda
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 3 1.2.3. Methodology of Sampling
The survey was conducted to map out the baseline profile of the communities within the affected area along the proposed toll road. The survey involves 930 household respondents for questionnaire interview, 62 key informants to be in-depth interviewed, and 150 persons involved in FGD. The respondents was selected are selected using the ‘stratified random sampling technique’.
Stratified random sampling technique is a mini-reproduction of the population. Before sampling, the population is divided into characteristics of importance for the research. For example, by gender, social class, education level, religion, etc. Then the population is randomly sampled within each category or stratum. While, a purposive sampling is a non-representative subset of some larger population, and is constructed to serve a very specific need or purpose.
During the survey, the respondents were determined to be 15 households per each affected villages. The sampling is classified based on economic condition which is consisted of poor economic condition and good economic condition. The number of sampling per each category is proportional, in which the data of household with poor economic condition is identified from the village data of direct cash assistance (BLT) recipients. Whenever BLT recipient data is not available, then another indicator is used, i.e. Public Health Insurance (Jamkesmas) recipient data.
1.2.4. Stage of Activities
The study was conducted in the span of 2 (two) months and divided into three main activities: (1) preparation of the instrument, the consolidation of teams and document review; (2) desk- based review and fieldwork to collect data through questionnaire survey, in-depth interview, and FGD, data entry; and (3) data processing, data analysis and report writing.
1. Project management
The researchers were divided into 5 teams. Each team consists of two enumerators and one data entry personnel. These teams were led by a technical specialist. Training and coaching were held with all team members prior to the execution of the scope of works, technical fieldwork and mobilization plan, to clarify the purpose and use of the data collection tools and methods, and to discuss guidance to conduct the data collection. This briefing
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 4 also divided tasks between team members to ensure all objectives of the audit were achieved equally by the enumerators who are working in different locations. During the fieldwork, the entire teams are placed in a home-based facility in order to assist one another.
2. Fieldwork
Fieldwork was undertaken to collect data through questionnaire survey, in-depth interview, and FGD. To be able to carry out these activities, in each cluster region, one team of three personnel were given the task to carry out survey activities in 12 to 13 villages due to geographical locations. a. Survey was conducted by using questionnaire to 930 household respondents. b. In-depth interviews with the local public figures are conducted to understand and verify information and key issues associated with the project development. In-depth interview was conducted to the affected landowners, business enterprise owner, and other key informant/ stakeholders related to the project. Informants for in-depth interviews were selected by using snowball-sampling technique that, according to Kumar (1996), elected by tracking the social networks of the subjects who are being interviewed. c. In addition, FGD was conducted to capture information from various group of community, including the vulnerable (elder, woman, and claimants). Vulnerable group is defined as the group of people who will experience the most potential impact from the project development, including lower socio-economic level (poor), having disabilities, widows, and elderly. FGDs were undertaken 2 times in each affected villages, with about 8 to 15 participants were involved in each FGD. d. Desk-based reviewed is undertaken to complete the analysis of the primary data, which including the following documents: o Village Monography Profile o Sub District in Figure o Regency in Figure
3. Data Analysis and Reporting Data processing and analysis were undertaken simultaneously with fieldwork, and followed by series of consignment meetings for the purpose of report writing. Data was tabulated into a matrix form to analyze the baseline profile of community within the affected villages along the proposed toll road. The report was developed based on data tabulation and key finding issues which were gathered during fieldwork.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 5 1.3. Time Frame
This study was carried out in 2 (two) months with the details as stated in Table 2 below: Tabel 2. Time Frame Time No. Activities First Month Second Month 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1. Team consolidation and designing research instruments 2. Coaching Surveyor and enumerators 3. Mobilizing the team 4. Field work 5. Data Entry 6 Data processing and analysis 7. Report drafting
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 6
2. Profile of Project Affected Region
The proposed toll road development project will cross five regencies, Purwakarta, Subang, Indramayu, Majalengka and Cirebon, which are known for agricultural production and are part of the middle route that cross the heart of West Java province known as “Lintas Tengah”. The plan of Cikopo– Palimanan Toll road, the region "Lintas Tengah" traverse agricultural land located between the South Route and the North Coast Route that form the main traffic lines between cities in West Java, namely: (i) Cikopo (Kopo) – Cirebon Route through Karawang and Indramayu, and (ii) Cikopo (Kopo) - Cirebon Route through Sadang / Purwakarta, Subang, Majalengka and Cirebon.
The majority of the villages are classified as original agricultural villages with a minimal degree of urban life, particularly in Subang and Indramayu Regency. It is identified during the baseline survey that the affected villages in the three regency are less developed compared with the villages in the Majalengka and Cirebon Regency which will also be traversed by the project.
In the Purwakarta Regency the toll road runs across three sub districts, which includes a total of six villages. Among the six villages only Cikopo Village is classified as rural industry, as it is located near the main transportation lines in West Java from Jakarta. The remaining villages are essentially agricultural villages with quite dense populations. Meanwhile, they have a strong service sector industry which is well known by the community.
In the Subang Regency, the proposed toll road will pass through 19 villages in 10 sub districts, while in the Indramayu Regency, the proposed toll road development project will pass through three villages in two sub districts. These villages in Subang and Indramayu Regencies are mainly agricultural villages.
Majalengka Regency has the most affected villages which is 24 villages in 6 sub-dictricts. The villages in Majalengka and Cirebon regency are mainly semi-urban villages which are easily accessible to big cities. Craft sector and small-medium industries have also developed rapidly. Circular migration is very common happen in Majalengka and Cirebon Regency.
Generally, the villages along the proposed project can be categorized into three major groups, namely: a. Rural-urban villages, can be found in the Regency of Purwakarta, especially Cikopo Village, some villages in Cirebon Regency, and most of the villages in Majalengka Regency;
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 7 b. Agricultural villages, mainly in Subang, Indramayu and part of Majalengka; and, c. Open agricultural villages, located in the Regency of Purwakarta.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 8
3. Baseline Data of Project Affected Community 3.1. Population 3.1.1. Purwakarta
Table 3 describes the demography conditions of the three sub districts that are affected by the proposed toll road project in Purwakarta Regency.
Tabel 3. Demography Conditions of Project Affected Area in Purwakarta Regency Sex Population Sub Sex Density Area No Household District Male Female Total Ratio (Person/ (Km2) Km2)
1 Bungur Sari 21,306 22,043 43,349 96.66 12,008 793 54.66
2 Campaka 19,174 20,040 39,214 95.68 11,077 899 43.60 3 Cibatu 13,890 13,821 27,711 100.50 8,032 490 56.60 Total 54,370 55,904 110,274 97.26 31,117 727 154.86 * Purwakarta 420,380 425,129 845,509 98.88 224,595 870 971.72
Source: Purwakarta Regency in Figures, 2010
The average ratio number of men and women living in Bungur Sari, Campaka and Cibatu Sub districts, which are located along the proposed toll road project, is 97.26. This means for every 100 women, there are approximately 97 men within the area. This ratio is lower than the ratio in the overall Purwakarta Regency. The average population density in the three sub districts is also lower (727 persons/km2) compared to the population density in Purwakarta (870 persons/km2). Purwakarta is the 21st most populated regency out of the 26 Regencies in West Java Province.
Based on the data above, generally Purwakarta Regency is considered to be low density area, compared to all other regencies in West Java Province. The population is mainly centered in the Capital City of Purwakarta Regency and the industrial areas within the city.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 9
3.1.2. Subang
Table 4 describes the demography conditions of the ten sub districts that are affected by the proposed toll road project in Subang Regency.
Tabel 4. Demography Conditions of Project Affected Area in Subang Regency Sex Population Sub Sex Density Area No Household District Male Female Total Ratio (Person/ (Km2) Km2) 1 Pabuaran 30,249 30,073 60,322 100.59 17,823 914 25,602 2 Cipeundeuy 22,433 22,536 44,969 99.54 13,036 481 80,942 3 Kalijati 29,715 30,464 60,179 97.54 18,802 609 3,123 4 Purwadadi 28,105 29,957 58,062 93.82 17,754 640 50,599 5 Pagaden 29,752 29,577 59,329 100.59 19,377 1,324 6,509 6 Pagaden 16,909 17,281 34,190 97.85 11,484 703 5,220 Barat 7 Subang 61,575 59,784 121,358 103.00 34,885 2,229 26,287 8 Cipunegara 30,237 29,604 59,841 102.14 19,302 589 53,606 9 Cibogo 20,391 20,124 40,515 101.33 12,542 748 28,630 10 Dawuan 19,051 19,166 38,217 99.40 12,122 457 45,923 Total 288,417 288,566 576,983 99.58 177,127 869 326,441 * Subang 746.148 731,335 1.477.482 102.03 456.299 714 632,233 Source: Subang Regency in Figures, 2010
The average ratio number of men and women living in the ten sub districts in Subang Regency, which are located along the proposed toll road project, is 99.58. This means for every 100 women, there are approximately 99 men within the area. This ratio is lower than the ratio in the overall Subang Regency. The population density in these ten sub districts ranges from 457 to 2,229 person/km2. Subang is the 16th most populated regency out of the 26 Regencies in West Java Province.
The population density in Subang and Pagaden Sub districts are significantly higher than the other sub districts as these two sub districts are more developed urban sub districts. From the above data, Subang Regency is considered to be medium density area, compared all other regencies in West Java Province.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 10
3.1.3. Indramayu
Table 5 describes the demography conditions of the two sub districts that are affected by the proposed toll road project in Indramayu Regency.
Tabel 5. Demography Conditions of Project Affected Area in Indramayu Regency
Sex Population Sub Density No Sex Ratio Household District Male Female Total (Person/ Km2) 1 Gantar 35,070 31,277 66,347 112.13 15,252 326 2 Terisi 27,232 26,132 53,364 104.21 15,234 458 Total 62,302 57,409 119,711 108.52 30,486 392 * Indramayu 888,579 856,318 1,744,897 103.77 455,889 855 Source: Indramayu Regency in Figures, 2010
The average ratio number of men and women living in the two sub districts in Indramayu Regency, which are located along the proposed toll road project, is 108.52. This means for every 100 women, there are approximately 108 men within the area. This ratio is higher than the ratio in the overall Indramayu Regency. Indramayu is the 13th most populated regency out of the 26 Regencies in West Java Province.
Indramayu is considered to be medium density area, compared to all other regencies in West Java Province.
3.1.4. Majalengka
Table 6 describes the demography conditions of the six sub districts that are affected by the proposed toll road project in Majalengka Regency.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 11
Tabel 6. Demography Conditions of Project Affected Area in Majalengka Regency
Sex Population Sub Sex Density Area No Household 2 District Male Female Total Ratio (Person/ (Km ) Km2) 1 Kertajati 22,903 23,143 46,046 98.96 16,319 333 138.36 2 Dawuan 21,356 21,860 43,216 97.69 14,041 1,816 23.80 3 Jatiwangi 41,623 42,296 83,919 98.41 25,476 2,096 40.03 4 Ligung 30,529 31,492 62,021 96.94 20,936 996 62.25 5 Palasah 24,088 24,580 48,668 98.00 15,293 1,258 38.69 6 Sumberjaya 28,503 29,591 58,094 96.32 18,060 1,775 32.73 Total 169,002 172,962 341,964 97,71 110.125 222 202,19 * Majalengka 600,396 606,306 1,206,702 99.03 378,159 1,002 1,204.24
Source: Majalengka Regency in Figures, 2010
The average ratio number of men and women living in the six sub districts in Majalengka Regency, which are located along the proposed toll road project, is 97.71. This means for every 100 women, there are approximately 97 men within the area. This ratio is lower than the ratio in the overall Majalengka Regency. Majalengka is the 17th most populated regency out of the 26 Regencies in West Java Province.
Based on the data above, generally the affected sub districts in Majalengka Regency are semi- urban area with relatively high population density.
3.1.5. Cirebon
Table 7 describes the demography conditions of the three sub districts that are affected by the proposed toll road project in Cirebon Regency.
Tabel 7. Demography Conditions of Project Affected Area in Cirebon Regency
Sex Population Sub Sex Density Area No Household 2 District Male Female Total Ratio (Person/ (Km ) Km2) 1 Ciwaringin 18,337 18,968 37,305 96.67 11,576 2,096.96 17.79
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 12 Sex Population Sub Sex Density Area No Household 2 District Male Female Total Ratio (Person/ (Km ) Km2) 2 Gempol 22,303 22,405 44,708 99.54 12,634 1,454.86 30.73 3 Palimanan 31,143 31,615 62,758 98.51 15,168 3,652.97 17.18 Total 71,783 72,988 144,771 98.35 39,378 2,401.00 65.70 * Cirebon ,089,076 1,081,298 2,170,374 100.72 582,287 2,191.50 990.36 Source: Cirebon Regency in Figures, 2010
The average ratio number of men and women living in the two sub districts in Cirebon Regency, which are located along the proposed toll road project, is 98.35. This means for every 100 women, there are approximately 98 men within the area. This ratio is lower than the ratio in the overall Cirebon Regency. Cirebon is the 10th most populated regency out of the 26 Regencies in West Java Province, while Palimanan is the most populated sub district among the three affected sub districts in the regency.
3.2. Ethnicity
Table Error! No text of specified style in document. below provides information pertaining to the majority ethnic groups that were identified during the baseline survey. These consist of Javanese and Sundanese Ethnic Group. The large number of Sundanese household respondent is predictable as the area of the toll road project is located in the West Java Province which is originally Sundanese. The Javanese respondents were found in Cirebon Regency, which is the border area between West Java and Central Java Province that is originally Javanese. The following data is a result of self-identification from the respondents.
Table Error! No text of specified style in document. Spread of Respondent in the Project Affected Regency Based on Ethnicity Ethnicity No Regency Javanese Sundanese 1. Purwakarta 2.13% 97.87% 2. Subang 7.85% 89.67% 3. Indramayu 17.78% 82.22% 4. Majalengka 6.28% 94.72% 5. Cirebon 72.59% 3.7% Average 21.33% 73.64% Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 13
3.3. Religion
The vast majority of the community in the project are Moslem, making up 99% of the population.
Table 9. Religion Based on Regency Figures No Regency Religion Islam Catholic Protestant Hindu Buddha 1 Purwakarta 99.18 0.20 0.50 0.11 0.0 2 Subang 99.23 0.26 0.35 0.01 0.15 3 Indramayu 99.17 0.29 0.39 0.09 0.06 4 Majalengka 99.64 0.12 0.13 0.07 04 5 Cirebon 99.57 0.15 0.21 0.5 0.4 Average 99.36 0.20 0.32 0.16 0.92 Source: Regency in Figures, 2010
These numbers indicate the uniformity of community within the affected area. In some areas within the affected regencies, religion influences community cultural value, in which community is still practicing cultural activities which related to the Islamic feast.
Table 10. Religion Based on Primary Data No Regency Religion Islam Others 1 Purwakarta 97.87 2.23 2 Subang 98.76 1.24 3 Indramayu 100 0 4 Majalengka 98.33 1.67 5 Cirebon 100 0 Average 98.99 1.02 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.4. Characteristic of Respondent: Religion and Ethnicity
Generally, the characteristics of respondents of this study in the five project affected regencies are as follow:
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 14 1. Based on figure 2, 68% of the 930 respondents are aged 40 years old and above, 31% are aged between 20 and 40 years old, while 1% are aged below 20 years old.
Figure 2. Percentage of Respondent’s Age
Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
2. Majority of the respondents are heads of families;
Figure 3. Percentage of Respondent’s Status
Percentage of Respondent’s Status
Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 15
3. Majority are Muslim;
Figure 4. Percentage of Respondent’s Religious
Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
4. Majority of the respondents are Sundanese, except for the respondents in Cirebon who are mainly Javanese, as shown in Figure 5.
Figure 5. Percentage of Respondent’s Ethnicity
Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 16
3.4.1. Purwakarta
The respondents in Purwakarta Regency are: 1) majority ages between 25 to 45 years old; 2) 76.6% are head of household, while the remaining 23.4% are adult household members; 3) 97.87% of the respondents are Muslim; and 4) 97.87% of the respondents are Sundanese, while the remaining 2.13% are Javanese who mainly residence in Cinangka Village.
Table 11. Characteristic of Respondent in Purwakarta Regency Characteristic Respondents
Respondents’ Status Religion Ethnicity Village Age Head of Others Islam Others Jawa Sunda Batak Household
Cikopo 33.31 76.92 23.08 92.31 7. 69 0 100 0 Cinangka 25.8 60 40 100 0 10 90 0
Cimahi 45.33 100 0 100 0 0 100 0 Cisaat 26.75 75 25 100 0 0 100 0 Kertamukti 27.25 100 0 100 0 0 100 0
Ciparungsari 42.3 70 30 100 0 0 100 0
Regency 48.23 76.6 23.4 97.87 2.23 2.13 97.87 0 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.4.2. Subang
The respondents in Subang Regency are: 1) aged between 17 to 68 years old; 2) 57.02% are head of households, while the remaining 42.98% are household members; 3) 98.76% are Muslim; and 4) 89.67% are Sundanese, while the remaining 10.33% are Javanese who mainly residence in Karangmukti, Wanasari, Cibogo, Pada Asih, Sumur Barang and Batusari Villages.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 17
Tabel 12. Characteristic of Respondent in Subang Regency
Characteristic Respondents
Respondents’ Status Religion Ethnicity Village Age Head of Others Islam others Jawa Sunda Batak Household
Wantilan 30.87 66.67 33.33 93.33 6.67 0 100 0 Sawangan 40.4 40 60 100 0 0 100 0
Karangmukti 33.53 33.33 66.67 100 0 20 80 0 Marengmang 30.67 66.67 33.33 100 0 6.67 93.33 0 Kaliangsana 39.64 60 40 93.33 6.67 0 93.33 0
Caracas 36.8 60 40 100 0 0 100 0
Ciruluk 38.8 73.33 26.67 100 0 0 100 0 Wanakerta 34.47 33.33 66.67 100 0 0 100 0 Gembor 43 66.67 33.33 88.89 11.11 0 100 0 Balingbing 34.87 26.67 72.33 100 0 0 100 0 Jabong 68 100 0 100 0 0 100 0
Sukamelang 31.38 76.92 23.08 100 0 0 100 0 Cisaga 34.86 57.14 42.86 100 0 0 100 0 Wanasari 17.4 73.33 26.67 100 0 6.67 93.33 0 Cibogo 30.33 73.33 26.67 100 0 13.33 86.67 0 Pada Asih 29.63 43.75 56.25 100 0 31.25 50 0
Sumur Barang 27.06 62.5 37.5 100 0 37.5 50 0
Batusari 25.53 66.67 33.37 100 0 6.67 93.33 0 Regency 45.04 57.02 42.98 98.76 1.24 7.85 89.67 0
Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.4.3. Indramayu
The respondents in Indramayu Regency are: 1) majority aged between 36 and 49 years old; 2) 80% are head of household, while the remaining 20% are adult household members; 3) All of
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 18 them are Muslim; and 4) 82.22% are Sundanese, while the remaining 17.73% are Javanese who mainly residence in Bantarwaru and Sanca Villages.
Tabel 13. Characteristic of Respondent in Indramayu Regency
Characteristic Respondents Respondents’ Status Religion Ethnicity Village Age Head of others Islam others Jawa Sunda Batak Household
Bantarwaru 36.4 100 0 100 0 26.67 73.33 0 Sanca 37.6 60 40 100 0 26.67 73.33 0 Cikawung 43.73 80 20 100 0 0 100 0 Regency 49.93 80 20 100 0 17.78 82.22 0
Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.4.4. Majalengka
The respondents in Majalengka Regency are: 1) aged between 25 and 56 years old; 2) 67.78% are head of households, while the remaining 32.22% are adult household members; 3) 98.33% are Muslim, while the others are mainly Christian who reside in Kertawinangun, Balida, Karanganyar, Jatiwangi, Surawangi and Sutawangi Villages; and 4) 94.72% are Sundanese, while the remaining 5.28% are Javanese who mainly residence in Kertawinangun, Mandapa and Panjalin Kidul Village.
Tabel 14. Characteristic of Respondent in Majalengka Regency
Characteristic Respondents Respondents’ Religion Ethnicity Village Status Age Head of others Islam others Jawa Sunda Batak Household
Mekarjaya 45.27 66.67 33.33 100 0 0 100 0 Palasah 50.33 73.33 26.67 100 0 0 100 0 Sukawana 48.53 86.67 13.33 100 0 0 100 0
Kertawinangun 42.13 93.33 6.67 93.33 6.67 6.67 93.33 0
Babakan 42.13 80 20 100 0 0 93.33 0
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 19 Pakubeureum 47 80 20 100 0 0 100 0 Pasir Malati 36.93 100 0 100 0 0 100 0 Balida 32 80 20 93.33 6.67 0 100 0
Karanganyar 48.07 66.67 33.33 93.33 6.67 0 100 0 Mandapa 49.2 93.33 6.67 100 0 6.67 93.33 0 Salawana 25.27 46.67 53.33 100 0 0 100 0 Jatiwangi 56.07 86.67 13.33 93.33 6.67 0 100 0 Surawangi 48.79 57.14 42.86 92.86 7.14 0 100 0
Jatisura 30.88 12.5 87.5 100 0 0 100 0 Sutawangi 47.67 53.33 46.67 93.33 16.67 0 100 0 Beusi 36.13 66.67 33.33 100 0 0 100 0 Tegal Aren 45.27 53.33 46.67 100 0 0 100 0
Cisambeng 35.67 73.33 26.67 100 0 0 100 0
Majasuka 33.67 93.33 6.67 100 0 0 100 0 Bongas Kulon 36.33 40 60 100 0 0 100 0 Bongas Wetan 28.73 60 40 100 0 0 100 0 Panjalin Lor 38.33 60 40 100 0 20 80 0
Panjalin Kidul 28.2 66.67 33.33 100 0 73.33 13.33 0 Garawangi 41.33 40 60 100 0 0 100 0 Regency 47.3 67.78 32.22 98.33 1.67 6.28 94.72 0 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.4.5. Cirebon
The respondents in Cirebon Regency are: 1) aged between 32 and 51 years old; 2) 80% are head of household, while the remaining 20% are adult household members; 3) all of them are Muslim; and 4) 75.9% are Sundanese, while the remaining 24.1% are Javanese who mainly residence in Budur, Ciwaringin, Galagamba, Walahar, Kedung Bunder, Kempek, Tegal Karang and Lung Benda Villages.
Tabel 15. Characteristic of Respondent in Cirebon Regency Characteristic Respondents
Village
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 20 Respondents’ Status Religion Ethnicity Age Head of Others Islam Others Jawa Sunda Batak Household
Budur 46.64 80 20 100 0 93.33 6.67 0 Babakan 41.53 86.67 13.33 100 0 100 0 0 Ciwaringin 49.88 81.25 12.5 100 0 68.75 6.25 0 Galagamba 51.38 85.71 14.29 100 0 64.29 0 0 Walahar 45.87 53.33 46.67 100 0 80 6.67 0
Kedung Bunder 42.13 80 20 100 0 60 6.67 0 Kempek 40.71 100 0 100 0 93.33 0 0 Pegagan 31.75 80 20 100 0 0 0 0 Tegalkarang 44.07 80 20 100 0 66.67 6.67 0
Lungbenda 32.1 70 30 100 0 40 60 0
Regency 47.53 80 20 100 0 72.59 3.7 0 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.5. Education 3.5.1. Education Level
The education profiles of each community in the project affected regencies are detailed in the following sections.
3.5.1.1. Purwakarta
Generally, the education level in the project affected villages in Purwakarta Regency is classifed as low compare to other project affected regencies. It is identified from 35% of respondents who are elementary school graduates, 21% are not finishing elementary school, 11.83% are receiving no education, and with only 8% of high school graduates and 0.67% of university graduates.
Tabel 16. Education Level in Purwakarta Regency Formal Education level (%) Not finish Village High Middle Elementary No University Elementary Others School School School Education School Cikopo 5.48 26.03 20.55 31.51 4.11 12.33 0 Cinangka 0 22 16 29 24 9 0
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 21 Cimahi 0 1.10 26.37 36.26 15.38 20.88 0 Cisaat 0 0 31.68 20.79 31.68 15.84 0 Kertamukti 0 5.94 17.82 52.48 17.82 5.94 0 Ciparungsari 0 0 2 51 35 12 0
Regency 0.71 8.48 18.90 37.10 22.26 12.54 0 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
As presented in the Table 16 above, Cikopo Village has the highest educational level compared to the other villages with 4% university graduates, while Cinangka Village has the highest number of high school graduates (22%). The affected community in Ciparungsari Village has the lowest education level with 51% of elementary school graduates, 35% do not finish elementary school, and 12% receive no education.
Low education level in most of the area is due to lack of educational facility and access, especially high school and university. This creates a high educational cost for transportation and accommodation.
3.5.1.2. Subang
The following Table 17 below shows that Gembor Village have the highest number of university graduates (3%), while Balingbing Village has the highest number of high school graduates (25%) than others affected villages in Subang Regency. The affected community in Sumur Barang Village has the lowest education level with 33% of elementary school graduates, 39% do not finish elementary school, and 16% receive no education.
Tabel 17. Education Level in Subang Regency Formal Education level (%) Not finish High Middle Elementary Elementary No Village University School School School School Education Others Wantilan 0 9.09 9.09 44.44 31.31 6.06 0 Sawangan 0 0 21.21 30.30 34.34 13.13 1.01 Karangmukti 1.01 9.09 7.07 44.44 27.27 11.11 0 Marengmang 0 13.13 19.19 26.26 32.32 9.09 0 Kaliangsana 1.98 20.79 12.87 37.62 19.80 4.95 1.98 Caracas 0 9.90 16.83 46.53 16.83 9.90 0
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 22 Ciruluk 2.02 10.10 20.20 47.47 14.14 4.04 2.02 Wanakerta 0 24 18 38 10 10 0 Gembor 3 12 3 41 29 9 3 Balingbing 2.02 25.25 19.19 25.25 13.13 13.13 2.02 Jabong 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 Sukamelang 0 22.22 17.17 33.33 20.20 7.07 0 Cisaga 0 6.06 16.16 19.19 32.32 26.26 0 Wanasari 0 0 13.86 31.68 38.61 15.84 0 Cibogo 0 10.89 17.82 27.72 25.74 17.82 0 Pada Asih 2 6 13 33 30 16 0 Sumur Barang 0 3.03 7.07 33.33 39.39 16.16 1.01 Batusari 0 9 25 30 34 2 0
Regency 0.67 10.59 14.26 38.33 24.90 10.64 0.61 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
Generally, the education level in the project affected villages in Subang Regency is classifed as low compare to other project affected regencies. It is identified from 38.22% of respondents who are elementary school graduates, 24.83% not finishing elementary school, 10.61% receiving no education, and with only 0.67% who graduated from university.
3.5.1.3. Indramayu
The following Table 18 below shows that Cikawung Village have the highest number of university graduates (5%) and high school graduates (15%) compared to the other affected villages in Indramayu Regency. The affected community in Sanca Village has the lowest education level with 55 percent of elementary school graduates, 13 percent do not finish elementary school, and 19 percent receive no education.
Tabel 18. Education Level in Indramayu Regency Formal Education level (%) Not finish High Middle Elementary Elementary No Village University School School School School Education Others Bantarwaru 4 13 19 26 38 0 0 Sanca 1.01 1.01 7.07 55.56 13.13 19.19 3.03 Cikawung 5.10 15.30 7.14 49.99 17.34 5.10 0.02
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 23
Regency 3.36 9.77 11.11 43.76 22.90 8.08 1.02 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
Generally, the education level in the project affected villages in Indramayu Regency is classifed as low compare to other project affected regencies. It is identified from 43.33% of respondents who are elementary school graduates, 22.67% are not finishing elementary school, 8% are receiving no education, and with only 3.33% who are graduated from university.
3.5.1.4. Majalengka
As presented in the Table 19 below, Majalengka Regency has the highest average percentage of university and high school graduates among other project affected regencies, even though it is not equal in each village. It is identified from 38.08% of respondents who are elementary school graduates, 21.38% are not finishing elementary school, 3.75% are receiving no education, and with only 2.71% who are graduated from university.
Tabel 19. Education Level in Majalengka Regency Formal Education level (%) Not finish High Middle Elementary Elementary No Village University School School School School Education Others Mekarjaya 0 4 20 48 20 4 4 Palasah 4 13 13 45 21 0 4 Sukawana 0 4 30 47 12 7 0 Kertawinangun 8.82 12.75 12.75 33.33 26.47 1.96 3.92 Babakan 4 13 5 38 29 9 2 Pakubeureum 7 16 21 23 23 5 5 Pasir Malati 4 15 18 25 27 2 9 Balida 7 15 13 30 25 8 2 Karanganyar 6 13 10 42 27 2 0 Mandapa 12 24 14 32 12 2 4 Salawana 0 7 20 41 27 5 0 Jatiwangi 0 2 9 26 52 2 9
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 24 Surawangi 0 9 14 36 30 11 0 Jatisura 0 5 19 37 34 3 2 Sutawangi 1.98 7.92 29.70 42.57 4.95 2.97 9.90 Beusi 1.96 1.96 9.80 47.06 18.63 4.90 15.69 Tegal aren 0 9.90 19.80 32.67 15.84 3.96 17.82 Cisambeng 0 1.98 9.90 59.41 12.87 3.96 11.88 Majasuka 4.95 23.76 14.85 32.67 12.87 1.98 8.91 Bongas Kulon 0 1.98 8.91 44.55 31.68 0 12.87 Bongas Wetan 0 0 16 45 31 2 6 Panjalin Lor 0 5 25 33 16 3 18 Panjalin Kidul 3.03 12.12 18.18 15.15 1.01 4.04 46.46 Garawangi 0 1.02 12.24 56.12 1.02 1.02 28.57
Regency 2.70 9.11 15.96 37.98 21.32 3.74 9.19 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
The baseline survey identified that the most affected villages recently are on the stage of developing into industrial area, which encouraged better education facilities and access. Mandapa, Kertawinangun, Balida, dan Pakubeureum Village have the highest educational level compared to other affected villages in Majalengka Regency.
3.5.1.5. Cirebon
Generally, the education level in the project affected villages in Cirebon Regency is classifed as low compare to other project affected regencies. It is identified from 24% of respondents who are elementary school graduates, 10.8% are not finishing elementary school, 3.1% are receiving no education, and with only 2% who are graduated from university.
Only four villages among the ten affected villages that have no university level of education, namely Babakan, Galagamba, Kedung Bunder, and Pagagan. This condition is potentially because the affected villages are at the stage of developing into industrial area, which encourage better education facilities and access.
Tabel 20. Education Level in Cirebon Regency Village Formal Education level (%)
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 25 Not finish High Middle Elementary Elementary No University School School School School Education Others Budur 3 9 9 36 11 3 29 Babakan 0 13 9 44 4 3 27 Ciwaringin 5 13 16 16 17 4 29 Galagamba 0 18 5 15 18 4 40 Walahar 1.98 17.82 11.88 30.69 14.85 0.99 21.78 Kedung Bunder 0 4.04 19.19 21.21 19.19 7.07 29.29 Kempek 3 14 12 27 7 0 37 Pegagan 0 30 20 10 0 0 40 Tegalkarang 2.97 29.70 7.92 19.80 9.90 4.95 24.75 Lungbenda 4.04 13.13 13.13 20.20 7.07 4.04 38.38
Regency 2 16.20 12.30 24 10.80 3.10 31.60 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
The above Table 20 shows that Ciwaringin Village has the highest educational level for University (5%), while at the high school level, Pegagan and Tegalkarang Villages have the highest percentage which is approximately 30%. The affected community in Babakan Village has the highest education level with 44% of elementary school graduates.
3.5.2. Education Facility 3.5.2.1. Purwakarta
There are 642 schools in Purwakarta Regency ranging from Kindergarden to Vocational level, both public and private institutions, with a total of 163,579 students. These schools include 98 kindergarten, 437 primary schools, 65 junior high schools, 21 senior high schools, and 21 vocational schools. The ratio of student and teacher at the junior high school is 14:1, at the senior high school is 16:1, and at the vocational school is 16:1. The profile of education facility in Purwakarta Regency as explained in the Table 18 below.
Tabel 21. Number of Schools, Students, and Teachers in Purwakarta Regency
Number of Number of Students Number of Teachers No Type of Education Schools
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 26 Public Public Private Total Public Private Total Public Private Total
1 Kindergarten 3 95 98 113 4,011 4,124 33 467 500
2 Elementary School (SD) 429 8 437 102,498 2,492 104,990 5,394 132 5,526
3 Junior High School (SMP) 58 7 65 31,621 1,234 32,855 1,422 100 2,522
4 Senior High School (SMU) 14 7 21 8,142 1,676 9,818 479 160 639
5 Vocational School (SMK) 5 16 21 4,753 7,039 11,792 292 516 808
Source: Purwakarta Regency in Figures, 2010
The following Table 21 shows that in the sub districts that will be crossed by the toll road project, there are 10 Kindergartens, 50 elementary schools, 8 junior high schools, 3 senior high schools and 2 vocational schools. The total number of students and teachers from all level of schools are 18,006 students and 950 teachers.
Tabel 22. Number of Schools, Students and Teachers on The Project Affected Sub Districts in Purwakarta Regency
Elementary Junior High Senior High Vocational Kindergarten Sub Schools Schools Schools Schools No District School School School School School School Student Student Student Student Student Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Bungur 1 6 211 28 18 4,262 206 3 1,593 68 1 650 33 - - - Sari
2 Campaka 3 122 9 18 4,086 211 2 1,792 70 1 234 15 1 114 22
3 Cibatu 1 32 8 14 2,997 162 3 854 56 1 551 31 1 508 31
Source: Purwakarta Regency in Figures, 2010
3.5.2.2. Subang
There are 1,284 schools in Subang Regency ranging from Kindergartens to schools for handicapped people, both public and private institutions, with a total of 257,427 students and 13,980 teachers (refer to Table 18). The schools include 183 kindergarten schools, 879 primary schools, 125 junior high schools, 43 senior high schools, 45 vocational schools, and 9 schools for handicapped people. The ratio of students and teachers at the junior high school is 19:1, at the
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 27 senior high school is 14:1, and at the vocational school is 15:1. The profile of education facility in Subang Regency is shown in the Table 20 below.
Tabel 23. Number of Schools, Students, and Teachers in Subang Regency Number of Nummber of Students Number of Teachers Schools No Type of Education Public Public Private Total Public Private Total Public Private Total 1 Kindergarten - - 183 - - 823 - - 642 Elementary School (SD) 871 8 879 158,695 1,674 160,639 8,074 88 8,162 2 Junior High School 89 36 125 54,517 5,584 60,101 2,582 594 3,176 3 (SMP) Senior High School 17 26 43 13,288 3,396 16,684 712 498 1,210 4 (SMU) Vocational School (SMK) 5 40 45 6,688 12,223 18,911 414 898 1,312 5 School for Handicapped - - 9 - - 269 - - 120 6 People Source: Subang Regency in Figures, 2010
The following Table 23 shows that in the sub districts that will be crossed by the toll road project, there are 71 kindergartens, 341 elementary schools, 54 junior high schools, 20 senior high schools and 14 vocational schools. The number of students is 63,931 students and the number of teachers is 6,385 teachers. There are some villages that do not have senior high school, such as Pagaden Barat, Cipunegara, and Dawuan Villages. Schools for handicapped people are located in four villages, namely Kalijati, Purwadadi, Pagaden, and Subang Villages.
Tabel 24. Number of Schools, Students, and Teachers on The Project Affected Sub District in Subang Regency
Junior High Senior High Kindergarten Elementary Schools Vocational S Schools Schools No Sub District School School School School School School Student Student Student Student Student Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher
1 Pabuaran 6 299 18 35 6,846 267 6 3,123 119 2 521 37 2 210
2 Cipeundeuy 3 64 5 26 4,769 233 3 1,553 76 1 361 40 2 274
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 28 Junior High Senior High Kindergarten Elementary Schools Vocational S Schools Schools No Sub District School School School School School School Student Student Student Student Student Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher
3 Kalijati 6 264 21 40 6,292 394 7 3,096 172 4 660 99 3 1,050
4 Purwadadi 11 318 31 36 5,725 382 7 2,979 153 3 1,357 52 2 739
5 Pagaden 9 366 36 31 6,415 304 7 3,354 178 1 1,065 48 1 732
Pagaden 6 5 208 33 22 2,875 211 1 522 30 - - - - - Barat
7 Subang 16 962 90 74 14,282 861 13 6,558 373 8 4,904 314 11 8,133
8 Cipunegara 3 49 6 30 6,193 244 4 1,785 91 - - - 1 731
9 Cibogo 8 245 25 22 3,737 261 4 1,075 82 1 11 12 1 80
10 Dawuan 4 219 9 25 3,803 249 2 1,427 57 - - - - -
Source: Subang Regency in Figures, 2010
3.5.2.3. Indramayu
There are 1,371 schools in Indramayu Regency ranging from elementary to vocational school level, both public and private institutions, with a total of 299,806 students. The schools include 246 kindergardens, 880 primary schools, 148 junior high schools, 52 senior high schools, and 45 vocational schools. Meanwhile, ratio of student and teacher at the junior high school is 20:1, at the senior high school is 13:1, and at the vocational school is 14:1. The profile of education facility in Indramayu Regency is shown in the Table 25 below.
Tabel 25. Number of Schools, Students, and Teachers in Indramayu Regency Elementary Kindergarten Junior High Schools Schools School School School School Student Student Student No Type of Education Teacher Teacher Teacher
1 Kindergarten 246 - - 10,373 - - 1,247 - -
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 29 Elementary School (SD) 880 - - 193,959 - - 1,247 - - 2 Junior High School (SMP) 148 - - 63,301 - - 3,385 - - 3 Senior High School (SMU) 52 - - 16,528 - - 1,378 - - 4 Vocational School (SMK) 45 - - 15,645 - - 1,144 - - 5
Source: Indramayu Regency in Figures, 2010
The following Table 26 shows that in the sub districts that will be crossed by toll road Project, there are totally 12 kindergardens, 59 elementary schools, 12 junior high schools, 3 senior high schools and 2 vocational school, with the number of students reached up to 19,339 students and number of teachers are 996 teachers.
Tabel 26. Number of Schools, Students, and Teachers on The Project Affected Sub District in Indramayu Regency Senior High Vocational Kindergarten Elementary Schools Junior High Schools Schools Schools
Sub School School School School School School Student Student Student Student Student No District Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher
1 Gantar 6 285 33 30 6,866 262 5 1,755 103 1 87 25 1 509 34 2 Terisi 6 218 26 29 5,772 289 7 3,077 157 2 679 48 1 91 19 Source: Indramayu Regency in Figures, 2010
3.5.2.4. Majalengka
There are 1,225 schools in Majalengka Regency ranging from kindergarten to vocational school level, both public and private institutions, with a total of 202,304 students and 12,228 teachers. The schools include 274 kindergartens, 819 primary schools, 79 junior high schools, 21 senior high schools, and 32 vocational schools. Meanwhile, the ratio of student and teacher at the junior high school is 18:1, at the senior high school is 14:1, and at the vocational school is 12:1. The profile of education facility in Majalengka Regency is shown in Table 27 below.
Tabel 27. Number of Schools, Students, and Teachers in Majalengka Regency No Type of Education Number of Number of Students Number of Schools Teachers
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 30 Total Total Total Public Public Public Private Private Private 1 Kindergarten 4 270 274 231 9788 10,019 127 746 873 2 Elementary School (SD) 725 94 819 93,624 33,256 126,880 5,623 1435 7,058 3 Junior High School (SMP) 69 10 79 40,136 1,598 41,734 2,227 165 2,392 4 Senior High School (SMU) 16 5 21 10,537 942 11,479 775 85 860 5 Vocational School (SMK) 8 24 32 4,943 7,249 12,192 430 615 1,045 Source: Majalengka Regency in Figures, 2010
The following Table 28 shows that in the sub districts that will be crossed by the toll road Project, there are 89 kindergartens, 234 elementary schools, 20 junior high schools, 5 senior high schools and 11 vocational schools with 56,997 students and 3,851 teachers. There are some villages which do not have senior high school such as the Kertajati and Palasah Villages.
The highest number of school facilities is available in Jatiwangi Village which consists of 19 kindergartens, 58 elementary schools, 5 junior high schools, 2 senior high schools and 2 vocational schools.
Tabel 28. Number of Schools, Students and Teachers on The Project Affected Sub District in Majalengka Regency Junior High Senior High Vocational Sch Kindergarten Elementary Schools Sub Schools Schools No District School School School School School School Student Student Student Student Student Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher 1 Kertajati 9 173 17 33 4,323 251 3 1,366 74 - - - 2 121 2 Dawuan 14 513 45 25 4,548 219 3 1,520 87 1 50 22 1 182 3 Jatiwangi 19 754 53 58 9,629 481 5 4,189 204 2 1,068 73 2 651 4 Ligung 17 501 41 44 6,241 293 4 2,172 108 1 509 30 2 204 5 Palasah 17 702 38 33 5,246 245 2 1,389 62 - - - 3 1,019 Sumber- 13 470 42 41 6,646 253 3 2,251 98 1 510 860 1 52 6 jaya Source: Majalengka Regency in Figures, 2010
3.5.2.5. Cirebon
There are 1,278 schools in Cirebon Regency ranging from kindergarden to vocational school level, with a total of 363,334 students and 16,077 teachers. The schools numbers include 126
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 31 kindergartens, 924 primary schools, 124 junior high schools, 45 senior high schools, and 59 vocational schools. Ratio of student and teacher at the junior high school is 20:1, at the senior high school is 16:1, and at the vocational school is 12:1. The profile of education facility in Cirebon Regency as explained in the Table 29 below.
Tabel 29. Number of Schools, Students, and Teachers in Cirebon Regency Number of Number of Number of Number of Number of No Type of Education School Level Classroom Student Teacher 1 Kindergarten 126 316 252 6,311 486 2 Elementary School (SD) 924 9,161 3,145 239,166 8,619 3 Junior High School (SMP) 124 1,842 2,581 75,723 3,792 4 Senior High School (SMU) 45 433 755 19,008 1,217 5 Vocational School (SMK) 59 741 727 23,126 1,963 Source: Cirebon Regency in Figures, 2010 The following Table 30 shows that in the sub districts that will be crossed by toll road Project, there are totally 3 kindergartens, 64 elementary schools, 42 junior high schools, 6 senior high schools, and 5 vocational schools, with the number of students reached up to 28,890 students and number of teachers are 1,919 teachers. Meanwhile, senior high school available in Ciwaringin and Palimanan Villages, with 1,775 students, but there is still a village which does not have senior high school, that is Gempol Village.
Tabel 30. Number of Schools, Students, and Teachers on The Project Affected Sub District in Cirebon Regency Elementary Junior High Senior High Vocational Kindergarten Sub Schools Schools Schools Schools No District School School School School School School Student Student Student Student Student Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Ciwaringin 1 38 4 17 4,089 703 33 2,292 102 3 634 37 1 394 32 1
Gempol 2 109 5 18 5,043 202 1 756 44 ------2
Palimanan - - - 29 7,480 348 8 4,748 228 3 1,141 78 4 2,166 136
Source: Cirebon Regency in Figures, 2010
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 32
Figure 6. School in Balingbing Village, Pegaden Barat District, Subang Regency
Figure 7. School in Ciwaringin Village, Ciwaringin District, Cirebon Regency
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 33
3.6. Health 3.6.1. Health Condition
This section provides general information about the health condition of the community that will be affected directly by the project which is identified from the number of illness cases, as presented in the Table 31 below. It is similar with the most occured illness cases which were identified from the community during the group discussion, including Diarrhea, Dengue fever, Respiratory illness, Hypertension, and Diabetes.
Table 31 Illness Case in The Project Affected Regency Number of Patient Illness Case Purwakarta Subang Indramayu Majalengka Cirebon
Acute Flaccid 265,000 63,000 218,000 229,000 154,000 Paralysis/ AFP < 15 years old % Tubercolosis (TB) 86.76 87.33 50.22 74.76 51.74 Pneumonia on toddlers 4665 9805 5536 5821 14407 Dengue fever 28,430 29,040 31,490 32,100 36,260 Diarrhea 5,684,660 2,809,490 3,314,950 1,993,850 3,075,350 Malaria 0 0 0 0 0 Leprosy 6 4 26 36 1 (Pausibasiler/PB) Leprosy 154 74 195 121 7 (Multibasiler/MB) Elephantiasis/ 4 0 2 1 4 Philariasis Diphteria 0 0 0 1 0 Pertussis 0 0 0 0 0 Tetanus 2 0 5 1 3 Measles 258 35 186 1 208 Polio 0 0 0 0 0 Source: Ministry of Health RI Website, 2010
Generally the affected areas are not endemic area for certain diseases. The above numbers identified that diarrhea is the most common illness, suggests that inadequate sanitation and food hygiene are a primary influencing factor in community health issues.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 34
Other identified health issue is due to the number of HIV/AIDS. In 2011, West Java Province is reportedly has 76 HIV/AIDS patients (West Java Province in FIgure, 2011). This number is decreased from 2009 to 2011, in which there are 710 HIV/AIDS patients in 2009, 130 patients in 2010, and 76 patients in 2011.
This indicates the increase awareness of community surrounding the Project affected area regarding the potential sex transmission disease, as nowadays more HIV/AIDS campaigns are delivered into the community as part of government health improvement program.
3.6.2. Health Facility
The existing health facility in the five project affected regencies are including general hospitals, public health center (Puskesmas/ Posyandu), mobile public health center, and clinic, as presented in the following sections.
3.6.2.1. Purwakarta
Health care facilities that are available in the three affected sub districts in Purwakarta Regency including 1 general hospital, 4 public health centers (Puskesmas), 7 subsidiary public health centers (posyandu), 3 mobile public health centers, and 6 general clinics. Complete health facilities are available only in Cibatu Sub district as it is also the only affected sub district in Purwakarta Regency that has a hospital.
Table 32. Public Health Facilities in Purwakarta Regency Main Subsidiary Mobile Public of Public Public General Specialist No. Sub District Hospital Health Health Health Clinic Clinic Center Center Center 1 Bungursari - 2 1 1 2 - 2 Campaka - 1 3 1 2 - 3 Cibatu 1 1 3 1 2 - Source: Purwakarta Regency in Figures, 2010
The following Table 33 shows that the health facility supported by 7 General Practitioners, 4 Dentists, 42 Midwives, and 24 Nurses.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 35
Table 33. Number of Paramedic Staff in Purwakarta Regency
No. Sub District General General Practitioners Specialist Dentist Midwife Nurse Sanitation Nutritionist Aphoteker/ Assisstant Aphoteker 1 Bungursari 2 - 2 14 10 1 1 1 2 Campaka 2 - 1 14 6 1 1 - 3 Cibatu 3 - 1 14 8 2 1 1 Source: Purwakarta Regency in Figures, 2010
3.6.2.2. Subang
There are 3 hospitals in the sub districts that will be crossed by the toll road Project in Subang Regency, two of them are located in Subang Sub district and the other is located in Kalijati Sub district. Public health center is available in all sub districts, in which there are 16 public health centers and 24 subsidiary public health centers available, along with 18 general clinics and 1 specialist clinic. Complete health facilities are available in Subang Sub district.
Table 34. Number of Public Health Facilities in Subang Regency Main Subsidiary Mobile Public of Public Public General Specialist No. Sub District Hospital Health Health Health Clinic Clinic Center Center Center 1 Pabuaran - 2 1 1 2 - 2 Cipeundeuy - 1 3 1 2 - 3 Kalijati 1 1 3 1 2 - 4 Purwadadi - 1 2 1 6 - 5 Pegaden - 2 1 3 - - 6 Pegaden Barat - 1 4 1 - - 7 Subang 2 2 2 2 6 1 8 Cipunegara - 1 3 1 - - 9 Cibogo - 1 2 1 - - 10 Dawuan - 1 3 1 - - Source: Subang Regency in Figures, 2010
The following Table 35 shows that the health facility supported by 22 general practitioners, 9 dentists, 157 midwives, and 169 nurses.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 36
Table 35. Number of Paramedic Staff in Subang Regency General No. Sub District Specialist Dentist Midwife Nurse Practitioners 1 Pabuaran 3 - 1 16 23 2 Cipeundeuy 1 - - 11 6 3 Kalijati 2 - 1 15 11 4 Purwadadi 2 - - 15 15 5 Pegaden 2 - 2 20 30 6 Pegaden Barat 2 - - 12 11 7 Subang 4 - 2 28 33 8 Cipunegara 2 - 1 13 12 9 Cibogo 2 - 1 13 16 10 Dawuan 2 - 1 14 12 Source: Subang Regency in Figures, 2010
3.6.2.3. Indramayu
Health care facilities that are available in the two affected sub districts in Indramayu Regency including 2 public health centers and 6 subsidiary public health centers.
Table 36. Number of Public Health Facilities in Indramayu Regency Main Subsidiary Mobile Public of Public Public General Specialist No. Sub District Hospital Health Health Health Clinic Clinic Center Center Center 1 Gantar - 1 3 - - - 2 Terisi - 1 3 - - - Source: Indramayu Regency in Figures, 2010
The following Table 37 shows that the health facility supported by 4 general practitioners, 1 dentists, 21 midwives, and 13 nurses.
Table 37. Number of Paramedic Staff in Indramayu Regency General No. Sub District Specialist Dentist Midwife Nurse Practitioners 1 Gantar 1 - 0 8 - 2 Terisi 3 - 1 13 13
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 37 Source: Indramayu Regency in Figures, 2010 3.6.2.4. Majalengka
The follwoing Table 38 shows that there is a hospital in every sub district that will be crossed by the toll road project. There is also one public health center in Jatiwangi sub district and about 16 subsidiary public health centers that are available in the all sub districts.
Table 38. Number of Public Health Facilities in Majalengka Regency Main Subsidiary Mobile Public of Public Public General Specialist No. Sub District Hospital Health Health Health Clinic Clinic Center Center Center 1 Kertajati 1 0 6 19 - - 2 Dawuan 1 0 1 1 - - 3 Jatiwangi 1 1 3 17 - - 4 Ligung 1 0 5 9 - - 5 Palasah 1 0 3 6 - - 6 Sumber jaya 1 0 3 7 - - Source: Majalengka Regency in Figures, 2010
The following Table 39 shows about 13 general practitioners are working on those facilities along with 4 dentists, 35 Midwives, and 87 nurses.
Table 39. Number of Paramedic Staff in Majalengka Regency General No. Sub District Specialist Dentist Midwife Nurse Practitioners 1 Kertajati 3 - 1 4 14 2 Dawuan 2 - 0 4 11 3 Jatiwangi 4 - 1 11 16 4 Ligung 2 - 0 8 19 5 Palasah 1 - 1 4 14 6 Sumber jaya 1 - 1 4 13 Source: Majalengka Regency in Figures, 2010
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 38
3.6.2.5. Cirebon
In the sub districts that will be crossed by toll road Project, there is only one hospital available in Ciwaringin Sub district. Public health center are available in the whole sub districts, includes 4 main public health centers and 4 Subsidiary of Public Health Centers, along with 8 general clinics and one specialist clinic. Complete health facilities are available in Ciwaringin Sub district, as it is also the only affected sub district in Cirebon Regency that has a hospital.
Table 40. Number of Public Health Facilities in Cirebon Regency Subsidiry Mobile Main Public Sub of Public Public General Specialist No. Hospital Health District Health Health Clinic Clinic Center Center Center 1 Palimanan 0 2 1 8 4 1 2 Ciwaringin 1 1 1 4 4 0 3 Gempol 0 1 2 5 0 0 Source: Cirebon Regency in Figures, 2010
The following Table 41 shows that the health facility supported by 4 general practitioners, 21 specialists, 2 dentists, 44 midwives, and 52 nurses.
Table 41. Number of Paramedic Staff in Cirebon Regency General No. Sub District Specialist Dentist Midwife Nurse Practitioners 1 Palimanan 2 0 1 22 23 2 Ciwaringin 1 21 1 17 17 3 Gempol 1 0 0 5 12 Source: Cirebon Regency in Figures, 2010
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 39
Figure 8. Main Public Health Center / Subsidiary of Public Health Center in Batusari Village, Dawuan Ditrict, Subang Regency
Figure 9. Main Public Health Center / Subsidiary of Public Health Center in Garawangi Village, Sumberjaya District, Majalengka Regency
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 40
3.6.3. Water Facility
The following sections will provide general information regarding community access to the clean water from the availability number of water facility in each affected household. Clean water availability is considered essential, in which the term of clean water is referred to the water that is possible to drink and use for daily household activities, such as cook, bath, and wash.
Details regarding community access to clean water, and the overall number of water facilities in each affected household were gathered during baseline data gathering and stakeholder engagement exercises. The term clean water is used to refer to water that is possible to drink and use for daily household activities, such as cooking, bathing, and washing.
Table42 shows that water facilities are available to 69.234 percent of household in the five project affected regencies. The highest number of available water facilities was in Cirebon Regency, with approximately 93 percent from total household respondent, whilst the lowest number of available water facilities was in Purwakarta Regency.
Table 42 Access to Water Facility Average Available Not Available No. Regency Settlement Fee (%) (%) (IDR) 1 Purwakarta 42.55 57.44 562,222.22 2 Subang 76.95 23.04 675,436 3 Indramayu 66.67 33.33 1,125,555 4 Majalengka 66.67 33.33 456,559 5 Cirebon 93.33 6.67 439,858 Average 69.234 30.762 651,926.04 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
The baseline data gathered also revealed that the main household water sources are from dug wells or pumps (ground water) and subscription to water piped (from spring), though some of the household still obtain water from the nearby river.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 41
3.6.3.1. Purwakarta
In the project affected villages in Purwakarta Regency, the percentage of clean water availability is only 42.5%, with an average settlement fee for each household is IDR 562,222. Among the 6 affected villages shown in following Table 43, Kertamukti Village has the highest percentage (75%) of clean water availability. Cinangka and Cipayung Villages have the lowest percentage of clean water availability, 20% and 30%.
Table 43. Water Facility Availability on The Project Affected Villages in Purwakarta Regency Available No Available Settlement Fee No Village (%) (%) (IDR) 1 Cikopo 53.84 46.15 2,013,333 2 Cinangka 20 80 250,000 3 Cimahi 50 50 300,000 4 Cisaat 50 50 400,000 5 Kertamukti 75 25 160,000 6 Ciparungsari 30 70 250,000
Regency 42.55 57.44 562,222.22 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.6.3.2. Subang
In the project affected villages in Subang Regency, the percentage of clean water availability is 76.95%, with an average settlement fee for each household is IDR 675,436. Among the 19 affected villages shown in following Table 44, Wantilan Village have the lowest percentage of clean water availability, 26.66%.
Table 44. Water Facility Availability on The Project Affected Villages in Subang Regency Available No Available Settlement Fee No Village (%) (%) (IDR) 1 Wantilan 26.66 73.33 150,000 2 Sawangan 53.33 46.66 768,750 3 Karangmukti 40 60 945,714
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 42 4 Marengmang 66.66 33.33 1,035,000 5 Kaliangsana 60 40 655,555 6 Caracas 53.33 46.66 1,025,000 7 Ciruluk 66.66 33.33 1,655,000 8 Wanakerta 100 0 742,666 9 Gembor 100 0 405,555 10 Balingbing 100 0 370,000 11 Cidahu 93.33 6.66 501,111 12 Jabong 77.77 22.22 787,500 13 Sukamelang 85.71 14.28 475,000 14 Cisaga 100 0 642,857 15 Wanasari 80 20 316,363 16 Cibogo 93.33 6.66 510,416 17 Pada Asih 87.5 12.5 813,076 18 Sumur Barang 93.75 6.25 693,333 19 Batusari 100 0 340,384
Regency 76.95 23.04 675,436 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.6.3.3. Indramayu
In the project affected villages in Indramayu Regency, the percentage of clean water availability is 66.67%, with an average settlement fee for each household is IDR 1,125,555. Among the 3 affected villages shown in following Table 45, Sanca Village has the highest percentage (86.66%) of clean water availability. Cikawung Village have the lowest percentage of clean water availability (46.66%).
Table 45. Water Facility Availability on The Project Affected Villages in Indramayu Regency Available No Available Settlement fee No Village (%) (%) (IDR) 1 Bantarwaru 66.66 33.33 1,185,000 2 Sanca 86.66 13.33 700,000 3 Cikawung 46.66 53.33 1,491,666
Regency 66.67 33.33 1,125,555 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 43
3.6.3.4. Majalengka
In the project affected villages in Majalengka Regency, the percentage of clean water availability is 66.67 percent, which is considered to be medium level of clean water availability, with an average settlement fee for each household is IDR 1,125,555. Among the 24 affected villages shown in following Table 46, there are seven villages which are considered not having a good level of clean water availability, namely Jatiwangi, Surawangi, Sutawangi, Beusi, Tegal Aren, Cisambeng and Bongas Kulon. The other villages are considered to have a good level of clean water availability.
Table 46. Water Facility Availability on The Project Affected Villages in Majalengka Regency Available No Available Settlement fee No Village (%) (%) (IDR) 1 Mekarjaya 86.66 13.33 1,610,000 2 Palasah 93.33 6.67 969,230 3 Sukawana 100 0 457,692 4 Kertawinangun 66.67 33.33 622,500 5 Babakan 73.33 26.67 455,555 6 Pakubeureum 86.67 13.33 425,000 7 Pasir Malati 93.33 6.67 420,416 8 Balida 93.33 6.67 476,000 9 Karanganyar 86.67 13.33 517,272 10 Mandapa 73.33 26.67 406,818 11 Salawana 93.33 6.67 313,333 12 Jatiwangi 26.67 73.33 425,000 13 Surawangi 7.14 92.85 0 14 Jatisura 68.75 31.25 527,777 15 Sutawangi 20 80 300,000 16 Beusi 26.67 73.33 312,500 17 Tegal Aren 40 60 265,000 18 Cisambeng 40 60 291,666
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 44 19 Majasuka 66.67 33.33 335,000 20 Bongas Kulon 26.67 73.33 566,666 21 Bongas Wetan 66.67 33.33 350,000 22 Panjalin Lor 66.67 33.33 0 23 Panjalin Kidul 100 0 385,000 24 Garawangi 93.33 6.67 525,000
Regency 66.67 33.33 456,559 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.6.3.5. Cirebon
In the project affected villages in Cirebon Regency, the percentage of clean water availability is 93.33%, which is considered to be good level of clean water availability, with an average settlement fee for each household is IDR 439,858. All the 10 affected villages shown in following Table 47 are considered to have a very good level of clean water availability.
Table 47. Water Facility Availability on The Project Affected Villages in Cirebon Regency Available No Available Settlement fee No Village (%) (%) (IDR) 1 Budur 93.33 6.67 536,363 2 Babakan 86.67 13.33 696,428 3 Ciwaringin 93.75 6.25 500,000 4 Galagamba 100 0 0 5 Walahar 86.67 13.33 500,000 6 Kedung Bunder 86.67 13.33 196,000 7 Kempek 93.33 6.67 441,666 8 Pegagan 100 0 237,500 9 Tegalkarang 100 0 628,125 10 Lungbenda 100 0 662,500
Regency 93.33 6.67 439,858 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 45 Figure 10. Water Sources / Drainage in Gembor Village, Pegaden District, Subang Regency
Figure 11. Water Sources / Drainage in Balingbing Village, Pegaden Barat District, Subang Regency
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 46
3.6.4. Sanitation Facility
Sanitation facilities that are available in the five affected regencies can be classified into three categories, self-owned sanitary, river utilization, and public sanitary. The sanitation facility primarily supports the purposes of bathing, washing, and toilet. The following sections present the utilization number of sanitation facility on each affected household in the five project affected regencies.
Tabel 48. Sanitary Facilities Usage in The Project Affected Regencies Self-owned Public No Regency Use River Other Sanitary Sanitary 1. Purwakarta 55.32 6.38 31.91 6.38 2. Subang 77.32 4.46 10.41 7.81 3. Indramayu 71.11 13.33 13.33 2.22 4. Majalengka 83.61 8.06 5.28 3.06 5. Cirebon 88.15 7.41 0.74 3.70
Average 75.10 7.92 12.33 4.63 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.6.4.1. Purwakarta
The affected villages in Purwakarta Regency generally have a medium level of self-owned sanitary facilities usage (55.32%). The highest number of usage is particularly in Cikopo and Cinangka Villages, with percentages of approximately 69% and 80%, while majority of the communities in Cimahi, Cisaat, and Ciparungsari Villages are still using the public sanitary facilities.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 47
Table 49. Sanitation Facilities Usage on The Project Affected Villages in Purwakarta Regency Self-owned Publik Uses River Other No Village sanitary sanitary (%) (%) (%) (%) 1 Cikopo 69.23 0.00 15.38 15.38 2 Cinangka 80.00 0.00 10.00 10.00 3 Cimahi 33.33 0.00 66.67 0.00 4 Cisaat 25.00 0.00 75.00 0.00 5 Kertamukti 50.00 50.00 0.00 0.00 6 Ciparungsari 40.00 10.00 50.00 0.00
Regency 55.32 6.38 31.91 6.38 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.6.4.2. Subang
The affected villages in Subang Regency generally have a high level of self-owned sanitary facilities usage (77.3%). Only approximately 10% of the communities are still using the public sanitary facilities, while 4 percent are using the river as a mean of sanitary facility. Among the 19 affected villages shown in Table 50, only two villages are considered to have medium level of self-owned sanitary facilities usage, namely Wantilan and Caracas Villages.
Table 50. Sanitation Facilities Usage on The Project Affected Villages in Subang Regency Self-owned Publik Uses River Other No Village sanitary sanitary (%) (%) (%) (%) 1 Wantilan 46.67 20 26.67 6.67 2 Sawangan 60 20 20 0 3 Karangmukti 73.33 0 26.67 0 4 Marengmang 80 6.67 13.33 0 5 Kaliangsana 86.67 0 6.67 6.67 6 Caracas 53.33 6.67 33.33 6.67 7 Ciruluk 93.33 0 6.67 0
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 48 8 Wanakerta 100 0 0 0 9 Gembor 77.78 0 0 22.22 10 Balingbing 80 6.67 6.67 6.67 11 Cidahu 66.67 0 13.33 20 12 Jabong 88.89 0 11.11 0 13 Sukamelang 71.43 14.29 7.14 7.14 14 Cisaga 60 10 20 10 15 Wanasari 86.67 0 0 13.33 16 Cibogo 80 0 0 20 17 Pada Asih 68.75 0 6.25 25 18 Sumur Barang 93.75 0 0 6.25 19 Batusari 100 0 0 0
Regency 77.32 4.46 10.41 7.81 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.6.4.3. Indramayu
The affected villages in Indramayu Regency generally have a medium level of self-owned sanitary facilities usage (7.11%). Among the three affected villages shown in Table 51, all of them have relatively similar percentage of self-owned sanitary facilities usage.
Table 51. Sanitation Facilities Usage on The Project Affected Villages in Indramayu Regency Self-owned Publik sanitary Uses River Sanitary Other No Village (%) (%) (%) (%) 1 Bantarwaru 73.33 20.00 0.00 6.67 2 Sanca 66.67 6.67 26.67 0.00 3 Cikawung 73.33 13.33 13.33 0.00
Regency 71.11 13.33 13.33 2.22 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.6.4.4. Majalengka
The affected villages in Subang Regency generally have a high level of self-owned sanitary facilities usage (83.61%). Only approximately 5% of the communities are still using the public
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 49 sanitary facilities, while 8 percent are using the river as a mean of sanitary facility. Among the 24 affected villages shown in Table 52, only one village is considered to have a low level (approximately 33%) of self-owned sanitary facilities usage, namely Jatiwangi Village. Medium level of communities using the river for sanitary found in Jatiwangi, Surawangi and Beusi Villages.
Table 52. Sanitation Facilities Usage on The Project Affected Villages in Majalengka Regency Self-owned Publik Uses River Other No Village sanitary sanitary (%) (%) (%) (%) 1 Mekarjaya 66.67 6.67 6.67 20 2 Palasah 93.33 0 6.67 0 3 Sukawana 93.33 0 6.67 0 4 Kertawinangun 73.33 0 20 6.67 5 Babakan 73.33 0 20 6.67 6 Pakubeureum 93.33 0 6.67 0 7 Pasir Malati 93.33 0 6.67 0 8 Balida 93.33 6.67 0 0 9 Karanganyar 86.67 6.67 6.67 0 10 Mandapa 66.67 20 6.67 6.67 11 Salawana 100 0 0 0 12 Jatiwangi 33.33 33.33 6.67 26.67 13 Surawangi 50 42.86 0 7.14 14 Jatisura 100 0 0 0 15 Sutawangi 100 0 0 0 16 Beusi 73.33 26.67 0 0 17 Tegal Aren 93.33 6.67 0 0 18 Cisambeng 86.67 13.33 0 0 19 Majasuka 100 0 0 0 20 Bongas Kulon 80 20 0 0 21 Bongas Wetan 93.33 6.67 0 0 22 Panjalin Lor 66.67 0 33.33 0 23 Panjalin Kidul 93.33 6.67 0 0 24 Garawangi 100 0 0 0
Regency 83.61 8.06 5.28 3.06 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 50
3.6.4.5. Cirebon
The affected villages in Subang Regency generally have a high level of self-owned sanitary facilities usage (88.15%). Less than 1% of the communities are still using the public sanitary facilities, while only approximately 7% are using the river as a mean of sanitary facility.
Table 53. Sanitation Facilities Usage on The Project Affected Villages in Cirebon Regency Self-owned Publik Uses River Other No Village sanitary sanitary (%) (%) (%) (%) 1 Budur 93.33 6.67 0.00 0.00 2 Babakan 80.00 13.33 0.00 6.67 3 Ciwaringin 87.50 0.00 6.25 6.25 4 Galagamba 85.71 14.29 0.00 0.00 5 Walahar 86.67 6.67 0.00 6.67 6 Kedung Bunder 86.67 13.33 0.00 0.00 7 Kempek 73.33 13.33 0.00 13.33 8 Pegagan 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9 Tegalkarang 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10 Lungbenda 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Regency 88.15 7.41 0.74 3.70 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
Figure 12. Public Lavatory in Kertamukti Village, Campaka District, Purwakarta Regency
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 51
Figure 13. Public Lavatory in Sukamelang Sub District, Subang District, Subang Regency
Figure 14. Garbage Disposal in Gembor Village, Pegaden District, Subang Regency
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 52
3.7. Roads
The increasing populations of West Java require continued development of road infrastructure to ensure that both movement within the Province and connectivity to the rest of Java is not only maintained, but also improved. The following table presents the existing conditions of road infrastructure in the project affected regencies. Public roads with asphalt surfaces in the five regencies total approximately 3671.67 km, with 1475.5 km considered to be in good condition. However this condition varies between regencies. The Project development will be able to meet community need for road facility.
Table 54 Road Infrastructure in the Project Affected Regency Regency Road (Km)
Type of
Surface ayu gka arta arta Indram Purwak Subang Cirebon Majalen
Asphalt 573.41 963.40 790.20 702.30 642.36 Gravel 130.17 50.70 - - - Soil 10.19 33.10 - 13.30 - Hotmix - 7.30 7.83 - - Others 6.75 - - - - Road Condition Good 311.19 248.07 400.05 362.08 154.11 Moderate 183.97 390.00 235.52 107.85 197.21 Damaged 108.98 416.43 111.58 166.97 202.61
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 53 Severely 116.32 50.87 78.70 8.84 Damaged Class of Road
National 42.91 54.78 - Provincial 59.35 617.52 _ Regency 720.50 26.98 715.60 642.36 Source: Regency in Figures, 2010
Figure 15. Road Conditions in Pada Asih Village, Cibogo District, Subang Regency
Figure 16. Road Conditions in Mekarjaya Village, Kertajati District, Majalengka Regency
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 54
Figure 17. Bridge Conditions in Wanasari Village, Cipunagara District, Subang Regency
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 55
Figure 18. Bridge Conditions in Pakubereum Village, Kertajati District, Majalengka Regency
3.8. Public Transportations
A robust and reliable public transport sector is critical for growth and development of other sectors. It provides the connectivity necessary to enable the ongoing economic development of the Project area. The two existing public transportation services predominately utilised by the community within the project affected regencies are bus and train services. There are two kinds of bus services. The first consists of long distance routes across provinces, with the second being smaller services between and within villages and towns. Because the city has a provincial status, all bus services which pass through the city limits are classified as inter-provincial services. Routes are based in Jakarta with a majority of services between the provinces in West Java. In addition there are also many services to other regions in Java and to Sumatra and other islands adjacent to the island of Java.
The alternative transport service is the train system comprised of a northern coastal route (Merak – Jakarta – Cirebon – Semarang – Surabaya) and a southern route (Bandung – Yogyakarta – Surabaya – Banyuwangi). There are a few north-south connections between these two main lines and two from the line close to the corridor study Cikampek to Bandung and Cirebon to Kroya. As described within the AMDAL, the volume of passengers using the railway has been high enough with an average of ± 300,000 people / year in 2008.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 56 Train Services state-own Company is planning a railway sector growth of 7% including the improvement and rehabilitation of approximately 840 km railway trains and construction of 350 km of railroads. The development of is roughly equivalent to that estimated for highway traffic.
Figure 19. Public Transportation in Wanakerta Village, Purwadadi District, Subang Regency
Figure 20. Public Transportation in Cimahi Village, Campaka District, Purwakarta Regency
3.9. Traffic Accidents
The following table presents the number of traffic accidents in the five project affected regencies during 2010. The highest number of accident occurred in Indramayu Regency (276) where 172 people died, 274 people experienced minor injuries, and 98 people suffered major injuries. These numbers show that an accident may involve more than one death, minor, and serious injuries. The Project development is expected to be able to improve safety standards within the five affected regencies.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 57 Table 55 Number of Traffic Accident in the Project Affected Regency No. Regency Total Accident Died Minor Major Injuries Injuries 1 Purwakarta 96 66 69 61 2 Subang 201 37 322 101 3 Indramayu 276 172 274 98 4 Majalengka 79 42 44 107 5 Cirebon 71 93 56 22 Total 723 410 765 389 Source: Regency in Figures, 2010
3.10. Religious Facilities
As shown in Table56, the large Moslem majority in the five regencies is reflected in the breakdown of religious facilities, where there are a total 22,738 Mosque registered. Cirebon Regency has the largest number of religious facilities, corresponding primarily to the fact that it has the highest population.
Table 56 Religious Facility in the Project Affected Regency No. Regency Mosque Protestan Catholic Temple Vihara t Church Church 1 Purwakarta 1,892 10 2 1 3 2 Subang 6,279 42 0 0 0 3 Majalengka 2,134 29 4 0 1 4 Indramayu 5,539 19 5 0 2 5 Cirebon 6,894 33 15 2 2 Total 22,738 133 26 3 8 Source: Regency in Figures, 2010
Figure 21. Mosques in Budur Village, Ciwaringin District, Cirebon Regency
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 58
Figure 21. Mosques in Bantarwaru Village, Gantar District, Indramayu Regency
3.11. Electricity
The following sections provide information regarding the condition of electricity facility within the project affected area, in which it is identified that most of the household already have access to electricity which is provided from PLN (State Electrical Company).
3.11.1. Purwakarta
95.74% of the communities in Purwakarta Regency are utilizing electricity facility which is provided from PLN (State Electrical Company). The average monthly payment is IDR 92,544 per household. Among the six affected villages in the regency, only households in Cikopo Village uses electricity not from PLN, but from self-owned generator.
Table 57. Electricity Usage in Purwakarta Regency PLN NON-PLN Monthly No. Village (%) (%) payment
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 59 (IDR/month)
1. Cikopo 84.62 15.38 198,181 2. Cinangka 100 0 63,000 3. Cimahi 100 0 117,833 4. Cisaat 100 0 95,000 5. Kertamukti 100 0 31,250 6. Ciparungsari 100 0 50,000
Regency 95.74 4.26 92,544 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.11.2. Subang
92.19% of the communities in Subang Regency are utilizing electricity facility which is provided from PLN. The average monthly payment is IDR 66,924 per household. Among the 19 affected villages in the regency, several 7.81% of household still can not access electricity from PLN, and using self-owned generator.
Table 58. Electricity Usage in Subang Regency PLN Monthly NON-PLN No. Village (%) payment (%) (IDR/month) 1. Wantilan 66.67 33.33 98,846 2. Sawangan 93.33 6.67 50,866 3. Karangmukti 100 0 85,666 4. Marengmang 93.33 6.67 58,357 5. Kaliangsana 93.33 6.67 54,000 6. Caracas 80 20 60,357 7. Ciruluk 100 0 119,333 8. Wanakerta 100 0 102,333 9. Gembor 88.89 11.11 53,555 10. Balingbing 93.33 6.67 58,615 11. Cidahu 86.67 13.33 47,000 12. Jabong 88.89 11.11 67,857 13. Sukamelang 92.86 7.14 61,142 14. Cisaga 90 10 77,000 15. Wanasari 93.33 6.67 41,000
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 60 16. Cibogo 86.67 13.33 49,533 17. Pada Asih 100 0 69,333 18. Sumur Barang 100 0 61,437 19. Batusari 100 0 55,333
Regency 92.19 7.81 66,924 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.11.3. Indramayu
84.44% of the communities in Indramayu Regency are utilizing electricity facility which is provided from PLN. The average monthly payment is IDR 81,912 per household. Among the 3 affected villages in the regency, 15.56 percent of household still can not access electricity from PLN, and using self-owned generator.
Table 59. Electricity Usage in Indramayu Regency PLN Monthly NON-PLN No. Village (%) payment (%) (IDR/month) 1. Bantarwaru 80 20 137,307 2. Sanca 80 20 39,500 3. Cikawung 93.33 6.67 68,928
Regency 84.44 15.56 81,912 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.11.4. Majalengka
87.78% of the communities in Majalengka Regency are utilizing electricity facility which is provided from PLN. The average monthly payment is IDR 58,558 per household. Among the 24 affected villages in the regency, 12.22% of household still can not access electricity from PLN, and using self-owned generator.
Table 60. Electricity Usage in Majalengka Regency
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 61 PLN Monthly NON-PLN No. Village (%) payment (%) (IDR/month) 1. Mekarjaya 100 0 51,692 2. Palasah 93.33 6.67 55,714 3. Sukawana 100 0 42,928 4. Kertawinangun 60 40 70,500 5. Babakan 86.67 13.33 89,500 6. Pakubeureum 73.33 26.67 56,785 7. Pasir Malati 93.33 6.67 75,642 8. Balida 86.67 13.33 71,923 9. Karanganyar 80 20 48,571 10. Mandapa 86.67 13.33 49,866 11. Salawana 100 0 47,714 12. Jatiwangi 80 20 23,125 13. Surawangi 78.57 21.43 29,461 14. Jatisura 93.75 6.25 38,562 15. Sutawangi 73.33 26.67 45,466 16. Beusi 86.67 13.33 36,533 17. Tegal Aren 86.67 13.33 45,000 18. Cisambeng 86.67 13.33 50,500 19. Majasuka 100 0 58,400 20. Bongas Kulon 80 20 40,923 21. Bongas Wetan 93.33 6.67 40,733 22. Panjalin Lor 86.67 13.33 60,909 23. Panjalin Kidul 100 0 214,615 24. Garawangi 100 0 60,333
Regency 87.78 12.22 58,558 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.11.5. Cirebon
96.3% of the communities in Cirebon Regency are utilizing electricity facility which is provided from PLN. The average monthly payment is IDR 74,294 per household. Among the 10 affected
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 62 villages in the regency, 3.7% of household still can not access electricity from PLN, and using self-owned generator.
Table 54. Electricity Usage in Cirebon Regency PLN Monthly NON-PLN No. Village (%) payment (%) (IDR/month) 1. Budur 100 0 82,500 2. Babakan 86.67 13.33 66,928 3. Ciwaringin 100 0 118,333 4. Galagamba 100 0 46,125 5. Walahar 86.67 13.33 58,142 6. Kedung Bunder 100 0 68,076 7. Kempek 100 0 69,291 8. Pegagan 100 0 68,750 9. Tegalkarang 93.33 6.67 73,461 10. Lungbenda 100 0 91,333
Regency 96.30 3.70 74,294 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
Figure 22. Electrical Substation in Gembor Village, Pegaden District, Subang Regency
Figure 23. Electrical Substation in Bantarwaru Village, Gantar District, Indramayu Regency
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 63
3.12. Household Asset 3.12.1. Land Ownership
This section discusses the actual condition of land ownership status of the household within the project affected regencies. The land ownership is referred to the aggregate land own by each household respondent according to documentation that was made available to be reviewed by the researcher during the baseline survey.
Generally, the land ownership status within the project affected regencies classified into Landholdings Certification (SHM), Right of Building Certification (HGB), Deed of Sales Purchase, Head of Village Reference, Tax Payment Reference, and land without any legal ownership documents.
Tabel 61. Land Ownership Status in The Project Affected Regencies Land Ownership Status (%) Right of Deed of Landholding Head Tax Building Sales Without Regency Certification of Village Payment Others Certification Purchase/ papers (SHM) Reference Reference (HGB) Grant Purwakarta 67.33 0 0 0.76 27.28 4.63 0 Subang 19.83 0 0.57 0.18 57.72 1.52 20.18 Indramayu 9.16 0 19.02 0 50.79 0 21.04 Majalengka 34.69 0.27 22.96 10.23 19.29 5.43 7.12 Cirebon 34.69 0.27 22.96 10.23 19.29 5.43 7.12 Average 33.59 0.64 10.73 12.21 39.73 2.64 10.69 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 64 3.12.1.1. Purwakarta
The baseline survey identified that 67.33% of the land that is owned by household within the project affected villages in Purwakarta Regency already have landholding certification. Cisaat Village has the lowest percentage of the land that has landholding certification (0.98%). Approximately 27% of the land ownership status document is using the tax payment reference, while 4.63% of the land is without any legal ownership documents.
Table 62. Land Ownership Status in Purwakarta Regency Land Ownership Status (%) Right of Deed of Landholding Head Tax Building Sales Without Village Certification of Village Payment Others Certification Purchase/ papers (SHM) Reference Reference (HGB) Grant Cikopo 97.22 0 0 0 0 2.78 0 Cinangka 73.24 0 0 0 26.76 0 0 Cimahi 40.18 0 0 0 59.82 0 0 Cisaat 0.98 0 0 0 99.02 0 0 Kertamukti 89.62 0 0 0 0 10.38 0 Ciparungsari 76.61 0 0 5.85 17.54 0 0
Regency 67.33 0 0 0.76 27.28 4.63 0 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.12.1.2. Subang
The baseline survey identified that only 19.83% of the land that is owned by household within the project affected villages in Subang Regency already have landholding certification, in which Balingbing Village has the highest percentage of the land that has landholding certification (65.88%). Most of the land, which is approximately 59.95%, is still using the tax payment reference for the legal ownership document, while 1.52% of the land is without any legal ownership documents.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 65 Table 63. Land Ownership Status in Subang Regency Land Ownership Status (%) Right of Deed of Landholding Head Tax Building Sales Without Village Certification of Village Payment Others Certification Purchase/ papers (SHM) Reference Reference (HGB) Grant Wantilan 17.7 0.00 0.00 0.00 77.88 0 4.42 Sawangan 33.95 0.00 0.00 3.91 54.31 7.83 0.00 Karangmukti 36.27 0.00 0.00 0.00 55.02 8.29 0.43 Marengmang 10.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 67.37 0.00 22.56 Kaliangsana 12.4 0.00 0.00 0.00 72.09 15.5 0.00 Caracas 5.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 94.86 0.00 0.00 Ciruluk 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 97.46 0.00 2.54 Wanakerta 44.64 0.00 0.00 0.00 48.68 0.00 6.68 Gembor 7.48 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.05 0.00 81.47 Balingbing 65.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.84 0.00 24.28 Jabong 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 Sukamelang 23.77 0.00 0.00 0.00 43.44 0.00 32.79 Cisaga 72.37 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.76 0.00 9.87 Wanasari 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 100 0.00 0.00 Cibogo 31.84 0.00 0.00 0.00 68.16 0.00 0.00 Pada Asih 20.86 0.00 8.53 0.00 40.28 0.00 30.33 Sumur 2.27 0.00 0.00 0.00 85.87 0.00 11.86 Barang Batusari 13.79 0.00 0.00 0.00 59.95 0.00 26.26
Regency 19.83 0.00 0.57 0.18 57.72 1.52 20.18 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.12.1.3. Indramayu
The baseline survey identified that only 9.16%of the land that is owned by household within the project affected villages in Indramayu Regency already have landholding certification, in which Bantarwaru Village has the highest percentage of the land that has landholding certification (14.69%). Most of the land, which is approximately 50.79%, is still using the tax payment reference for the legal ownership document, while 19.02% of the land ownership is based on deed of sales purchase.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 66
Table 64. Land Ownership Status in Indramayu Regency Land Ownership Status (%) Right of Landholding Head Tax Building Deed of Sales Without Village Certification of Village Payment Others Certification Purchase/Grant papers (SHM) Reference Reference (HGB) Bantarwaru 14.69 0 7 0 33.38 0 44.92 Sanca 0 0 38.96 0 61.04 0 0 Cikawung 10.12 0 16.86 0 71.84 0 1.18
Regency 9.16 0 19.02 0 50.79 0 21.04 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.12.1.4. Majalengka
The baseline survey identified that only 36.94%of the land that is owned by household within the project affected villages in Majalengka Regency already have landholding certification, in which Panjalin Kidul Village has the highest percentage of the land that has landholding certification (86.44%). Most of the land, which is approximately 43.59%, is still using the tax payment reference for the legal ownership document, while 11.12% of the land ownership is based on deed of sales purchase.
Table 65. Land Ownership Status in Majalengka Regency Land Ownership Status (%) Right of Deed of Landholding Head Tax Building Sales Without Village Certification of Village Payment Others Certification Purchase/ papers (SHM) Reference Reference (HGB) Grant Mekarjaya 5.3 2.19 0 0 69.47 0 23.03 Palasah 35.58 3.52 0 0 58.38 0 2.51 Sukawana 6.18 0 0 3.52 90.29 0 0 Kertawinangun 30.99 0 18.7 2.67 47.1 0 0.53
Babakan 9.23 0 0 0 55.13 0 35.63 Pakubeureum 10.85 0 30.75 0 47.93 0 10.46 Pasir Malati 5.31 0 12.38 0 74.13 0 8.19 Balida 45.94 4.2 20.56 0 26.78 0 2.52
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 67 Karanganyar 26.9 4.24 5.09 0 61.22 2.55 0 Mandapa 53.79 0 0 0 11.51 33.51 1.19 Salawana 3.22 0 0 51.27 25.33 20.18 0 Jatiwangi 2.99 0 13.95 7.31 69.77 5.98 0 Surawangi 40.44 0 51.45 0 8.11 0 0 Jatisura 23.21 0 3.12 0 73.68 0 0 Sutawangi 29.6 0 19.49 0 50.91 0 0 Beusi 9.48 0 26.38 0 64.14 0 0 Tegal aren 34.29 0 37.14 0 28.57 0 0 Cisambeng 59.35 0 14.57 0 26.08 0 0 Majasuka 31.57 0 7.05 0 61.38 0 0 Bongas kulon 9.67 0 28.95 0 61.39 0 0 Bongas wetan 37.89 0 20.6 0 41.51 0 0 Panjalin lor 0 0 0 0 100 0 0 Panjalin kidul 86.44 0 11.1 0 0 0 2.47 Garawangi 18.46 0 6.35 0 75.19 0 0
Regency 36.94 0.55 11.12 1.04 43.59 1.63 5.13 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.12.1.5. Cirebon
The baseline survey identified that only 34.69% of the land that is owned by household within the project affected villages in Cirebon Regency already have landholding certification, in which Budur Village has the highest percentage of the land that has landholding certification (74.13%). Some of the land, which is approximately 19.29%, is still using the tax payment reference for the legal ownership document, while 22.96% of the land ownership is based on deed of sales purchase.
Table 66. Land Ownership Status in Cirebon Regency Land Ownership Status (%) Right of Deed of Landholding Head Tax Building Sales Without Village Certification of Village Payment Others Certification Purchase/ papers (SHM) Reference Reference (HGB) Grant Budur 74.13 0 11.63 1.61 6.45 0 6.17 Babakan 27.81 0 7.58 0 64.61 0 0 Ciwaringin 29.07 0 24.07 4.58 32.85 0 9.44
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 68 Galagamba 18.47 0 30.01 0 43.03 0 8.49 Walahar 7.45 0 9.93 71.2 10.36 1.06 0 Kedung 5.22 0 0 59.87 14.44 13.21 7.26 Bunder Kempek 1.59 0 73.69 0 3.75 5.31 15.66 Pegagan 66.63 0 33.37 0 0 0 0 Tegalkarang 20.67 0 28.68 0 5.94 39.31 5.4 Lungbenda 15.72 4.09 48.56 4.38 0 0 27.25 Regency 34.69 0.27 22.96 10.23 19.29 5.43 7.12 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.12.2. Land Use
The following sections shows the average land area owned per household which is classified into three categories, including yard, productive farming land, and non productive farming land.
3.12.2.1. Purwakarta
Among the 6 affected villages in Purwakarta Regency, Kertamukti Village has the most average wide productive farming land per household (2,500 m2) as well as land with building and yard (approximately 2,697 m2). This shows relatively high productive farmlands in the project affected area in Purwakarta. Generally, the productive farmlands cover larger areas than the non- productive farmlands. This can be associated with the high volume of farming productivity that will be affected by the project in Purwakarta. Table 67 describes the land use in the project affected area in Purwakarta Regency.
Table 67. Land Used on The Project Affected Villages in Purwakarta Regency Average Land Width per Household (m2) No Village Land with Productive Non-Productive Building and Yard Farming Land Farming Land 1. Cikopo 483.23 846.15 130.77 2. Cinangka 155 0 0 3. Cimahi 271 0 50 4. Cisaat 1,430 1,625 1,250 5. Kertamukti 2,697.25 2,500 0 6. Ciparungsari 421.3 50 0
Regency 909.63 836.86 238.46
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 69 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.12.2.2. Subang
Among the 19 affected villages in Subang Regency, Jabong and Gembor Village have the largest productive farming land per household, which is approximately 6,395 m2 and 5,945 m2, respectively. The largest land with building and yard per household is also located in Gembor Village, which is approximately 1,955 m2. The following table also shows that the productive farming land on the affected villages in Subang Regency is larger than the non-productive land. This number can be associated with the high number of farming productivity in Subang Regency that is affected by the project. Table 68 describes the land use in the project affected area in Subang Regency.
Table 68. Land Used on The Project Affected Villages in Subang Regency Average Land Width per Household (m2) No Village Land with Productive Farming Non-Productive Building and Yard Land Farming Land 1. Wantilan 283.07 140 16 2. Sawangan 418.73 566.67 0 3. Karangmukti 542.67 856.53 0 4. Marengmang 504.07 663.2 0 5. Kaliangsana 364.53 186.67 93.33 6. Caracas 780.93 1,827.2 10 7. Ciruluk 417.8 3604 0 8. Wanakerta 605.67 1,573.33 23.33 9. Gembor 1,955.33 5,945.56 0 10. Balingbing 531.33 2,043.33 23.33 11. Cidahu 463.4 3491 0 12. Jabong 459.82 6,395.18 0 13. Sukamelang 431.13 2450 0 14. Cisaga 545.2 2,417.33 228 15. Wanasari 455.4 1,353.33 46.67 16. Cibogo 227 1780 0 17. Pada Asih 563.38 2,239.13 0 18. Sumur Barang 905 2,117.88 0 19. Batusari 301.2 862.4 0
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 70
Regency 566.08 2,132.24 23.19
Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.12.2.3. Indramayu
Based on Table 69, the three villages have relatively large areas of lands, including productive and non-productive farmlands. In Sanca and Cikawung villages, the non-productive farmlands are larger than the productive farmlands. Table 63 describes the land use in the project affected area in Indramayu Regency.
Table 69. Land Used on The Project Affected Villages in Indramayu Regency Average Land Width per Household (m2) No Village Land with Productive Non-Productive Building and Yard Farming Land Farming Land 1. Bantarwaru 662.6 4,385.87 333.33 2. Sanca 432.07 933.33 1,760 3. Cikawung 366.27 6,821.33 8,707.33
Regency 486.98 4,046.84 3,600.22
Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.12.2.4. Majalengka
Among the 24 affected villages in Majalengka Regency, Palasah and Kertawinangun Villages have the largest productive farming land per household, which is approximately 5,215 m2 and 3,716 m2, respectively. Generally, the productive farmlands are larger than the non-productive farmlands. This can be associated with the high volume of farming productivity in the project affected area in Majalengka.
On the other hand, there are some villages where the households do not own any productive and non-productive farmlands. This shows that the households in those villages do not depend on farming as a mean of their livelihoods. This survey indicates that some villages that will be affected by the proposed toll road project have started industrialization in their villages, where small and medium sized industries can be found. Table 70 describes the land use in the project affected area in Majalengka Regency.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 71 Table 70. Land Used on The Project Affected Villages in Majalengka Regency Average Land Width per Household (m2) No Village Land with Productive Non-Productive Building and Yard Farming Land Farming Land 1. Mekarjaya 641.2 4,424 0 2. Palasah 409.07 5,215.6 0 3. Sukawana 330 1,566.8 387.33 4. Kertawinangun 485.73 3,716.67 606.67 5. Babakan 353.4 2,740.27 242.67 6. Pakubeureum 804.93 1,386.67 25.6 7. Pasir Malati 339.33 850.67 19.47 8. Balida 177.87 2,200 22.4 9. Karanganyar 342.2 2,273.2 0 10. Mandapa 343.53 2,111.2 0 11. Salawana 170.27 280 0 12. Jatiwangi 148.07 327.87 0 13. Surawangi 122.93 365 0 14. Jatisura 155.75 0 0 15. Sutawangi 177.53 0 0 16. Beusi 160.53 0 0 17. Tegal Aren 220.47 0 0 18. Cisambeng 225.73 0 0 19. Majasuka 405.87 333.33 0 20. Bongas Kulon 204.6 350 46.67 21. Bongas Wetan 321.4 259.33 174.13 22. Panjalin Lor 389.47 160 154 23. Panjalin Kidul 1,874.47 264.4 0 24. Garawangi 376.4 996.8 43.47
Regency 382.53 1,242.57 71.76 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.12.2.5. Cirebon
Among the 10 affected villages in Majalengka Regency, the Budur Village has the largest productive farming land per household, which is approximately 3,306 m2. Generally, the productive farmlands cover significantly larger areas than the non-productive farmlands.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 73 However, the productive farmlands are generally not very large compared with the other affected regencies.
As shown in table 65, the households in some villages do not own productive and non-productive farmlands. This indicates that the households in those villages do not depend on farming as a mean of their livelihoods. This survey indicates that some villages that will be affected by the proposed toll road project have started industrialization in their villages, where small and medium sized industries can be found. Table 71 describes the land use in the project affected area in Cirebon Regency.
Table 71. Land Used on The Project Affected Villages in Majalengka Regency Average Land Width per Household (m2) No Village Land with Productive Non-Productive Building and Yard Farming Land Farming Land 1. Budur 1,040.6 3,306.67 0 2. Babakan 407.13 967.33 26.13 3. Ciwaringin 193.13 55 21 4. Galagamba 203.14 0 0 5. Walahar 260.93 1,529.6 341.6 6. Kedung Bunder 176.4 16.67 39.33 7. Kempek 283.07 1,139.73 14 8. Pegagan 377.2 0 0 9. Tegalkarang 329.87 0 0 10. Lungbenda 320.5 0 0
Regency 359.19 701.5 44.21 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
Figure 24. Factories / Small Industriesl in Ciruluk Village, Kalijati District, Subang Regency
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 74
Figure 25. Factories / Small Industriesl in Wanakerta Village, Purwadadi District, Subang Regency
3.12.3. Moving Asset
This section provide general information about household moving asset ownership on each project affected villages, in which for some of the affected household the asset is also utilized as part of their source of livelihood.
3.12.3.1. Purwakarta
Table 72 describes the household moving asset ownership in the project affected villages in Purwakarta Regency. On average, motorcycles dominate the type of moving assets in Purwakarta, with the highest number of motorcycles found in Cinangka, Kertamukti and Ciparungsari villages.
Table 72. Household Moving Asset in Purwakarta Regency No Village Motorcycle Car Bicycle Boat Generator Other (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) 1 Cikopo 61.90 28.57 0 0 4.76 4.76 2 Cinangka 100 0 0 0 0 0 3 Cimahi 80 0 20 0 0 0 4 Cisaat 66.67 33.33 0 0 0 0 5 Kertamukti 100 0 0 0 0 0 6 Ciparungsari 100 0 0 0 0 0
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 75 Regency 84.76 10.32 3.33 0 0.79 0.79
Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.12.3.2. Subang
Table 73 describes the household moving asset ownership in the project affected villages in Subang Regency. On average, motorcycles dominate the type of moving assets in Subang, with the highest number of motorcycles found in Ciruluk village. Besides motorcycles, bicycles are the next most common asset that the communities own (21.11%), while cars are rarely owned in these villages (2.34%).
Table 73. Household Moving Asset in Subang Regency Motorcycle Car Bicycle Boat Generator Other No Village (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) 1 Wantilan 92.86 0 7.14 0 0 0 2 Sawangan 89.47 0 10.53 0 0 0 3 Karangmukti 53.33 0 40 0 0 6.67 4 Marengmang 89.47 0 10.53 0 0 0 5 Kaliangsana 71.43 0 28.57 0 0 0 6 Caracas 94.12 0 5.88 0 0 0 7 Ciruluk 100 0 0 0 0 0 8 Wanakerta 76 4 20 0 0 0 9 Gembor 36.36 0 36.36 0 27.27 0 10 Balingbing 81.25 6.25 12.50 0 0 0 11 Cidahu 57.58 9.09 27.27 0 0 6.06 12 Jabong 65 5 30 0 0 0 13 Sukamelang 72.73 4.55 13.64 0 0 9.09 14 Cisaga 65.22 8.70 26.09 0 0 0 15 Wanasari 72.73 0 27.27 0 0 0 16 Cibogo 50 0 28.57 0 0 21.43 17 Pada Asih 65 0 30 0 0 1 Sumur 18 Barang 44.83 6.90 41.38 0 0 6.90 19 Batusari 94.74 0 5.26 0 0 0
Regency 72.22 2.34 21.11 0 1.44 2.69
Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 76
3.12.3.3. Indramayu
Table 74 describes the household moving asset ownership in the project affected villages in Indramayu Regency. On average, motorcycles dominate the type of moving assets in Indramayu (60.83%). Besides motorcycles, bicycles are the next most common asset that the communities own (34.18%).
Table 74. Household Moving Asset in Indramayu Regency Motorcycle Car Bicycle Boat Generator Other No Village (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) 1 Bantarwaru 52.94 5.88 41.18 0 0 0 2 Sanca 54.55 9.09 36.36 0 0 0 3 Cikawung 75 0 25 0 0 0
Regency 60.83 4.99 34.18 0 0 0
Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.12.3.4. Majalengka
Table 75 describes the household moving asset ownership in the project affected villages in Majalengka Regency. On average, motorcycles dominate the type of moving assets in Majalengka (52.51%). Besides motorcycles, bicycles are the next most common asset that the communities own (43.65%).
Table 75. Household Moving Asset in Majalengka Regency Motorcycle Car Bicycle Boat Generator Other No Village (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) 1 Mekarjaya 70 0 30 0 0 0 2 Palasah 55 10 35 0 0 0 3 Sukawana 47.37 0 52.63 0 0 0 4 Kertawinangun 73.91 4.35 21.74 0 0 0 5 Babakan 78.57 0 21.43 0 0 0 6 Pakubeureum 37.04 7.41 55.56 0 0 0 7 Pasir Malati 66.67 0 33.33 0 0 0 8 Balida 51.16 2.33 41.86 2.33 0 2.33 9 Karanganyar 32.26 3.23 45.16 19.35 0 0 10 Mandapa 70.37 3.70 18.52 0 0 7.41
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 77 11 Salawana 47.83 0 52.17 0 0 0 12 Jatiwangi 15.79 0 84.21 0 0 0 13 Surawangi 35.71 0 64.29 0 0 0 14 Jatisura 16.13 0 83.87 0 0 0 15 Sutawangi 33.33 0 53.33 0 0 13.33 16 Beusi 18.75 0 81.25 0 0 0 17 Tegal Aren 82.35 0 11.76 0 0 5.88 18 Cisambeng 36.36 0 63.64 0 0 0 19 Majasuka 78.95 0 21.05 0 0 0 20 Bongas Kulon 33.33 0 66.67 0 0 0 21 Bongas Wetan 62.50 0 37.50 0 0 0 22 Panjalin Lor 100 0 0 0 0 0 23 Panjalin Kidul 52.63 0 36.84 0 0 10.53 24 Garawangi 64.29 0 35.71 0 0 0
Regency 52.51 1.29 43.65 0.90 0 1.64
Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.12.3.5. Cirebon
Table 76 describes the household moving asset ownership in the project affected area in Cirebon Regency. On average, motorcycles dominate the type of moving assets in Cirebon (65.2%), with the highest number of motorcycles found in Kedung Bunder village (83.33%). Besides motorcycles, bicycles are the next most common asset that the communities own (23.74%). The number of cars found in Cirebon Regency is the highest, compared with the other regencies (7.22%).
Table 76. Household Moving Asset in Cirebon Regency Motorcycle Car Bicycle Boat Generator Other No Village (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) 1 Budur 62.50 8.33 12.50 0 0 16.67 2 Babakan 52.17 0 39.13 0 0 8.70 3 Ciwaringin 52.17 34.78 8.70 0 0 4.35 4 Galagamba 59.09 9.09 31.82 0 0 0 5 Walahar 80 0 20 0 0 0 Kedung 6 Bunder 83.33 0 16.67 0 0 0 7 Kempek 61.54 0 30.77 0 0 7.69 8 Pegagan 80 20 0 0 0 0 9 Tegalkarang 72.22 0 27.78 0 0 0 10 Lungbenda 50 0 50 0 0 0
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 78
Regency 65.30 7.22 23.74 0 0 3.74
Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.12.4. Housing 3.12.4.1. Purwakarta
It is identified from the baseline survey that majority of the house structure (approximately 65.38%) in the project affected villages in Purwakarta Regency is made of brick, as presented in the following table. The highest percentage of village with brick-wall house is on Cikopo Village, while only 9.62% of the housing is made of soft board-wall. According to this data, it can be concluded that generally the household in the project affected villages in Purwakarta Regency is relatively in medium economic condition. Table 77 describes the physical type of the communities’ houses in the project affected area in Purwakarta Regency.
Table 77. Housing Condition in Purwakarta Regency Housing Physical Type (%) Soft board- Brick-wall Hardwood-wall Other Village wall Cikopo 72.22 0 11.11 16.67 Cinangka 70 0 10 20 Cimahi 33.33 0 16.67 50 Cisaat 50 0 0 50 Kertamukti 50 0 0 50 Ciparungsari 80 0 10 0
Regency 65.38 0 9.62 25 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.12.4.2. Subang
It is identified from the baseline survey that majority of the house structure (approximately 74.35%) in the project affected villages in Subang Regency is made of brick, as presented in the following table. The lowest percentage of house with brick-wall is found in Wantilan and Pada Asih Villages, which is below 50%. Only 10.71% of the housing is made of soft board-wall which is found in the 13 villages in Subang Regency. According to this data, it can be concluded that generally the household in the project affected villages in Subang Regency is relatively in good
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 79 economic condition. Table 78 describes the physical type of the communities’ houses in the project affected area in Subang Regency.
Table 78. Housing Condition in Subang Regency Housing Physical Type (%) Hardwood- Soft board- Brick-wall Other Village wall wall Wantilan 42.11 0 21.05 36.84 Sawangan 70.59 0 23.53 5.88 Karangmukti 77.27 4.55 4.55 13.64 Marengmang 94.74 0 0 5.26 Kaliangsana 58.82 5.88 17.65 17.65 Caracas 52.94 0 5.88 41.18 Ciruluk 85.71 0 0 14.29 Wanakerta 78.26 4.35 17.39 0 Gembor 83.33 8.33 0 8.33 Balingbing 78.95 5.26 5.26 10.53 Jabong 100 0 0 0 Sukamelang 88.89 0 5.56 5.56 Cisaga 100 0 0 0 Wanasari 75 0 12.50 12.50 Cibogo 90 0 5 5 Pada Asih 47.37 10.53 15.79 26.32 Sumur Barang 75 0 20 5 Batusari 76.19 0 19.05 4.76
Regency 74.35 2.27 10.71 12.66 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.12.4.3. Indramayu
It is identified from the baseline survey that majority of the house structure (approximately 50%) in the project affected villages in Indramayu Regency is made of brick, as presented in the following table. 14.29% of the housing is made of soft board-wall. According to this data, it can be concluded that generally the household in the project affected villages in Indramayu Regency
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 80 is relatively in medium economic condition. Table 79 describes the physical type of the communities’ houses in the project affected area in Indramayu Regency.
Table 79. Housing Condition in Indramayu Regency Housing Physical Type (%) Soft board- Brick-wall Hardwood-wall Other Village wall Bantarwaru 61.90 0 9.52 28.57 Sanca 52.94 5.88 17.65 23.53 Cikawung 33.33 22.22 16.67 27.78
Regency 50 8.93 14.29 26.79 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.12.4.4. Majalengka
It is identified from the baseline survey that majority of the house structure (approximately 74.45%) in the project affected villages in Majalengka Regency is made of brick, as presented in the following table. The lowest percentage of house with brick-wall is found in Jatiwangi villages, which is 33.33%. Only 10.07% of the housing is made of soft board-wall. According to this data, it can be concluded that generally the household in the project affected villages in Majalengka Regency is relatively in good economic condition. Table 80 describes the physical type of the communities’ houses in the project affected area in Majalengka Regency.
Table 80. Housing Condition in Majalengka Regency Housing Physical Type (%) Hardwood- Soft Brick-wall Other Village wall board-wall Mekarjaya 35.29 0 41.18 23.53 Palasah 63.16 0 26.32 10.53 Sukawana 93.75 0 0 6.25 Kertawinangun 80 0 10 10 Babakan 52.94 0 17.65 29.41 Pakubeureum 76.19 4.76 9.52 9.52
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 81 Pasir Malati 64.71 0 11.76 23.53 Balida 63.16 0 0 36.84 Karanganyar 52.63 0 15.79 31.58 Mandapa 66.67 0 5.56 27.78 Salawana 100 0 0 0 Jatiwangi 33.33 20 20 26.67 Surawangi 85.71 7.14 7.14 0 Jatisura 88.24 5.88 5.88 0 Sutawangi 60 13.33 26.67 0 Beusi 66.67 6.67 26.67 0 Tegal Aren 88.24 0 5.88 5.88 Cisambeng 86.67 6.67 6.67 0 Majasuka 93.75 6.25 0 0 Bongas Kulon 93.33 6.67 0 0 Bongas Wetan 100 0 0 0 Panjalin Lor 93.33 0 0 6.67 Panjalin Kidul 75 0 4.17 20.83 Garawangi 87.50 0 0 12.50
Regency 74.45 2.95 10.07 12.53 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.12.4.5. Cirebon
It is identified from the baseline survey that majority of the house structure (approximately 71.88%) in the project affected villages in Cirebon Regency is made of brick, as presented in the following table. The lowest percentage of house with brick-wall is found in Galagamba Village, which is 25%. Only 0.63% of the housing is made of soft board-wall which is found in Pegagan Village. According to this data, it can be concluded that generally the household in the project affected villages in Cirebon Regency is relatively in good economic condition. Table 81 describes the physical type of the communities’ houses in the project affected area in Cirebon Regency.
Table 81. Housing Condition in Cirebon Regency Housing Physical Type (%) Soft board- Brick-wall Hardwood-wall Other Village wall Budur 70.83 0 0 29.17
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 82 Babakan 100 0 0 0 Ciwaringin 33.33 0 0 66.67 Galagamba 25 0 0 75 Walahar 87.50 0 0 12.50 Kedung Bunder 87.50 0 0 12.50 Kempek 77.78 0 0 22.22 Pegagan 88.89 0 11.11 0 Tegalkarang 75 6.25 0 18.75 Lungbenda 91.67 0 0 8.33
Regency 71.88 0.63 0.63 26.88 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
Figure 24. Brick-wall Housing in Walahar Village, Gempol District, Cirebon Regency
Figure 25. Brick-wall Housing in Karang Mukti Village, Cipeundeuy District, Subang Regency
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 83
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 84
Figure 26. Hardwood-wall Housing in Beusi Village, Ligung District, Majalengka Regency
Figure 27. Hardwood-wall Housing in Wanakerta Village, Purwadadi District, Subang Regency
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 85
Figure 28. Others Brick-wall Housing in Sawangan Village, Cipeundeuy District, Subang Regency
Figure 29. Others Brick-wall Housing in Cikopo Village, Bungursari District, Purwakarta Regency
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 86
3.13. Job Seekers
Data obtained from the West Java Provincial Government indicates that job seeker throughout the Province are primarily Senior High School graduates. This number can be indicator for local workforce availability within the affected area.
Table 82 Respondent Household Livelihood in West Java Province
No. Education Level Male Female Total 1 Elementary School 26,542 23,367 49,909 2 Junior High School 279,040 181,572 460,608 3 Senior High School 5,137,404 3,477,005 8,614,409 4 Diploma 1,368,126 1,440,853 2,787,157 5 Undergraduate 186,818 207,044 355,003 Total 6,997,830 5,329,841 12,267,086 Source: West Java Province in Figure, 2010
3.14. Household Livelihood
Livelihoods in the five regencies are mainly farmers, fishermen, laborers, merchants, entrepreneurs and others. Others include people who are not employed or not permanently employed.
3.14.1. Purwakarta
In project affected area in Purwakarta, the communities are mainly farmers and laborers (27.66%). Merchants are only found in Cikopo and Cinangka Villages, while entrepreneurs are found in Cikopo, Cinangka and Cisaat Villages. The highest percentage of entrepreneurs are found in Cisaat Village (50%), compared to the other villages in Purwakarta. Table 83 describes the household’s livelihoods in the project affected villages in Purwakarta Regency.
Table 83. Household Livelihood in Purwakarta Regency Type of Livelihood (%)
Employees Enterpre Village Farmer Fisherman Laborer Merchant /Civil Others neur Service
Cikopo 23.08 0 7.69 23.08 0 23.08 23.08
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 87 Cinangka 20 0 30 10 0 10 30
Cimahi 16.67 0 33.33 0 0 0 33.33
Cisaat 25 0 25 0 0 50 0 Kertamukti 50 0 50 0 0 0 0 Ciparungsari 40 0 40 0 0 0 20
Regency 27.66 0 27.66 8.51 0 12.77 21.28 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.14.2. Subang
In project affected area in Subang, the communities are mainly farmers (29.74%) and laborers (27.88%). Fishermen are only found in Wantilan Village, while merchants are found in seven villages. On the other hand, entrepreneurs are found in all of the villages, except for Karangmukti and Sukamelang villages. Table 84 describes the households’ livelihoods in the project affected villages in Subang Regency.
Table 84. Household Livelihood in Subang Regency Type of Livelihood (%)
Employees Enterpre Village Farmer Fisherman Laborer Merchant /Civil Others neur Service
Wantilan 26.67 6.67 53.33 0 0 6.67 13.33
Sawangan 40 0 33.33 6.67 0 20 6.67
Karangmukti 33.33 0 40 13.33 0 0 20
Marengmang 26.67 0 26.67 20 0 20 26.67 Kaliangsana 33.33 0 26.67 26.67 0 6.67 6.67
Caracas 46.67 0 26.67 0 0 20 6.67
Ciruluk 46.67 0 20 6.67 0 13.33 13.33
Wanakerta 6.67 0 26.67 0 0 13.33 53.33
Gembor 66.67 0 11.11 0 0 22.22 11.11
Balingbing 20 0 6.67 0 0 13.33 60
Jabong 20 0 40 0 0 6.67 40
Sukamelang 55.56 0 11.11 0 0 0 33.33 Cisaga 14.29 0 42.86 0 0 14.29 35.71
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 88 Wanasari 30 0 20 10 0 10 30
Cibogo 13.33 0 60 0 0 13.33 13.33 Pada Asih 13.33 0 40 13.33 0 20 13.33
Sumur Barang 37.50 0 25 0 0 6.25 31.25
Batusari 31.25 0 0 0 0 12.50 56.25
Regency 29.74 0.37 27.88 5.95 0 11.90 27.51 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.14.3. Indramayu
In project affected area in Indramayu, the communities are mainly farmers (35.56%), where the highest percentage can be found in Sanca village (53.33%). The other main professions are laborers (26.67%), entrepreneurs (17.78%) and merchants (4.44%). Table 85 describes the households’ livelihoods in the project affected villages in Indramayu Regency.
Table 85. Household Livelihood in Indramayu Regency Type ofLivelihood (%)
Employees Fisher Enterpre Village Farmer Laborer Merchant /Civil Others man neur Service
Bantarwaru 20 0 26.67 6.67 0 26.67 26.67 Sanca 53.33 0 40 0 0 0 6.67 Cikawung 33.33 0 13.33 6.67 0 26.67 20
Regency 35.56 0 26.67 4.44 0 17.78 17.78 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.14.4. Majalengka
In project affected area in Majalengka, the communities are mainly laborers (53.33%), followed by others (18.89%) and farmers (12.5%). The high number of laborers in Majalengka shows that this regency does not depend on agricultural sector for their livelihood anymore. Table 86 describes the households’ livelihoods in the project affected villages in Majalengka Regency.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 89
Table 86. Household Livelihood in Majalengka Regency Type ofLivelihood (%)
Employees Enterpre Village Farmer Fisherman Laborer Merchant /Civil Others neur Service
Mekarjaya 33.33 0 26.67 0 0 6.67 26.67
Palasah 40 0 46.67 0 0 0 6.67
Sukawana 33.33 0 33.33 0 0 13.33 26.67
Kertawinangun 20 0 26.67 0 0 26.67 33.33 Babakan 26.67 6.67 33.33 6.67 0 6.67 20
Pakubeureum 33.33 0 26.67 0 0 6.67 33.33
Pasir Malati 6.67 0 40 6.67 0 20 26.67
Balida 6.67 0 20 20 0 20 33.33
Karanganyar 13.33 0 40 0 0 6.67 40
Mandapa 6.67 0 46.67 6.67 0 13.33 26.67
Salawana 6.67 0 73.33 0 0 6.67 13.33
Jatiwangi 13.33 0 73.33 0 0 0 6.67
Surawangi 7.14 0 78.57 0 0 0 14.29
Jatisura 0 0 106.25 0 0 0 0
Sutawangi 0 0 60 6.67 0 6.67 26.67
Beusi 0 0 73.33 6.67 0 6.67 13.33
Tegal Aren 0 0 53.33 33.33 0 0 13.33
Cisambeng 0 0 93.33 0 0 0 6.67
Majasuka 6.67 0 53.33 0 0 20 20 Bongas Kulon 0 0 86.67 0 0 0 13.33
Bongas Wetan 6.67 0 86.67 0 0 6.67 0
Panjalin Lor 13.33 0 33.33 6.67 0 33.33 20
Panjalin Kidul 13.33 0 0 6.67 0 60 20
Garawangi 13.33 0 66.67 0 0 6.67 13.33
Regency 12.50 0.28 53.33 4.17 0 11.11 18.89 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 90
3.14.5. Cirebon
In project affected area in Cirebon, the communities are mainly farmers (24.44%), followed by entrepreneur (20.74%), laborers (20%) and others (28.89%). The highest percentage of farmers is found in Kedung Bunder Village, which reaches 60%. On the other hand, in Pegagan Village, the main profession is entrepreneurs, which made up of 80% of the villagers. Table 87 describes the households’ livelihoods in the project affected villages in Cirebon Regency.
Table 87. Household Livelihood in Cirebon Regency Type of Livelihood (%) Employees Village Farmer Fisherman Laborer Merchant /Civil Enterpreneur Others Service
Budur 13.33 0 40 0 0 26.67 26.67 Babakan 13.33 0 46.67 13.33 0 6.67 20 Ciwaringin 25 0 6.25 6.25 0 18.75 43.75
Galagamba 21.43 0 0 0 0 35.71 42.86 Walahar 53.33 0 20 6.67 0 6.67 13.33
Kedung Bunder 60 0 20 0 0 6.67 13.33
Kempek 20 0 26.67 0 0 20 33.33
Pegagan 0 0 0 0 0 80 20 Tegalkarang 6.67 0 6.67 13.33 0 20 46.67
Lungbenda 10 0 20 20 0 30 20
Regency 24.44 0 20 5.93 0 20.74 28.89 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 91
Figure 30. Traditional Market in Cikopo Village, Bungursari District, Purwakarta Regency
Figure 31. Small Shop in Caracas Village, Kalijati District, Subang Regency
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 92
Figure 32. Small Shop in Cikopo Village, Bungursari District, Purwakarta Regency
Figure 33. Street Vendor in Cimahi Village, Campaka District, Purwakarta Regency
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 93
Figure 34. Street Vendor in Cimahi Village, Campaka District, Purwakarta Regency
Figure 35. Rice Field in Kempek Village, Gempol District, Cirebon Regency
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 94
Figure 36. Rice Field in Walahar Village, Gempol District, Cirebon Regency
Figure 37. Farm/Plantation in Cisaat Village, Campaka District, Purwakarta Regency
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 95
Figure 38. Farm/Plantation in Batusari Village, Dawuan District, Subang Regency
Figure 39. Forest/Woods in Ciwaringin Village, Ciwaringin District, Cirebon Regency
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 96
Figure 40. Forest/Woods in Kempek Village, Gempol District, Cirebon Regency
Figure 41. Economy Activities in Mekarjaya Village, Kertajati District, Majalengka Regency
Figure 42. Economy Activities in Kempek Village, Gempol District, Cirebon Regency
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 97
3.15. Household Income 3.15.1. Agricultural Income
The following sections present the average number of household income from agricultural sector, including farming, husbandry, fisheries, and land lease.
3.15.1.1. Purwakarta
In the project affected area in Purwakarta, the average households’ income affected is IDR 3,882,000 per year. 89.79% of this amount is made up from the agricultural sector. Of the six project affected villages, the households’ income in Cimahi and Cisaat Villages are mainly from farming (100%). Table 88 describes the average farming income of household along the project affected villages in Purwakarta Regency.
Table 88. Household Agricultural Income in Purwakarta Regency
Source of Income/Per Year (In IDR. 1,000) Village Average Plantation Husbandry Fisheries Land Lease Others IDR IDR % IDR % IDR % IDR % IDR % Cikopo 6,234 98,500 87.77 13,720 12.23 - 0 - 0 - 0
Cinangka 3,281 55,600 99.68 180 0.32 - 0 - 0 - 0
Cimahi 800 4,000 100 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0
Cisaat 3,000 21,000 100 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0
Kertamukti 4,892 18,000 73.59 6,460 26.41 - 0 - 0 - 0
Ciparungsari 2,583 26,000 83.87 5,000 16.13 - 0 - 0 - 0
Regency 3,882 223,100 89.79 25,360 10.21 - 0 - 0 - 0 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 98
3.15.1.2. Subang
In the project affected area in Subang, the average households’ income affected is IDR 5,417,000 per year. 56.2% of this amount is made up from the agricultural sector. Of the 19 project affected villages, the households’ income in 7 villages are mainly from farming (more than 80%). Gembor Village has the largest income from fisheries (64.91%). Table 89 describes the average farming income of household along the project affected villages in Subang Regency.
Table 89 Household Agricultural Income in Subang Regency
Source of Income/Per Year (In IDR. 1,000) Village Average Plantation Husbandry Fisheries Land Lease Others IDR IDR % IDR % IDR % IDR % IDR % Wantilan 6,000 21,650 17.18 11,000 8.73 - 0 - 0 93,360 74.09 Sawangan 2,145 21,208 31.90 10,283 15.47 - 0 5,000 7.52 30,000 45.12
Karangmukti 9,168 195,650 68.84 29,770 10.47 - 0 - 0 58,800 20.69
Marengmang 728 16,600 91.23 1,596 8.77 - 0 - 0 - 0
Kaliangsana 849 18,100 81.97 1,581 7.16 - 0 - 0 2,400 10.87 Caracas 2,144 18,000 34.98 460 0.89 - 0 - 0 33,000 64.13 Ciruluk 9,579 80,000 46.40 2,418 1.40 - 0 90,000 52.20 - 0 Wanakerta 1,024 24,700 75.41 -213 -0.65 - 0 2,266 6.92 6,000 18.32 Gembor 45,348 138,920 34.04 2,513 0.62 264,900 64.91 - 0 1,800 0.44 Balingbing 3,679 35,090 56.11 760 1.22 50 0.08 - 0 26,640 42.60 Cidahu 6,605 122,150 80.40 3,970 2.61 - 0 - 0 25,800 16.98 Jabong 1,649 24,000 85.62 4,030 14.38 - 0 - 0 - 0 Sukamelang 6,636 123,970 88.95 -205 -0.15 - 0 - 0 15,600 11.19 Cisaga 11,614 122,300 70.20 1,705 0.98 20,800 11.94 15,000 8.61 14,400 8.27 Wanasari 4,927 20,000 20.30 -70 -0.07 - 0 - 0 78,600 79.77 Cibogo 2,600 62,200 99.68 200 0.32 - 0 - 0 - 0 Pada Asih 9,319 91,280 57.62 32,346 20.42 - 0 6,000 3.79 28,800 18.18 Sumur 5,948 77,575 56.71 -725 -0.53 750 0.55 10,000 7.31 49,200 35.96 Barang Batusari 3,129 65,300 80.26 16,060 19.74 - 0 - - 0
Regency 5,417 1,278,693 56.20 117,478 5.16 286,500 12.59 128,266 5.64 464,400 20.41 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 99
3.15.1.3. Indramayu
In the project affected area in Indramayu, the average households’ income affected is IDR 14,139,000 per year. 81.55% of this amount is made up from the agricultural sector. Table 90 describes the average farming income of household along the project affected villages in Indramayu Regency.
Table 90. Household Agricultural Income in Indramayu Regency
Source of Income/Per Year (In IDR. 1,000) Village Average Farming Husbandry Fisheries Land Lease Others IDR IDR % IDR % IDR % IDR % IDR % Bantarwaru 5,277 120,050 87.50 - 0 - 0 5,150 3.75 12,000 8.75
Sanca 16,107 136,000 56.29 - 0 - 0 - 0 105,600 43.71
Cikawung 34,230 332,000 96.99 - 0 - 0 10,300 3.01 - 0
Regency 14,139 588,050 81.55 - 0 - 0 15,450 2.14 117,600 16.31 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.15.1.4. Majalengka
In the project affected area in Majalengka, the average households’ income affected is IDR 3,935,000 per year. 64.95% of this amount is made up from the agricultural sector. Of the 24 project affected villages, the households’ income in 6 villages are mainly from farming (more than 80%), especially in Majasuka Village (100%). Only Pakubeureum village which has income from fisheries (10.12%). Table 91 describes the average farming income of household along the project affected villages in Majalengka Regency.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 100
Table 91. Household Agricultural Income in Majalengka Regency Source of Income/Per Year (In IDR. 1,000) Village Average Plantation Husbandry Fisheries Land Lease Others IDR IDR % IDR % IDR % IDR % IDR % Mekarjaya 10,943 113,000 73.76 1,800 1.17 - 0 4,800 3.13 33,600 21.93 Palasah 18,638 239,100 80.18 1,500 0.50 - 0 42,000 14.08 15,600 5.23 Sukawana 10,388 69,400 39.30 - 0 - 0 12,400 7.02 94,800 53.68
Kertawinangun 7,494 79,600 66.39 6,500 5.42 - 0 30,200 25.19 3,600 3
Babakan 7,560 112,800 99.47 - 0 - 0 - 0 600 0.53
Pakubeureum 9,881 126,500 80.01 - 0 16,000 10.12 15,000 9.49 600 0.38
Pasir Malati 10,760 33,900 21 - 0 - 0 7,500 4.65 120,000 74.35 Balida 7,855 187,200 76.88 - 0 - 0 45,500 18.69 10,800 4.44
Karanganyar 4,621 77,200 75.94 4,500 4.43 - 0 16,000 15.74 3,960 3.90
Mandapa 4,424 83,000 89.34 - 0 - 0 9,900 10.66 - 0 Salawana 556 8,000 53.33 4,600 30.67 - 0 - 0 2,400 16 Jatiwangi 90 - 0 - 0 - 0 1,800 100 - 0 Surawangi 2,021 29,400 76.56 - 0 - 0 - 0 9,000 23.44 Jatisura 750 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 18,000 100 Sutawangi 296 - 0 - 0 - 0 2,000 25 6,000 75 Beusi 840 18,000 85.71 - 0 - 0 - 0 3,000 14.29 Tegal Aren 261 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 6,000 100 Cisambeng 222 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 6,000 100 Majasuka 850 22,100 100 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0
Bongas Kulon 480 10,500 78.07 2,950 21.93 - 0 - 0 - 0
Bongas Wetan 728 14,000 76.92 - 0 - 0 - 0 4,200 23.08
Panjalin Lor 6,450 15,300 23.72 - 0 - 0 - 0 49,200 76.28
Panjalin Kidul 1,522 12,050 49.49 - 0 - 0 300 1.23 12,000 49.28
Garawangi 5,023 6,400 10.62 - 0 - 0 2 0 53,880 89.38
Regency 3,935 1,257,450 64.95 21,850 1.13 16,000 0.83 187,402 9.68 453,240 23.41 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 101
3.15.1.5. Cirebon
In the project affected area in Cirebon, the household income affected is IDR 9,008,000 per year. 57.52% of this amount is made up from the agricultural sector. Of the 10 project affected villages, the households’ income in 2 villages are mainly from farming (more than 80%), there are Ciwaringin and Galagamba Villages. Only Kempek Village which has income from fisheries (7.53%). Table 92 describes the average farming income of household along the project affected villages in Cirebon Regency.
Table 92. Household Agricultural Income in Cirebon Regency Source of Income/Per Year (In IDR. 1,000) Village Average Plantation Husbandry Fisheries Land Lease Others IDR IDR % IDR % IDR % IDR % IDR % Budur 8,434 111,100 69.33 5,400 3.37 - 0 12,000 7.49 31,750 19.81 Babakan 7,557 41,800 39.51 - 0 - 0 16,000 15.12 48,000 45.37 Ciwaringin 21,019 77,575 92.27 2,500 2.97 - 0 4,000 4.76 - 0 Galagamba 8,380 116,950 99.69 - 0 - 0 368 0.31 - 0 Walahar 22,145 48,600 36.58 1,470 1.11 - 0 - 0 82,800 62.32 Kedung 4,475 21,986 70.19 1,338 4.27 - 0 8,000 25.54 - 0 Bunder Kempek 9,707 66,020 42.51 39,950 25.72 11,700 7.53 34,400 22.15 3,240 2.09 Pegagan 60 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 120 100
Tegalkarang 8,062 12,600 19.54 - 0 - 0 7,497 11.62 44,400 68.84
Lungbenda 4,923 21,500 43.68 2,725 5.54 - 0 10,000 20.31 15,000 30.47
Regency 9,008 518,131 57.52 53,383 5.93 11,700 1.30 92,265 10.24 225,310 25.01 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 102
3.15.2. Non- Agricultural Income 3.15.2.1. Purwakarta
In Purwakarta Regency, the average households’ income from non-agriclutural sector is IDR 15,596,000 per year, with the highest amount of IDR 26,420,000 in Cikopo Village and the lowest amount of IDR 9,600,000 in Ciparungsari Village. The main non-agrictural income sources are merchants (48.69%), laborers (37.57%), civil services (8.18%) and other sectors (5.57%). There are community works only in Cikopo and Cinangka Villages, and no merchants in Cimahi and Kertamukti Villages. Table 93 describes the average non-farming income of the household in the project affected villages in Purwakarta Regency.
Table 93. Household Non- Agricultural Income in Purwakarta Regency
Source of Income/Per Year (In IDR. 1,000) Merchant Employees No Village Average Laborer Others /Entrepreneur /Civil Service IDR IDR % IDR % IDR % IDR % 1 Cikopo 26,420 28,800 6.06 386,400 81.25 60,000 12.62 360 0.08 2 Cinangka 11,541 135,600 69.11 39,000 19.88 21,600 11.01 - 0 3 Cimahi 15,600 42,000 53.85 - 0 - 0 36,000 46.15 4 Cisaat 9,943 24,600 35.34 37,800 54.31 - 0 7,200 10.34 5 Kertamukti 12,720 63,600 100 - 0 - 0 - 0 6 Ciparungsari 9,600 80,400 69.79 22,800 19.79 - 0 12,000 10.42
Regency 15,596 375,000 37.57 486,000 48.69 81,600 8.18 55,560 5.57 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.15.2.2. Subang
In Subang Regency, the average households’ income from non-agriclutural sector is IDR 14,949,000 per year, with the highest amount of IDR 35,660,000 in Cisaga Village and the lowest amount of IDR 7,882,000 in Wanasari Village. The main non-agrictural income sources are merchants (44.67%), laborers (31.62%), civil services (9.02%) and other sectors (14.69%). Table 94 describes the average non-farming income of the household in the project affected villages in Subang Regency.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 103
Table 94. Household Non- Agricultural Income in Subang Regency
Source of Income/Per Year (In IDR. 1,000) Merchant Employees No Village Average Laborer Others /Entrepreneur /Civil Service IDR IDR % IDR % IDR % IDR % 1 Wantilan 13,823 223,200 76.89 55,080 18.97 - 0.00 12,000 4.13 2 Sawangan 15,147 184,200 39.23 250,560 53.36 6,000 1.28 28,800 6.13 3 Karangmukti 17,141 192,600 36.25 236,400 44.49 30,000 5.65 72,360 13.62 4 Marengmang 11,694 105,360 36.04 168,996 57.80 - 0.00 18,000 6.16 5 Kaliangsana 11,580 187,200 62.18 49,080 16.30 15,600 5.18 49,200 16.34 6 Caracas 15,597 140,328 37.49 136,800 36.55 60,000 16.03 37,200 9.94 7 Ciruluk 20,860 177,600 47.30 173,880 46.31 - 0.00 24,000 6.39 8 Wanakerta 14,246 168,000 36.85 122,640 26.90 146,400 32.11 18,840 4.13 9 Gembor 18,777 6,000 3.55 106,596 63.08 18,000 10.65 38,400 22.72 10 Balingbing 17,831 4,800 1.58 180,240 59.46 51,600 17.02 66,480 21.93 11 Cidahu 10,200 89,400 38.11 22,800 9.72 75,600 32.23 46,800 19.95 12 Jabong 11,559 17,700 9.01 125,400 63.82 - 0.00 53,400 27.18 13 Sukamelang 13,864 86,800 29.81 146,400 50.29 - 0.00 57,936 19.90 14 Cisaga 35,660 31,500 5.89 419,400 78.41 - 0.00 84,000 15.70 15 Wanasari 7,882 115,596 73.33 26,796 17.00 15,252 9.67 - 0 16 Cibogo 10,335 64,680 26.08 91,800 37.01 26,760 10.79 64,800 26.12 17 Pada Asih 30,000 36,000 7.06 242,400 47.53 30,000 5.88 201,600 39.53 18 Sumur Barang 10,887 79,608 31.79 111,600 44.57 15,600 6.23 43,596 17.41 19 Batusari 11,264 74,700 25.51 137,760 47.04 75,600 25.81 4,800 1.64
Regency 14,949 1,985,272 31.62 2,804,628 44.67 566,412 9.02 922,212 14.69 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 104
3.15.2.3. Indramayu
In Indramayu Regency, the average households’ income from non-agriclutural sector is IDR 13,939,000 per year, with the highest amount of IDR 15,840,000 in Cikawung Village and the lowest amount of IDR 9,536,000 in Sanca Village. The main non-agrictural income sources are merchants (61.06%), civil services (24.56%), laborers (12.02%) and other sectors (2.36%). Table 95 describes the average non-farming income of the household in the project affected villages in Indramayu Regency.
Table 95. Household Non- Agricultural Income in Indramayu Regency
Source of Income/Per Year (In IDR. 1,000) Merchant Employees No Village Average Laborer Others /Entrepreneur /Civil Service
IDR IDR % IDR % IDR % IDR %
1 Bantarwaru 15,748 31,440 7.68 293,400 71.66 84,600 20.66 - 0
2 Sanca 9,536 46,800 32.72 60,240 42.11 36,000 25.17 - 0 3 Cikawung 15,840 7,200 4.55 80,400 50.76 54,000 34.09 16,800 10.61
Regency 13,939 85,440 12.02 434,040 61.06 174,600 24.56 16,800 2.36 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.15.2.4. Majalengka
In Majalengka Regency, the average households’ income from non-agriclutural sector is IDR 10,771,000 per year, with the highest amount of IDR 32,631,000 in Panjalin Kidul Village and the lowest amount of IDR 4,822,000 in Cisambeng Village. The main non-agrictural income sources are laborers (37.21%), merchants (36.75%), civil services (19.44%) and other sectors (6.6%). Table 96 describes the average non-farming income of the household in the project affected villages in Majalengka Regency.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 105
Table 96. Household Non- Agricultural Income in Majalengka Regency
Source of Income/Per Year (In IDR. 1,000) Merchant Employees No Village Average Laborer Others /Entrepreneur /Civil Service IDR IDR % IDR % IDR % IDR % 1 Mekarjaya 20,464 30,600 10.68 217,200 75.81 7,500 2.62 31,200 10.89 2 Palasah 7,215 38,640 33.47 37,200 32.22 3,600 3.12 36,000 31.19 3 Sukawana 7,535 67,800 52.93 48,300 37.70 12,000 9.37 - 0 4 Kertawinangun 16,995 21,600 7.94 119,580 43.98 126,600 46.56 4,140 1.52 5 Babakan 11,640 79,200 45.36 89,400 51.20 - 0 6,000 3.44 6 Pakubeureum 20,625 49,800 15.09 88,200 26.73 182,400 55.27 9,600 2.91 7 Pasir Malati 16,680 49,200 19.66 57,000 22.78 144,000 57.55 - 0 8 Balida 12,488 3,720 0.96 242,400 62.62 130,200 33.63 10,800 2.79 9 Karanganyar 14,973 76,200 23.13 138,600 42.08 87,600 26.59 27,000 8.20 10 Mandapa 14,114 96,600 32.59 38,400 12.96 147,000 49.60 14,400 4.86 11 Salawana 5,693 82,920 53.94 51,600 33.57 18,000 11.71 1,200 0.78 12 Jatiwangi 4,942 74,844 75.72 - 0 - 0 24,000 24.28 13 Surawangi 5,757 91,392 83.55 3,600 3.29 14,400 13.16 - 0 14 Jatisura 7,611 155,064 84.89 14,400 7.88 7,200 3.94 6,000 3.28 15 Sutawangi 5,998 93,600 57.80 31,440 19.41 6,000 3.71 30,900 19.08 16 Beusi 6,980 125,700 72.03 43,800 25.10 4,999 2.86 - 0 17 Tegal Aren 7,526 82,200 47.49 48,900 28.25 7,200 4.16 34,800 20.10 18 Cisambeng 4,822 105,000 80.65 10,800 8.29 14,400 11.06 - 0 19 Majasuka 11,285 81,600 27.81 62,400 21.27 97,800 33.33 51,600 17.59 20 Bongas Kulon 4,826 123,120 91.12 - 0 12,000 8.88 - 0 21 Bongas Wetan 7,020 137,700 78.46 30,600 17.44 7,200 4.10 - 0 22 Panjalin Lor 9,432 16,920 17.94 48,600 51.53 - 0 28,800 30.53 23 Panjalin Kidul 32,631 700 0.13 521,400 99.87 - 0 - 0 24 Garawangi 27,090 288,000 88.59 3,600 1.11 - 0 33,480 10.30
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 106 Regency 10,771 1,972,120 37.21 1,947,420 36.75 1,030,099 19.44 349,920 6.60 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.15.2.5. Cirebon
In Cirebon Regency, the average households’ income from non-agriclutural sector is IDR 19,187,000 per year, with the highest amount of IDR 27,262,000 in Kempek Village and the lowest amount of IDR 3,360,000 in Pegagan Village. The main non-agrictural income sources are merchants (43.51%), civil services (20.93%), laborers (17.94%) and other sectors (17.62%). Table 97 describes the average non-farming income of the household in the project affected villages in Cirebon Regency.
Table 97. Household Non- Agricultural Income in Cirebon Regency
Source of Income/Per Year (In IDR. 1,000) Merchant Employees No Village Average Laborer Others /Entrepreneur /Civil Service
IDR IDR % IDR % IDR % IDR %
1 Budur 18,361 41,664 11.94 257,400 73.78 24,600 7.05 25,200 7.22
2 Babakan 26,443 127,200 34.36 165,600 44.73 - 0 77,400 20.91 3 Ciwaringin 11,646 1,584 3.40 42,000 90.16 - 0 3,000 6.44
4 Galagamba - - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0
5 Walahar 17,000 - 0 13,200 12.94 - 0 88,800 87.06
6 Kedung Bunder 4,200 11,400 38.78 600 2.04 3,600 12.24 13,800 46.94
7 Kempek 27,262 36,192 8.30 51,200 11.74 307,600 70.52 41,200 9.45
8 Pegagan 3,360 - 0 6,720 100 - 0 - 0
9 Tegalkarang 22,050 - 0 137,400 77.89 6,000 3.40 33,000 18.71
10 Lungbenda 13,370 78,000 58.34 43,800 32.76 3,504 2.62 8,400 6.28
Regency 19,187 296,040 17.94 717,920 43.51 345,304 20.93 290,800 17.62 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 107
3.16. Household Expenditure 3.16.1. Purwakarta
In Purwakarta Regency, the average households’ expense is IDR 19,784,000 per year. The largest portion is food which made up 56.24%, followed by education (20.86%).
Table 98. Households Expenses in Purwakarta Regency Expenses Type Per Capita/Per Year Average (In IDR. Transport- Communica- 1,000) Food Education Health Electricity ation tion Other Village IDR % % % % % % % Cikopo 45,613 47.18 18.30 4.52 12.06 7.72 3.50 6.74 Cinangka 28,122 64.01 22.37 0.14 4.02 1.22 3.20 5.06 Cimahi 9,586 67.06 15.56 0.89 4.60 3.22 6.30 2.41 Cisaat 9,723 42.31 21.92 0.97 6.71 5.91 1.40 20.77 Kertamukti 8,890 56.56 28.08 0.88 2.60 5.52 6.40 0 Ciparungsari 16,772 60.32 18.91 0.30 13.63 2.56 1.20 3.07
Regency 19,784 56.24 20.86 1.28 7.27 4.36 3.65 6.34 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.16.2. Subang
In Subang Regency, the average households’ expense is IDR 38,440,000 per year. However, there is one village, Wanasari Village, where the households’ expenses is lower than the other villages (IDR 25,059,000). The largest portion of expenses is food which made up 50.36%, followed by education (13.03%), transportation (10.38%) and others (13.74%).
Table 99. Households Expenses in Subang Regency
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 108 Expenses Type Per Capita/Per Year Averag e Educatio Electricit Transport Communi Village (In Food Health Other n y -ation -cation IDR. 1,000) IDR % % % % % % %
Wantilan 32,429 55.82 15.07 5.01 3.44 4.71 2.67 13.28 Sawangan 47,899 38.76 11.17 9.44 2.8 17.79 3.87 16.18 Karangmukt i 56,243 60.2 11.03 4.21 2.73 6.26 3.55 12.02 Marengman g 46,394 43.97 9.64 16.14 5.01 8.06 2.79 14.39 Kaliangsana 27,206 46.57 15.25 7.85 4.89 4.44 1.64 19.37 Caracas 47,347 45.55 17.92 6.66 4.83 9.12 1.81 14.11 Ciruluk 40,998 49.74 14.55 5.44 6 11.21 3.91 9.16 Wanakerta 48,576 42.21 13.17 6.18 5.38 9.62 3.04 20.42 Gembor 28,955 44.4 13.66 9.71 2.85 15.99 6.1 7.29 Balingbing 35,815 47.39 17.9 1.89 4.08 5.57 4.6 18.58 Cidahu 38,555 57.8 9.18 0.67 3.31 10.67 2.67 15.68 Jabong 29,496 40.68 20.23 2.85 3.36 14.91 7.86 10.11 Sukamelang 31,949 61.57 18.88 0.89 4.3 9.12 2.58 2.67 Cisaga 29,925 57 13.2 1.83 3.61 17.44 4.3 2.63 Wanasari 25,059 64.9 1.15 3.18 8.52 6.38 1.88 13.99 Cibogo 25,786 55.18 4.79 4.72 4.94 12.73 3.42 14.22 Pada Asih 57,132 39.46 5.62 0.54 4.05 6.12 0.98 43.24 Sumur Barang 43,739 58.12 10.11 3.02 3.85 12.52 1.46 10.92 Batusari 36,860 47.44 25.39 1.64 3.77 14.58 4.39 2.79
Regency 38,440 50.36 13.05 4.84 4.30 10.38 3.34 13.74 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.16.3. Indramayu
In Indramayu Regency, the average households’ expense is IDR 42,234,000 per year. The largest portion of expenses is food which made up 52.6%, followed by education (18.94%) and electricity bills (12.08%).
Table 100. Households Expenses in Indramayu Regency
Village Expenses Type Per Capita/Per Year
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 109 Average (In IDR. Transport Communi 1,000) Food Education Health Electricity -ation -cation Other
IDR % % % % % % % Bantarwaru 49,691 40.98 11.05 0.72 27.73 6.77 5.37 7.37 Sanca 30,885 57.17 24.88 0 3.3 8.71 1.28 4.67 Cikawung 46,127 59.65 20.9 0 5.22 3.98 5.8 4.46
Regency 42,234 52.60 18.94 0.24 12.08 6.49 4.15 5.50 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.16.4. Majalengka
In Majalengka Regency, the average households’ expense is IDR 29,942,000 per year. The largest portion of expenses is food which made up 63.31%, followed by education (9.7%).
Table 101. Households Expenses in Majalengka Regency
Expenses Type Per Capita/Per Year Average (In IDR. Transport Communi 1,000) Food Education Health Electricity -ation -cation Other
Village IDR % % % % % % %
Mekarjaya 32,713 52.58 11.62 2.62 4.45 8.78 4.22 15.74
Palasah 28,020 63.32 14.54 3.47 4.16 6.55 2.97 5
Sukawana 32,738 68.58 17.80 0 3.52 5.56 3.69 0.84
Kertawinangun 48,280 50.24 11.23 0 5.90 7.81 3.18 21.63
Babakan 26,641 71.04 13 0.64 3.93 7.08 4.31 0
Pakubeureum 43,757 58.77 18.26 0.51 3.25 3.59 2.90 12.73
Pasir Malati 37,897 57.22 16.79 0.45 4.13 2.67 2.45 16.29
Balida 42,862 58.62 12.61 0.84 3.66 7.78 5.52 10.97
Karanganyar 35,758 60.17 3.16 1.53 3.97 3.36 1.92 25.89
Mandapa 40,776 50.62 16.19 1.56 2.81 10.45 3.15 15.22
Salawana 23,481 55.36 7.73 1.62 5.24 4.88 4.68 20.48
Jatiwangi 14,986 74.02 4.68 2.06 3.86 3.05 1.41 10.93
Surawangi 14,002 87.44 2.02 1.21 4.68 1.93 1.92 0.81
Jatisura 22,333 69.53 3.92 2.49 4.74 1.78 1.92 15.63
Sutawangi 22,738 71.06 5.71 0.94 5.14 2.15 0.75 14.25
Beusi 22,660 73.54 4.34 2.69 4.15 3.21 2.76 9.31
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 110 Tegal Aren 23,185 74.56 4.5 0.65 4.92 3.89 0.22 11.27
Cisambeng 20,471 75.02 1.04 0.42 5.93 2.52 0.84 14.24
Majasuka 33,672 67.37 8.47 1.48 4.46 5.17 1.78 11.26
Bongas Kulon 20,284 65.09 1.21 2.04 4.71 3.24 2.79 20.92
Bongas Wetan 26,186 64.54 10.33 2.08 4 3.60 2.95 12.5
Panjalin Lor 25,426 62.70 9.57 0.64 4.96 10.42 5.36 6.35
Panjalin Kidul 51,134 48.15 17.7 1.03 10.31 5.82 4.29 12.71
Garawangi 28,602 39.90 16.4 3.60 5.10 4.18 1.92 28.91
Regency 29,942 63.31 9.70 1.44 4.67 4.98 2.83 13.08 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.16.5. Cirebon
In Cirebon Regency, the average households’ expense is IDR 44,072,000 per year. The largest portion of expenses is food which made up 51.25%, followed by education (12.38%).
Table 102. Households Expenses in Cirebon Regency Expenses Type Per Capita/Per Year Average (In IDR. Transport Communi 1,000) Food Education Health Electricity -ation -cation Other Village IDR % % % % % % % Budur 51,091 55.89 19.63 0.33 3.99 4.28 3.18 12.69 Babakan 26,561 71.48 11.42 0.97 5 3.64 2.58 4.91 Ciwaringin 107,093 27.13 2.58 0.48 2.38 2.84 1.86 62.72 Galagamba 46,453 41.42 7.54 1.76 3.41 13.6 2.97 29.29 Walahar 30,651 74.11 11.75 0 4.68 3.57 5.9 0 Kedung Bunder 34,161 65.86 10.09 0.09 4.63 10.26 1.49 7.57 Kempek 38,145 50.87 19.56 2.12 3.61 6.57 5.44 11.84 Pegagan 31,560 31.78 8.61 0.12 2.85 7.63 1.55 47.47 Tegalkarang 49,920 45.43 8.32 3.35 3.07 30.5 3.56 5.77 Lungbenda 25,087 48.52 24.33 0.15 5.48 5.1 3.38 13.05
Regency 44,072 51.25 12.38 0.94 3.91 8.80 3.19 19.53 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
Figure 43. Telephone and Internet Rental in Sukamelang Sub District, Subang District, Subang Regency
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 111
Figure 44. Post Office in Gembor Village, Pegaden District, Subang Regency
3.17. Social Interaction
This chapter presents the condition of social interaction of the community in the project affected regencies. Some of the aspects to be discussed regarding the social interaction, including average frequency of social interaction with other regency, activities during travel outside the regency, and community perception towards the migrants.
This chapter presents the condition of social interaction of the community in the project affected regencies. Some of the aspects to be discussed regarding the social interaction, including average frequency of social interaction with other regency, activities during travel outside the regency, community perception towards the migrants.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 112 Tabel 103. Frequency of Social Interaction with Other Regency Frequency of Going Outside The Regency per Year Regency Often Seldom Only Once Never Purwakarta 1.17 2.17 1.17 2.83 Subang 4.05 3.05 1.63 5.95 Indramayu 6.00 3.67 0.33 5.00 Majalengka 2.88 2.13 2.75 6.83 Cirebon 3.60 3.40 1.80 4.70 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
The Table 103 above presents the average frequency of respondent going outside the village, in which it is identified that most of them never travel outside the regency. However it is also identified that there are some of the family member, particularly in the young ages are working outside the regency. The following Table 104 shows that the major activities of the family member during travel out of the regency is related to economic reason.
Tabel 104. Activities During Travel Out of The Regency Activities During Travel Out of The Regency (%) Regency Occupation Education Other Purwakarta 33.33 0 66.67 Subang 59.06 4.72 36.22 Indramayu 58.33 33.33 8.33 Majalengka 78.40 8 13.60 Cirebon 64.66 0 35.34 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
The presence of the project will potentially increase the number of migrants within the affected area, which further might impact to the social interaction condition within the community. The following Table 98 shows that most of the community in the five projects affected regencies are open to the presence of migrants.
Tabel 105. Openness Towards The Migrants Openness towards The Migrants (%) The Presence of Regency Open Neutral Migrants Not Necessary
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 113 Purwakarta 5.83 1.83 0.17 Subang 8.95 5.26 0.63 Indramayu 9.00 5.67 0.33 Majalengka 6.92 7.67 0.42 Cirebon 11.10 1.90 0.50 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.17.1. Length to Stay 3.17.1.1. Purwakarta
All of the respondents in Purwakarta Regency stated that they have lived in their villages for more than 25 years, with an average of 33.46 years. The average longest length of stay of the villagers occurs in Cimahi Village, followed by Ciparungsari and Cikopo Villages. The respondents in the other three villages have lived in their villages for less than 30 years. Table 106 shows the average number of years the villagers have lived in their villages in Purwakarta Regency.
Table 106. Average Length of Stay of the villagers in the Project Affected Area in Purwakarta Regency No Village Average Length to stay (year) 1 Cikopo 33.31 2 Cinangka 25.8 3 Cimahi 45.33 4 Cisaat 26.75 5 Kertamukti 27.25 6 Ciparungsari 42.3
Regency 33.46 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.17.1.2. Subang
All of the respondents in Subang Regency stated that they have lived in their villages for more than 17 years, with an average of 35.23 years. The average shortest length of stay (less than 30 years) of the villagers occurs in Wanasari, Pada Asih, Sumurbarang and Batusari Villages. Table 107 shows the average number of years the villagers have lived in their villages in Subang Regency.
Table 107. Average Length of Stay of the villagers in the Project Affected Area in Subang Regency
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 114 No Village Average Length to stay (year) 1 Wantilan 30.87 2 Sawangan 40.4 3 Karangmukti 33.53 4 Marengmang 30.67 5 Kaliangsana 39.64 6 Caracas 36.8 7 Ciruluk 38.8 8 Wanakerta 34.47 9 Gembor 43 10 Balingbing 34.87 11 Cidahu 42.2 12 Jabong 68 13 Sukamelang 31.38 14 Cisaga 34.86 15 Wanasari 17.4 16 Cibogo 30.33 17 Pada Asih 29.63 18 Sumur Barang 27.06 19 Batusari 25.53
Regency 35.23 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.17.1.3. Indramayu
All of the respondents in Indramayu Regency stated that they have lived in their villages for more than 35 years, with an average of 39.24 years. The average shortest length of stay (less than 40 years) of the villagers occurs in Bantarwaru and Sanca Villages. Table 98 shows the average number of years the villagers have lived in their villages in Indramayu Regency.
Table 108. Average Length of Stay of the villagers in the Project Affected Area in Indramayu Regency
No Village Average Length to stay (year) 1 Bantarwaru 36.4 2 Sanca 37.6
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 115 3 Cikawung 43.73
Regency 39.24 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.17.1.4. Majalengka
All of the respondents in Majalengka Regency stated that they have lived in their villages for more than 25 years, with an average of 40.58 years. The average shortest length of stay (less than 30 years) of the villagers occurs in Panjalin Kidul and Salawana Villages. Table 99 shows the average number of years the villagers have lived in their villages in Majalengka Regency.
Table 109. Average Length of Stay of the villagers in the Project Affected Area in Majalengka Regency
No Village Average Length to stay (year) 1 Mekarjaya 45.27 2 Palasah 50.33 3 Sukawana 48.53 4 Kertawinangun 42.13 5 Babakan 42.13 6 Pakubeureum 47 7 Pasir Malati 36.93 8 Balida 32 9 Karanganyar 48.07 10 Mandapa 49.2 11 Salawana 25.27 12 Jatiwangi 56.07 13 Surawangi 48.79 14 Jatisura 30.88 15 Sutawangi 47.67 16 Beusi 36.13 17 Tegal Aren 45.27 18 Cisambeng 35.67 19 Majasuka 33.67 20 Bongas Kulon 36.33 21 Bongas Wetan 28.73 22 Panjalin Lor 38.33
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 116 23 Panjalin Kidul 28.2 24 Garawangi 41.33
Regency 40.58 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.17.1.5. Cirebon
All of the respondents in Cirebon Regency stated that they have lived in their villages for more than 30 years, with an average of 42.61 years. Table 110 shows the average number of years the villagers have lived in their villages in Cirebon Regency.
Table 110. Average Length of Stay of villagers in the Project Affected Area in Cirebon Regency
No Village Average Length to stay (year) 1 Budur 46.64 2 Babakan 41.53 3 Ciwaringin 49.88 4 Galagamba 51.38 5 Walahar 45.87 6 Kedung Bunder 42.13 7 Kempek 40.71 8 Pegagan 31.75 9 Tegalkarang 44.07 10 Lungbenda 32.1
Regency 42.61 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.17.2. Travelling Outside the Regency 3.17.2.1. Purwakarta
The respondents in Purwakarta Regency seldom travel outside their villages. Some of them have never even travelled outside the regency, especially the respondents from Cikopo, Cinangka and Ciparungsari Villages. Table 101 shows how often the local villagers in the project affected area in Purwakarta Regency travel outside the regency.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 117 Table 112. Frequency of the communities living in the Project Affected Area in Purwakarta Regency travel outside the regency Frequency of the community travelling outside the regency Often Seldom >2x per 1 – 2x per Only No Village year year Once Never 1 Cikopo 27.27 9.09 9.09 54.55 2 Cinangka 20 20 10 50 3 Cimahi 16.67 50 33.33 0 4 Cisaat 0 75 0 25 5 Kertamukti 0 66.67 33.33 0 6 Ciparungsari 10 20 20 50
Regency 12.32 40.13 17.63 29.92 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.17.2.2. Subang
The respondents in Subang Regency moderately never travel outside their villages. Up to 40% of respondents from 10 villages stated that they have never travelled outside the regency. Table 113 shows how often the local villagers in the project affected area in Subang Regency travel outside the regency.
Table 113. Frequency of the communities living in the Project Affected Area in Subang Regency travel outside the regency. Frequency of the community travelling outside the regency Often Seldom >2x per 1 – 2x per Only No Village year year Once Never 1 Wantilan 33.33 0 0 66.67 2 Sawangan 13.33 33.33 13.33 40 3 Karangmukti 6.67 20 6.67 66.67 4 Marengmang 0 33.33 20 46.67 5 Kaliangsana 13.33 26.67 26.67 33.33 6 Caracas 13.33 13.33 20 53.33 7 Ciruluk 14.29 21.43 28.57 35.71 8 Wanakerta 40 13.33 6.67 40 9 Gembor 44.44 11.11 33.33 11.11 10 Balingbing 40 33.33 0 26.67 11 Cidahu 15.79 36.84 10.53 36.84 12 Jabong 60 20 10 10
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 118 13 Sukamelang 53.33 26.67 6.67 13.33 14 Cisaga 53.33 13.33 0 33.33 15 Wanasari 13.33 26.67 6.67 53.33 16 Cibogo 33.33 13.33 0 53.33 17 Pada Asih 18.75 12.50 12.50 56.25 18 Sumur Barang 37.50 12.50 18.75 31.25 19 Batusari 40 20 0 40
Regency 28.64 20.41 11.60 39.36 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.17.2.3. Indramayu
The respondents in Indramayu Regency often travel outside their villages. 40% of respondents stated that they often travel outside of the regency. Table 114 shows how often the local villagers in the project affected area in Indramayu Regency travel outside the regency.
Table 114. Frequency of the communities in the Project Affected Area in Indramayu Regency travel outside the regency. Frequency of the community travelling outside the regency Often Seldom >2x per 1 – 2x per Only No Village year year Once Never 1 Bantarwaru 40 26.67 6.67 26.67 2 Sanca 20 26.67 0 53.33 3 Cikawung 60 20 0 20
Regency 40 24.44 2.22 33.33 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.17.2.4. Majalengka
The respondents in Majalengka Regency moderately never travel outside their villages. However, up to 40% of the respondents in 20 villages stated that they have never travelled outside the regency. Table 115 shows how often the local villagers in the project affected area in Majalengka Regency travel outside the regency.
Table 115. Frequency of the communities in the Project Affected Area in Majalengka Regency travel outside the regency.
No Village Frequency of the community
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 119 travelling outside the regency Often >2x Seldom per 1 – 2x per Only year year Once Never 1 Mekarjaya 26.67 13.33 13.33 46.67 2 Palasah 20 13.33 13.33 53.33 3 Sukawana 33.33 20 6.67 40 4 Kertawinangun 35.71 14.29 7.14 42.86 5 Babakan 20 6.67 0 73.33 6 Pakubeureum 33.33 20 6.67 40 7 Pasir Malati 53.33 33.33 0 13.33 8 Balida 40 33.33 0 26.67 9 Karanganyar 40 20 0 40 10 Mandapa 46.67 20 6.67 26.67 11 Salawana 7.14 14.29 50 28.57 12 Jatiwangi 11.11 11.11 11.11 66.67 13 Surawangi 0 7.69 23.08 69.23 14 Jatisura 0 6.25 50 43.75 15 Sutawangi 7.14 14.29 21.43 57.14 16 Beusi 6.67 6.67 26.67 60 17 Tegal Aren 0 20 20 60 18 Cisambeng 6.67 13.33 20 60 19 Majasuka 0 13.33 46.67 40 20 Bongas Kulon 0 6.67 53.33 40 21 Bongas Wetan 6.67 0 46.67 46.67 22 Panjalin Lor 6.67 13.33 6.67 73.33 23 Panjalin Kidul 60 13.33 13.33 13.33 24 Garawangi 6.67 13.33 6.67 73.33
Regency 19.49 14.50 18.73 47.29 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.17.2.5. Cirebon
The respondents in Cirebon Regency seldom travel outside their villages. 32.31% of the respondents stated that they have never travelled outside the regency. Repondents from Budur, Babakan, Kedung Bunder and Kempek Villages are the highest number that stated never travelled outside regency. Table 116 shows how often the local villagers in the project affected area in Cirebon Regency travel outside the regency.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 120 Table 116. Frequency of the communities in the Project Affected Area in Cirebon Regency travel outside the regency
Frequency of the community travelling outside the regency Seldom Often 1 – 2x per No Village >2x per year year Only Once Never 1 Budur 13.33 20 6.67 60 2 Babakan 20 6.67 20 53.33 3 Ciwaringin 50 18.75 6.25 25 4 Galagamba 42.86 28.57 7.14 21.43 5 Walahar 13.33 26.67 33.33 26.67 6 Kedung Bunder 6.67 26.67 20 46.67 7 Kempek 40 0 13.33 46.67 8 Pegagan 40 60 0 0 9 Tegalkarang 26.67 53.33 6.67 13.33 10 Lungbenda 20 40 10 30
Regency 27.29 28.07 12.34 32.31 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.17.3. Percentage of Family Members Living in other Regencies and Their Reasons 3.17.3.1. Purwakarta
Approximately 5.47% of the respondents in Purwakarta Regency have family members or relatives living in other regencies. Only the villagers in Cimahi and Cisaat Villages do not have relatives in other regencies. The main reason for the local communities in Purwakarta living in other regencies is the other reason (55.56%). The employment opportunities made up 11.11%.
Table 106 shows the percentage of the communities’ family members living in other regencies and their reasons. These communities are defined as the local villagers who are living the project affected area in Purwakarta Regency.
Table 117. Percentage of the communities’ family members living in other regencies and their reasons Percentage of the communities’ family No Village Reason members living in other regencies (%) (%)
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 121 Employment Education Other / Job 1 Cikopo 2.13 0 0 100 2 Cinangka 6.67 0 0 100 3 Cimahi 0 0 0 0 4 Cisaat 0 0 0 0 5 Kertamukti 11.76 0 0 100 6 Ciparungsari 12.24 66.67 0 33.33
Regency 5.47 11.11 0 55.56 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.17.3.2. Subang
Approximately 12.1% of the respondents in Subang Regency stated that they have family members or relatives living in other regencies. Only the villagers in Cidahu and Jabong Villages do not have relatives in other regencies. The reasons for the original communities in Subang living in other regencies are employment opportunities (59.06%), education (4.72%) and other reason (36.22%).
Table 118 shows the percentage of the communities’ family members living in other regencies and their reasons. These communities are defined as the local villagers who are living the project affected area in Subang Regency.
Table 118. Percentage of the communities’ family members living in other regencies and their reasons. Percentage of the Reason communities’ family (%) No Village members living in other regencies Employment Education Other (%) / Job 1 Wantilan 14.81 62.50 0 37.50 2 Sawangan 4.29 33.33 0 66.67 3 Karangmukti 17.14 50 0 50 4 Marengmang 13.21 71.43 0 28.57 5 Kaliangsana 10.71 83.33 0 16.67 6 Caracas 6.67 50 25 25 7 Ciruluk 8.16 50 0 50
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 122 8 Wanakerta 11.76 37.50 25 37.50 9 Gembor 17.65 50 0 50 10 Balingbing 28.85 46.67 6.67 46.67 11 Cidahu 0 0 0 0 12 Jabong 0 0 0 0 13 Sukamelang 15 33.33 0 66.67 14 Cisaga 6.82 66.67 0 33.33 15 Wanasari 27.27 75 0 25 16 Cibogo 10.53 100 0 0 17 Pada Asih 11.11 42.86 0 57.14 18 Sumur Barang 16.42 81.82 0 18.18 19 Batusari 10.71 66.67 33.33 0
Regency 12.10 59.06 4.72 36.22 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.17.3.3. Indramayu
Approximately 6.86% of the respondents in Indramayu Regency stated that they have family members or relatives living in other regencies. The reasons for the original communities in Indramayu living in other regencies are employment opportunities (58.33%), followed by education (33.33%) and other reason (8.33%). In Sanca Village, the only reason for living in other regencies is employment opportunities (100%).
Table 119 shows the percentage of the communities’ family members living in other regencies and their reasons. These communities are defined as the local villagers who are living the project affected area in Indramayu Regency.
Table 119. Percentage of the communities’ family members living in other regencies and their reasons. Percentage of the Reason No Village communities’ family (%)
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 123 Employment Education Other / Job
1 Bantarwaru 8.51 25 50 25 2 Sanca 4.35 100 0 0 3 Cikawung 8.47 60 40 0
Regency 6.86 58.33 33.33 8.33 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.17.3.4. Majalengka
Approximately 9.41% of the respondents in Majalengka Regency stated that they have family members or relatives living in other regencies. The main reasons for the original communities in Majalengka living in other regencies are employment opportunities (78.4%), followed by education (8%) and other reason (13.6%).
Table 120 shows the percentage of the communities’ family members living in other regencies and their reasons. These communities are defined as the local villagers who are living the project affected area in Majalengka Regency.
Table 120. Percentage of the communities’ family members living in other regencies and their reasons. Percentage of the Reason communities’ family (%) No Village members living in Employment other regencies Education Other / Job (%) 1 Mekarjaya 7.41 75 0 25 2 Palasah 12.77 100 0 0 3 Sukawana 8.77 100 0 0 4 Kertawinangun 12.50 42.86 42.86 14.29 5 Babakan 12.73 71.43 0 28.57 6 Pakubeureum 4.92 66.67 33.33 0 7 Pasir Malati 10.91 66.67 33.33 0 8 Balida 15 88.89 11.11 0 9 Karanganyar 6.25 100 0 0
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 124 10 Mandapa 26 69.23 15.38 15.38 11 Salawana 10.71 83.33 0 16.67 12 Jatiwangi 12.96 100 0 0 13 Surawangi 6.82 100 0 0 14 Jatisura 8.47 100 0 0 15 Sutawangi 1.64 100 0 0 16 Beusi 3.17 100 0 0 17 Tegal Aren 1.96 100 0 0 18 Cisambeng 7.69 100 0 0 19 Majasuka 1.82 100 0 0 20 Bongas Kulon 10.64 80 0 20 21 Bongas Wetan 6.12 66.67 33.33 0 22 Panjalin Lor 13.11 100 0 0 23 Panjalin Kidul 4.48 0 0 100 24 Garawangi 19.40 53.85 0 46.15
Regency 9.41 78.40 8 13.60 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.17.3.5. Cirebon
Approximately 16.96% of the respondents in Cirebon Regency stated that they have family members or relatives living in other regencies. The main reasons for the original communities in Cirebon living in other regencies are employment opportunities (64.66%), followed by and other reason (35.34%). None of the villagers in Cirebon lives in other regencies for education reason.
Table 121 shows the percentage of the communities’ family members living in other regencies and their reasons. These communities are defined as the local villagers who are living the project affected area in Cirebon Regency.
Table 121. Percentage of the communities’ family members living in other regencies and their reasons. Percentage of the Reason No Village communities’ family (%)
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 125 Employment Education Other / Job
1 Budur 16 91.67 0 8.33 2 Babakan 14.67 100 0 0 3 Ciwaringin 17.11 61.54 0 38.46 4 Galagamba 15.07 90.91 0 9.09 5 Walahar 19.80 75 0 25 6 Kedung Bunder 8.08 12.50 0 87.50 7 Kempek 20.34 25 0 75 8 Pegagan 10 0 0 100 9 Tegalkarang 36.07 59.09 0 40.91 10 Lungbenda 11.11 60 0 40
Regency 16.96 64.66 0 35.34 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.17.4. Attitude Towards In-Migrants 3.17.4.1. Purwakarta
Approximately 81.54% of the respondents in Purwakarta stated that they welcome visitors/migrants, while the remaining said they are neutral for the idea (17.18%) and 1.28% said they do not need welcome visitors/migrants. In Cimahi, Cisaat and Kertamukti, all of the respondents said that they welcome visitors/migrants. In other words, the potential risk for conflict to occur regarding not employing the local communities is considered low and will not have significant effect on the relationship between the local communities and visitors/migrants.
Table 122. Attitude of the Project Affected Community Towards Visitors in Purwakarta Regency
Attitude Towards Visitors Do not need to No Village Welcome Neutral welcome 1 Cikopo 69.23 23.08 7.69 2 Cinangka 60 40 0 3 Cimahi 100 0 0 4 Cisaat 100 0 0 5 Kertamukti 100 0 0 6 Ciparungsari 60 40 0
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 126 Regency 81.54 17.18 1.28 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.17.4.2. Subang
Approximately 60.92% of the respondents in Subang stated that they welcome visitors/migrants, while 35.06% of them are neutral towards visitors/migrants and 4.01% said they do not need to welcome visitors/migrants. The respondents who said they do not need to welcome visitors/migrants are from Wantilan, Karangmukti, Cirasak, Ciruluk, Banglimbing, Cidahu, Sukamelang, Sumur Barang and Batusari Villages. In other words, there is a potential risk for conflict to occur regarding employing people from outside Subang.
Table 123. Attitude of the Project Affected Community Towards Visitors in Subang Regency
Attitude Towards Visitors Do not need to No Village Welcome Neutral welcome 1 Wantilan 73.33 20 6.67 2 Sawangan 66.67 33.33 0 3 Karangmukti 46.67 40 13.33 4 Marengmang 53.33 46.67 0 5 Kaliangsana 33.33 66.67 0 6 Caracas 60 33.33 6.67 7 Ciruluk 60 26.67 13.33 8 Wanakerta 66.67 33.33 0 9 Gembor 88.89 11.11 0 10 Balingbing 60 33.33 6.67 11 Cidahu 55 35 10 12 Jabong 63.64 36.36 0 13 Sukamelang 53.33 40 6.67 14 Cisaga 26.67 73.33 0 15 Wanasari 86.67 13.33 0 16 Cibogo 66.67 33.33 0 17 Pada Asih 75 25 0 18 Sumur Barang 75 18.75 6.25 19 Batusari 46.67 46.67 6.67
Regency 60.92 35.06 4.01 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.17.4.3. Indramayu
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 127
Approximately 60% of the respondents in Subang stated that they welcome visitors/migrants, while 37.78% of them are neutral towards visitors/migrants and 2.22% said they do not need to welcome visitors/migrants. The respondents who said they do not need to welcome visitors/migrants are from Sanca village. In other words, there is a potential risk for conflict to occur regarding employing people from outside Indramayu.
Table 124. Attitude of the Project Affected Community Towards Visitors in Indramayu Regency
Attitude Towards Visitors Do not need to No Village Welcome Neutral welcome 1 Bantarwaru 93.33 6.67 0 2 Sanca 33.33 60 6.67 3 Cikawung 53.33 46.67 0
Regency 60 37.78 2.22 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.17.4.4. Majalengka
Approximately 46.08% of the respondents in Majalengka stated that they welcome visitors/migrants, while 51.14% of them are neutral towards visitors/migrants and 2.78% said they do not need to welcome visitors/migrants. The respondents who said they do not need to welcome visitors/migrants are from Palasah, Kertawinangun, Karanganyer, Salawana, Jatiwangi, Jatisura and Sutawanan Villages. In other words, there is a potential risk for conflict to occur regarding employing people from outside Majalengka.
Table 125. Attitude of the Project Affected Community Towards Visitors in Majalengka Regency
Attitude Towards Visitors Do not need to No Village Welcome Neutral welcome 1 Mekarjaya 60 40 0 2 Palasah 66.67 26.67 6.67 3 Sukawana 60 40 0 4 Kertawinangun 53.33 40 6.67 5 Babakan 60 40 0 6 Pakubeureum 73.33 26.67 0 7 Pasir Malati 53.33 46.67 0
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 128 8 Balida 46.67 53.33 0 9 Karanganyar 60 33.33 6.67 10 Mandapa 73.33 26.67 0 11 Salawana 20 73.33 6.67 12 Jatiwangi 60 20 20 13 Surawangi 14.29 78.57 7.14 14 Jatisura 25 68.75 6.25 15 Sutawangi 53.33 40 6.67 16 Beusi 6.67 93.33 0 17 Tegal Aren 33.33 66.67 0 18 Cisambeng 20 80 0 19 Majasuka 53.33 46.67 0 20 Bongas Kulon 13.33 86.67 0 21 Bongas Wetan 26.67 73.33 0 22 Panjalin Lor 53.33 46.67 0 23 Panjalin Kidul 40 60 0 24 Garawangi 80 20 0
Regency 46.08 51.14 2.78 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.17.4.5. Cirebon
Approximately 82.71% of the respondents in Cirebon stated that they welcome visitors/migrants, while 12.63% of them are neutral towards visitors/migrants and 4.67% said they do not need to welcome visitors/migrants. The respondents who said they do not need to welcome visitors/migrants are from Kedung Bunder, Kempek, Pegagan and Tegalkarang Villages. In other words, there is a potential risk for conflict to occur regarding employing people from outside Cirebon.
Table 126. Attitude of the Project Affected Community Towards Visitors in Cirebon Regency
Attitude Towards Visitors Do not need to No Village Welcome Neutral welcome 1 Budur 86.67 13.33 0 2 Babakan 80 20 0 3 Ciwaringin 93.75 6.25 0 4 Galagamba 100 0 0 5 Walahar 73.33 26.67 0 6 Kedung Bunder 80 13.33 6.67
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 129 7 Kempek 73.33 20 6.67 8 Pegagan 80 0 20 9 Tegalkarang 60 26.67 13.33 10 Lungbenda 100 0 0
Regency 82.71 12.63 4.67 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.17.5. Attitude Towards Successful In-Migrants 3.17.5.1. Purwakarta
Approximately 67.93% of the respondents in Purwakarta are happy seeing successful migrants, while 30.41% of them are neutral and 1.67% are not happy seeing successful migrants. The respondent who is not happy seeing successful migrants is living in Ciparungsari Village. As there is only 1 respondent stating that he/she is not happy seeing successful migrants, the risk for potential social conflict regarding successful migrants/visitors should be able to be handled, should it occur.
Table 127. Attitude of the project affected community towards successful migrants in Purwakarta Regency
Attitude towards successful migrants No Village Happy Neutral Not Happy 1 Cikopo 69.23 30.77 0 2 Cinangka 60 40 0 3 Cimahi 83.33 16.67 0 4 Cisaat 25 75 0 5 Kertamukti 100 0 0 6 Ciparungsari 70 20 10
Regency 67.93 30.41 1.67 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.17.5.2. Subang
Approximately 39.53% of the respondents in Subang are happy seeing successful migrants, while 58.13% of them are neutral and 2.34% are not happy seeing successful migrants. The respondents who are not happy seeing successful migrants are found in Karangmukti, Caracas, Gembor, Balingbing and Wanasari Villages. Hence, the risk of potential social conflict regarding successful migrants to occur will increase after the toll road has been built.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 130 Table 128. Attitude of the project affected community towards successful migrants in Subang Regency
Attitude towards successful migrants No Village Happy Neutral Not Happy 1 Wantilan 66.67 33.33 0 2 Sawangan 60 40 0 3 Karangmukti 60 33.33 6.67 4 Marengmang 66.67 33.33 0 5 Kaliangsana 33.33 66.67 0 6 Caracas 60 33.33 6.67 7 Ciruluk 60 33.33 6.67 8 Wanakerta 33.33 66.67 0 9 Gembor 44.44 44.44 11.11 10 Balingbing 33.33 60 6.67 11 Cidahu 25 75 0 12 Jabong 63.64 36.36 0 13 Sukamelang 20 80 0 14 Cisaga 6.67 93.33 0 15 Wanasari 20 73.33 6.67 16 Cibogo 40 60 0 17 Pada Asih 18.75 81.25 0 18 Sumur Barang 12.50 87.50 0 19 Batusari 26.67 73.33 0
Regency 39.53 58.13 2.34 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.17.5.3. Indramayu
Approximately 73.33% of the respondents in Indramayu are happy seeing successful migrants, while 22.22% of them are neutral and 4.44% are not happy seeing successful migrants. The respondents who are not happy seeing successful migrants are found in Bantarwaru Village. In other words, the risk of potential social conflict with regards to employing people from outside the regency will not create a significant impact of the relationship between the local community and the migrants.
Table 129. Attitude of the project affected community towards successful migrants in Indramayu Regency
Attitude towards successful migrants No Village Happy Neutral Not Happy 1 Bantarwaru 86.67 0 13.33
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 131 2 Sanca 80 20 0 3 Cikawung 53.33 46.67 0
Regency 73.33 22.22 4.44 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.17.5.4. Majalengka
Approximately 68.95% of the respondents in Majalengka are happy seeing successful migrants, while 28.23% of them are neutral and 2.8% are not happy seeing successful migrants. The respondents who are not happy seeing successful migrants are found in Kertawinangun, Mandapa, Salawana, Jatiwangi and Sutawangi Villages. Hence, the risk for potential social conflict regarding successful migrants to occur will increase after the toll road has been built.
Table 130. Attitude of the project affected community towards successful migrants in Majalengka Regency
Attitude towards successful migrants No Village Happy Neutral Not Happy 1 Mekarjaya 86.67 13.33 0 2 Palasah 66.67 33.33 0 3 Sukawana 80 20 0 4 Kertawinangun 46.67 33.33 20 5 Babakan 80 20 0 6 Pakubeureum 86.67 13.33 0 7 Pasir Malati 33.33 66.67 0 8 Balida 66.67 33.33 0 9 Karanganyar 46.67 53.33 0 10 Mandapa 33.33 60 6.67 11 Salawana 73.33 13.33 13.33 12 Jatiwangi 53.33 33.33 13.33 13 Surawangi 85.71 7.14 7.14 14 Jatisura 62.50 37.50 0 15 Sutawangi 93.33 0 6.67 16 Beusi 100 0 0 17 Tegal Aren 80 20 0 18 Cisambeng 73.33 26.67 0 19 Majasuka 100 0 0 20 Bongas Kulon 66.67 33.33 0 21 Bongas Wetan 86.67 13.33 0 22 Panjalin Lor 53.33 46.67 0
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 132 23 Panjalin Kidul 33.33 66.67 0 24 Garawangi 66.67 33.33 0
Regency 68.95 28.25 2.80 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
1.1.1.1. Cirebon
Approximately 52.32% of the respondents in Cirebon are happy seeing successful migrants, while 44.35% of them are neutral and 3.33% are not happy seeing successful migrants. The respondents who are not happy seeing successful migrants are found in Kebun Bunder, Pegagan and Tegalkarang Villages. Hence, the risk for potential social conflict regarding successful migrants to occur will increase after the toll road has been built.
Table 131. Attitude of the project affected community towards successful migrants in Cirebon Regency
Attitude towards successful migrants No Village Happy Neutral Not Happy 1 Budur 33.33 66.67 0 2 Babakan 53.33 46.67 0 3 Ciwaringin 81.25 18.75 0 4 Galagamba 28.57 71.43 0 5 Walahar 73.33 26.67 0 6 Kedung Bunder 80 13.33 6.67 7 Kempek 20 80 0 8 Pegagan 20 60 20 9 Tegalkarang 53.33 40 6.67 10 Lungbenda 80 20 0
Regency 52.32 44.35 3.33 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.17.6. Desire to Progress/Advance 3.17.6.1. Purwakarta
Approximately 98.33% of the respondents in Purwakarta stated that they want to progress, while 1.67% said they do not know, especially the villagers in Ciparungsari Village. The toll road, together with other infrastructures that will be built will facilitate the local communities’ desire to progress/advance.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 133
Table 132. Desire to Progress/Advance of the Project Affected Communities in Purwakarta Regency
Desire to Progress/Advance Would Like to Do not No Village Progress/Advance Neutral Know 1 Cikopo 100 0 0 2 Cinangka 100 0 0 3 Cimahi 100 0 0 4 Cisaat 100 0 0 5 Kertamukti 100 0 0 6 Ciparungsari 90 0 10
Regency 98.33 0 1.67 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.17.6.2. Subang
Approximately 94.74% of the respondents in Subang stated that they want to progress, while 2.32% of them are neutral and 2.95% said they do not know. The toll road, together with other infrastructures that will be built will facilitate the local communities’ desire to progress/advance.
Table 133. Desire to Progress/Advance of the Project Affected Communities in Subang Regency
Desire to Progress/Advance Would Like to Do not No Village Progress/Advance Neutral Know 1 Wantilan 100 0 0 2 Sawangan 100 0 0 3 Karangmukti 100 0 0 4 Marengmang 100 0 0 5 Kaliangsana 100 0 0 6 Caracas 86.67 0 13.33 7 Ciruluk 93.33 0 6.67 8 Wanakerta 86.67 6.67 6.67 9 Gembor 77.78 11.11 11.11 10 Balingbing 100 0 0 11 Cidahu 100 0 0 12 Jabong 81.82 0 18.18 13 Sukamelang 100 0 0 14 Cisaga 86.67 13.33 0
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 134 15 Wanasari 93.33 6.67 0 16 Cibogo 100 0 0 17 Pada Asih 100 0 0 18 Sumur Barang 93.75 6.25 0 19 Batusari 100 0 0
Regency 94.74 2.32 2.95 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.17.6.3. Indramayu
Approximately 97.78% of the respondents in Indramayu stated that they want to progress, while 2.22% said they do not know. The toll road, together with other infrastructures that will be built will facilitate the local communities’ desire to progress/advance.
Table 134. Desire to Progress/Advance of the Project Affected Communities in Indramayu Regency
Desire to Progress/Advance Would Like to Do not No Village Progress/Advance Neutral Know 1 Bantarwaru 93.33 0 6.67 2 Sanca 100 0 0 3 Cikawung 100 0 0
Regency 97.78 0 2.22 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.17.6.4. Majalengka
Approximately 91.94% of the respondents in Majalengka stated that they want to progress, while 3.06% of them are neutral and 5% said they do not know. The toll road, together with other infrastructures that will be built will facilitate the local communities’ desire to progress/advance.
Table 135. Desire to Progress/Advance of the Project Affected Communities in Majalengka Regency
Desire to Progress/Advance Would Like to Do not No Village Progress/Advance Neutral Know 1 Mekarjaya 100 0 0 2 Palasah 100 0 0 3 Sukawana 100 0 0
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 135 4 Kertawinangun 73.33 6.67 20 5 Babakan 100 0 0 6 Pakubeureum 93.33 6.67 0 7 Pasir Malati 80 20 0 8 Balida 100 0 0 9 Karanganyar 93.33 6.67 0 10 Mandapa 86.67 6.67 6.67 11 Salawana 93.33 0 6.67 12 Jatiwangi 73.33 6.67 20 13 Surawangi 92.86 0 7.14 14 Jatisura 93.75 0 6.25 15 Sutawangi 80 6.67 13.33 16 Beusi 80 0 20 17 Tegal Aren 93.33 0 6.67 18 Cisambeng 86.67 13.33 0 19 Majasuka 100 0 0 20 Bongas Kulon 86.67 0 13.33 21 Bongas Wetan 100 0 0 22 Panjalin Lor 100 0 0 23 Panjalin Kidul 100 0 0 24 Garawangi 100 0 0
Regency 91.94 3.06 5 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.17.6.5. Cirebon
Approximately 97.33% of the respondents in Cirebon stated that they want to progress, while 2% of them are neutral and less than 1% said they do not know. The toll road, together with other infrastructures that will be built will facilitate the local communities’ desire to progress/advance.
Table 136. Desire to Progress/Advance of the Project Affected Communities in Cirebon Regency
Desire to Progress/Advance Would Like to Do not No Village Progress/Advance Neutral Know 1 Budur 86.67 13.33 0 2 Babakan 93.33 6.67 0 3 Ciwaringin 100 0 0 4 Galagamba 100 0 0 5 Walahar 93.33 0 6.67
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 136 6 Kedung Bunder 100 0 0 7 Kempek 100 0 0 8 Pegagan 100 0 0 9 Tegalkarang 100 0 0 10 Lungbenda 100 0 0
Regency 97.33 2 0.67 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.18. Community Organization and Social Institution 3.18.1. Role of Local Leaders
All respondents stated that there are a number of local leaders that host them for a consultation and asking advices of several day-to-day problems. Most of respondents also stated that the local leaders are very helpful in their efforts to find solutions for their day to day problems. The highest satisfaction level, in consecutive order is achieved by local leaders in Purwakarta, Subang, Majalengka and Cirebon Regency.
The communities’ satisfaction level for consultation sessions hosted by the local leaders in Indramayu Regency has been very low, as stated by 50% of the respondents. This means that the poor households in Indramayu Regency do not appreciate the role of the local leaders as much. This is significantly different with what happens in Purwakarta, where the role of local leaders is very dominant for several problems in the family and community matters.
Table 137. Project Affected Communities’ Perception on Household Consultations Hosted by Local Leaders
Regency Figure Participation (%) No Village Less Not Very Helpful Do not know Helpful Helpful
1. Purwakarta 100 0 0 100
2. Subang 98.68 0 0 1.32
3. Indramayu 50 0 0 50
4. Majalengka 84.18 0 0 15.82
5. Cirebon 85.82 0 3.73 10.45
Average 83.74 0 0.75 35.52 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 137 3.18.1.1. Purwakarta
All of the respondents in Purwakarta stated that the local leaders are very helpful in solving their day- to-day problems. This means that engaging local leaders in decision makings is very important.
Table 138. Project Affected Communities’ Perception on Household Consultations Hosted by Local Leaders in Purwakarta Regency Local Leader Participation (%) No Village Very Less Not Do not Helpful Helpful Helpful know 1 Cikopo 100 0 0 0 2 Cinangka 100 0 0 0 3 Cimahi 100 0 0 0 4 Cisaat 100 0 0 0 5 Kertamukti 100 0 0 0 6 Ciparungsari 100 0 0 0
Regency 100 0 0 0 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.18.1.2. Subang
98.25% of the respondents in Subang stated that the local leaders are very helpful in solving their day-to-day problems, while 1.75% of them in Sukamelang, Cisaga and Wanasari Villages do not know what the roll of the local leaders is. This means that the local leaders in these three villages are not dominant figures and decision makings cannot be undertaken based on engaging only the local leaders.
Table 139. Project Affected Communities’ Perception on Household Consultations Hosted by Local Leaders in Subang Regency
Figure Participation (%) No Village Less Not Very Helpful Do not know Helpful Helpful 1 Wantilan 100 0 0 0 2 Sawangan 100 0 0 0 3 Karangmukti 100 0 0 0 4 Marengmang 100 0 0 0 5 Kaliangsana 100 0 0 0
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 138 6 Caracas 100 0 0 0 7 Ciruluk 100 0 0 0 8 Wanakerta 100 0 0 0 9 Gembor 100 0 0 0 10 Balingbing 100 0 0 0 11 Cidahu 100 0 0 0 12 Jabong 100 0 0 0 13 Sukamelang 91.67 0 0 8.33 14 Cisaga 83.33 0 0 16.67 15 Wanasari 91.67 0 0 8.33 16 Cibogo 100 0 0 0 17 Pada Asih 100 0 0 0 Sumur 18 Barang 100 0 0 0 19 Batusari 100 0 0 0
Regency 98.25 0 0 1.75 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.18.1.3. Indramayu
50.8% of the respondents in Indramayu stated that the local leaders are very helpful in solving their day-to-day problems, while 49.2% of them do not know what the roll of the local leaders is. This means that the local leaders in these three villages are not dominant figures and decision makings cannot be undertaken based on engaging only the local leaders.
Table 140. Project Affected Communities’ Perception on Household Consultations Hosted by Local Leaders in Indramayu Regency Figure Participation (%) No Village Very Less Not Do not Helpful Helpful Helpful know 1 Bantarwaru 75 0 0 25 2 Sanca 30.77 0 0 69.23 3 Cikawung 46.67 0 0 53.33
Regency 50.81 0 0 49.19 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.18.1.4. Majalengka
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 139 83.8% of the respondents in Majalengka stated that the local leaders are very helpful in solving their day-to-day problems, while 16.2% of them in Mekarjaya, Palasah, Kertawinangun, Babakan, Pakubeureum, Pasir Malati, Balida and Karanganyar Villages do not know what the roll of the local leaders is. This means that the local leaders in those villages are not dominant figures and decision makings cannot be undertaken based on engaging only the local leaders.
Table 141. Project Affected Communities’ Perception on Household Consultations Hosted by Local Leaders in Majalengka Regency
Figure Participation (%) No Village Very Less Not Do not Helpful Helpful Helpful know 1 Mekarjaya 66.67 0 0 33.33 2 Palasah 46.15 0 0 53.85 3 Sukawana 100 0 0 0 4 Kertawinangun 76.92 0 0 23.08 5 Babakan 42.86 0 0 57.14 6 Pakubeureum 78.57 0 0 21.43 7 Pasir Malati 91.67 0 0 8.33 8 Balida 64.29 0 0 35.71 9 Karanganyar 53.85 0 0 46.15 10 Mandapa 63.64 0 0 36.36 11 Salawana 100 0 0 0 12 Jatiwangi 100 0 0 0 13 Surawangi 100 0 0 0 14 Jatisura 100 0 0 0 15 Sutawangi 100 0 0 0 16 Beusi 100 0 0 0 17 Tegal Aren 100 0 0 0 18 Cisambeng 100 0 0 0 19 Majasuka 100 0 0 0 20 Bongas Kulon 100 0 0 0 21 Bongas Wetan 100 0 0 0 22 Panjalin Lor 100 0 0 0 23 Panjalin Kidul 33.33 0 0 66.67 24 Garawangi 93.33 0 0 6.67
Regency 83.80 0 0 16.20 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 140
3.18.1.5. Cirebon
86.57% of the respondents in Cirebon stated that the local leaders are very helpful in solving their day-to-day problems, while 3.67% of them said the local leaders are not helpful and 9.76% of them in Budur, Babakan, Galagamba, Kedung Bunder, Kempek, Tegalkarang and Lungbenda Villages do not know what the roll of the local leaders is. This means that the local leaders in those villages are not dominant figures and decision makings cannot be undertaken based on engaging only the local leaders.
Table 142. Project Affected Communities’ Perception on Household Consultations Hosted by Local Leaders in Cirebon Regency
Figure Participation (%) No Village Very Less Not Do not Helpful Helpful Helpful know 1 Budur 73.33 0 0 26.67 2 Babakan 86.67 0 0 13.33 3 Ciwaringin 100 0 0 0 4 Galagamba 85.71 0 0 14.29 5 Walahar 100 0 0 0 Kedung 6 Bunder 93.33 0 6.67 0 7 Kempek 86.67 0 0 13.33 8 Pegagan 100 0 0 0 9 Tegalkarang 60 0 20 20 10 Lungbenda 80 0 10 10
Regency 86.57 0 3.67 9.76 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.18.2. Consultation to Local Leaders 3.18.2.1. Purwakarta
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 141
Table 143 shows the matters that the local communities consulted with the local leaders in Purwakarta.
Table 143. Matters that the Local Communities Consulted with the Local Leaders in Purwakarta Regency Type/matters to be consulted (%) Debt- Land Family loan conflict No Village matters matters matters Other 1 Cikopo 58.33 8.33 33.33 0 2 Cinangka 71.43 28.57 0 0 3 Cimahi 83.33 0 0 16.67 4 Cisaat 75 0 25 0 5 Kertamukti 75 0 25 0 6 Ciparungsari 33.33 44.44 22.22 0
Regency 66.07 13.56 17.59 2.78 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.18.2.2. Subang
Table 144 shows the matters that the local communities consulted with the local leaders in Subang.
Table 144. Matters that the Local Communities Consulted with the Local Leaders in Subang Regency Type/matters to be consulted (%) Debt- Land Family loan conflict No Village matters matters matters Other 1 Wantilan 73.33 0 13.33 13.33 2 Sawangan 86.67 6.67 6.67 0 3 Karangmukti 80 0 20 0 4 Marengmang 60 6.67 20 13.33 5 Kaliangsana 73.33 0 20 6.67 6 Caracas 93.33 6.67 0 0 7 Ciruluk 80 0 13.33 6.67
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 142 8 Wanakerta 0 0 0 100 9 Gembor 0 0 0 100 10 Balingbing 0 0 0 100 11 Cidahu 93.33 0 0 6.67 12 Jabong 0 0 0 100 13 Sukamelang 0 0 0 100 14 Cisaga 14.29 0 0 85.71 15 Wanasari 0 0 0 100 16 Cibogo 0 0 0 100 17 Pada Asih 0 0 0 100 Sumur 18 Barang 12.50 0 0 87.50 19 Batusari 0 0 0 100
Regency 35.09 1.05 4.91 59.94 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
3.18.2.3. Indramayu
Table 145 shows the matters that the local communities consulted with the local leaders in Indramayu.
Table 145. Matters that the Local Communities Consulted with the Local Leaders in Indramayu Regency Type/matters to be consulted (%) Debt- Land Family loan conflict No Village matters matters matters Other 1 Bantarwaru 45.45 0 0 54.55 2 Sanca 26.67 0 0 73.33 3 Cikawung 27.27 0 0 72.73
Regency 33.13 0 0 66.87 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 143 3.18.2.4. Majalengka
Table 146 shows the matters that the local communities consulted with the local leaders in Majalengka.
Table 146. Matters that the Local Communities Consulted with the Local Leaders in Majalengka Regency Type/matters to be consulted (%) Debt- Land Family loan conflict No Village matters matters matters Other 1 Mekarjaya 44.44 0 0 55.56 2 Palasah 81.82 0 0 18.18 3 Sukawana 87.50 0 0 12.50 4 Kertawinangun 45.45 0 0 54.55 5 Babakan 70 0 0 30 6 Pakubeureum 50 0 0 50 7 Pasir Malati 80 10 0 10 8 Balida 25 0 0 75 9 Karanganyar 75 8.33 0 16.67 10 Mandapa 33.33 0 0 66.67 11 Salawana 85.71 7.14 0 7.14 12 Jatiwangi 90 0 0 10 13 Surawangi 92.86 0 0 7.14 14 Jatisura 100 0 0 0 15 Sutawangi 93.33 0 0 6.67 6 Beusi 100 0 0 0 17 Tegal Aren 80 6.67 13.33 0 18 Cisambeng 85.71 14.29 0 0 19 Majasuka 100 0 0 0 20 Bongas Kulon 86.67 13.33 0 0 21 Bongas Wetan 92.86 0 7.14 0 22 Panjalin Lor 27.27 0 0 72.73 23 Panjalin Kidul 36.36 0 0 63.64 24 Garawangi 50 0 16.67 33.33
Regency 71.39 2.49 1.55 24.57 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 144
3.18.2.5. Cirebon
Table 147 shows the matters that the local communities consulted with the local leaders in Cirebon.
Table 147. Matters that the Local Communities Consulted with the Local Leaders in Cirebon Regency Type/matters to be consulted (%) Debt- Land Family loan conflict No Village matters matters matters Other 1 Budur 20 0 0 80 2 Babakan 66.67 0 0 33.33 3 Ciwaringin 75 0 25 0 4 Galagamba 40 0 0 60 5 Walahar 87.50 0 0 12.50 6 Kedung Bunder 80 0 0 20 7 Kempek 64.29 7.14 0 28.57 8 Pegagan 100 0 0 0 9 Tegalkarang 25 0 0 75 10 Lungbenda 66.67 0 0 33.33
Regency 62.51 0.71 2.50 34.27 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
Figure 45. Village Hall in Babakan Village, Kalijati District, Majalengka Regency
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 145
Figure 46. Village Hall in Sumurbarang Village, Cibogo District, Subang Regency
Figure 47. Village Government office in Jabong Village, Pegaden Barat District, Subang Regency
Figure 48. Village Government office in Mandapa Village, Dawuan District, Majalengka Regency
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 146
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 147
2. Community Knowledge and Expectation
2.1. Source of Information
This section will give analysis on community knowledge related to the project as identified from group discussion and in-depth interview with the affected community, local figures, and local government official.
The Cikampek – Palimanan Toll Road Development plan is already widely known by the community surrounding the affected area as identified from the group discussion and in-depth interview, in which community obtain the information mostly from social interaction within the neighborhood. The following Table shows other source of information regarding the project in which community also obtain the information from local government. Other sources of information include media and Non-Governmental Organisation (NGO).
The local government is the main source for information regarding land acquisition and general information on the project. Socialisation meeting was conducted by Government Land Acquisition Team and Committee (TPT and P2T).
The communities in Subang, Majalengka and Cirebon regencies obtain information about the proposed toll road project from the media, neighbourhood, local government and NGO. In Indramayu, the local community obtains the information regarding the project from the neighbourhood and the local government. The community has limited knowledge on the potential impact from the project as a result of limited information about the project that is obtained by the community.
Tabel 146 Source of Information Regarding The Project
Regency % % % % % NGO Other Media Government Government Neighborhood
Purwakarta 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 Subang 3 15.79 76 20.16 80 25.72 1 50.00 1 100.00 Indramayu 0 0.00 30 7.96 19 6.11 0 0.00 0 0.00 Majalengka 9 47.37 23.90 63.40 18.30 58.84 1 50.00 0 0.00 Cirebon 7 36.84 32 8.49 29 9.32 0 0.00 0 0.00
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 148 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
Communities’ knowledge regarding The Project is associated with various issues. Below are some of the main issues raised: 1. The project is one package of the development plan from government which will be in-line with the development of industries, including construction of medium and big scale factories in the surrounding area of the affected regencies along the toll road. This issue was raised as in community knowledge this Project will increase employment opportunities when it begin to commence, specifically for those who are affected by the Project directly. 2. The issue above however not equally known by the community. Some of them even stated that in their knowledge the Project would not have significant impact to their life, as they think that from the project preparation phase to operation phase will take quite a long time, and the employment or business opportunities cannot be experienced by every affected villager in the community. 3. The general impression of the land acquisition is that it is not transparent and disregards the aspirations of the community, especially regarding land prices. A lot of information related to land acquisitions are mainly related to price, payment period and returning the certificates of the lands that are decided not to be acquired. Another thing that remains unclear is on how to channel complaints if there are problems arise along the way. This is because the organization on the village-level governance and the Regency cannot provide as clear information in many ways as expected by the community. 4. Regarding the land acquisition, the issue raised is that the information shared to public by the TPT/P2T was not as adequate and clear as expected, specifically related to the compensation appraisal and determination, the timing of payment, the compensation scheme of the parcels of land that are still processed whether to be acquired and the complaints procedure. Regarding the lands that will not be acquired, the TPT/P2T has not given confirmation when the certificates of these parcels of land will be returned to the owner.
Regarding the development process in Cikopo - Palimanan toll road construction plans, it is very reasonable if people know or get information about the toll road from neighbors and local government either from regency officials and village officials. The rest of the respondents receive the information about the toll road construction from various printed and electronic media, from non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and other sources.
The diverse sources of information may cause many interpretations regarding the toll road construction project. The information includes information about other events that goes with it and the impact on local residents. The information that developed in the community is that along with plans to build toll roads, there will also be a large scale industrial development around the
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 149 new toll road. Another piece of information that spread around in the communities is the negative or positive impacts of the project to the communities.
2.2. Community Perception towards The Potential Impact of the Project
It is identified from available documentation that public consultation was already conducted for the project through socialization to inform several key messages, including (1) information regarding the construction and operation plan of The Cikampek (Cikopo) – Palimanan Toll Road (Project); (2) land acquisition plan; (3) procedure for submitting complaints regarding the land acquisition process; (4) the consignment process to resolve the complaints; and the potential impact of the project to the affected community, which include economic development of the affected area as well as to employment and business opportunities. There was not enough information provided to the affected community regarding the potential negative impact caused by the project.
The following table shows community high expectation towards the employment opportunity (approximately 35.96%). This should be considered by the project to develop mitigation measures related to the further potential impact if the demand of employment is higher than project capacity.
Tabel 147. Perception towards Potential Impact of the Project Potential Impact of The Project (%) Opportunity Infrastructure Human Regency Economic Employment to become Facility Resource Other growth opportunity supplier Improvement Development Purwakarta 2.13 40.4 14.89 40.43 0 2.13 Subang 3.72 18.6 7.85 35.12 0.41 34.3 Indramayu 0 48.9 4.44 28.89 0 17.78 Majalengka 5.83 29.2 14.44 40.56 0.83 9.17 Cirebon 6.67 22.2 14.81 34.81 0.74 20.74 Rate 3.67 31.9 11.28 35.96 0.39 16.82 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
As shown in the table above, the most potentially affected sectors are the employment opportunity (35.96%) and the economic growth (31.9%). These two sectors have large potential impact throughout all the regencies. The highest percentages of these sectors occur in Purwakarta, Indramayu and Majalengka. On the other hand, the potential impact is considered
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 150 low in Subang and Cirebon regencies. Other potentially impacted sectors include infrastructure and facility and opportunity to become supplier.
Other issues that were raised during the baseline survey is related to the change of livelihood, the increased number of migration which will be impacted to economic competition with local community, health problem particularly during construction, and loss of access to public infrastructure due to land dislocation.
2.2.1. Livelihood
Based on the baseline data, the main livelihood in all of the regencies are mainly from agricultural sector. The other livelihoods include plantations, livestock, fisheries, services and trade sectors. The toll road development project is expected to impact the socio-economic aspects as follows:
1. In areas where agriculture, industry and services are dominant, the construction of toll roads do not have much impact on livelihood patterns. This is because the land acquired for the construction of toll roads will not be significant compared to the total area of agricultural land in the local community. Hence, the agricultural activities will keep running as usual, the farmers will not be much impacted by the toll road. Similarly, businesses in the industrial and service sectors will not be affected as much, but rather will further strengthen their efforts. What may even occur in the industry and services sector is the increase of labor absorption as a result of the domino effect of the toll road construction.
2. In the area of large scale agriculture land activities (not the land itself) and agriculture in general, the toll road development will disturb the livelihoods of the residents, especially for those who worked as croppers, laborers and peasant women where the land cultivation is the only arena for their economic activity. The issue that emerges here is the lost of employment opportunities, but because the agriculture sector is still the main livelihood of most villages, lost of employment will only be temporary because they can carry out other activities in other area. This is because the character of farm laborers or croppers in the villages, where the study is conducted, does not remain at one location but is a laborer at several employers.
3. In areas where there is no dominant economic sector (agriculture, industry and services), competition is high for the employment opportunities. In such areas the characteristics of the working poor are "chaotic". They do not have a definite income so that the presence of the toll road will create more certainty on workspace for them.
The potential impacts on livelihood include:
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 151 (1) Labor will be much absorbed for the rough workers both women and men (2) Business competition will increase amongst community especially with regard to the influx migrants. (3) The access of poor and vulnerable groups will be very limited due to this toll road construction project. (4) The increasing of agriculture activities around the toll road, because of shift of land function from agriculture to medium and big scale industry (5) Reduction of agricultural land because of the toll road construction most likely will reduce the income of the agriculture and agricultural services sectors. Villagers should try to get additional income by working as rough workers in toll road construction (6) The increasing of industrial and service activities, including house rental (7) The increasing of land price along the easier accessibility of the villages. (8) The increasing number of rough workers in the construction sector, services and trading (9) The construction of new factories will convert the agriculture land , it will make the farmer and farming labor to change their livelihood. (10) Displacement of farm workers / farmers or factory workers to toll road workers (11) Even the existence of the toll road which is believed to be followed by the entry of other industries will increase the prices of agricultural commodities.
2.2.2. In-Migration
It has become a common phenomenon, where a large project is built; there will be population movements, especially the productive labors will try to get closer to their workplace. By living in the area around the project site it will make it easier for them to quickly obtain information and get hired. It is very likely that the job seekers have started looking for boarding places in the villages surrounding the toll road.
In most villages along the toll road, house rental and leasing is a common business and even has become a source of considerable income. In addition, the workforce in industry and services sectors in Java comprise of mostly ‘circular’ workers who migrate from one place to another in a pattern that has also become a culture for the workers.
With regards to the issue of migration in the villages around the toll road project, there are some tendencies, as described below: 1. Working opportunity in the construction sector not only particularly for the need of the Project, but also for the regional development in general (the possibility of new factories construction along the toll road). This will also encourage business opportunity for local community.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 152 2. Economic competition: employment opportunity, land purchase, service needs, and neighborhood safety. In-migrants from outside the regencies often add large amounts of complex problems in an area. The growth of slums will be faster; social conflicts will be more frequent and increasing vulnerability to the environmental safety. This phenomenon often occurs in areas where local labor and local institutions are not included in the process of recruitment of manpower. 3. The increased number of in-migrants needs supporting infrastructures.
2.2.3. Health and Safety Issue
On the more prominent issue is the issue of health effects of air pollution and environmental health. The base line data has identified that the areas around the proposed toll road shows symptoms of chronic diseases and common diseases. Therefore this issue needs to be anticipated more seriously. The problem becomes more complex if in the process of constructing the toll road bypass village streets and waterways/irrigation where it may cause potential threat to the region around it and widely feared that this would lead to new diseases.
Another issue that may occur is the safety, especially associated with the heavy equipments. Almost in every village, the issues for the heavy equipment security indicate that the villages around the toll road route are prone to criminal actions and theft on the goods, carpentry equipment and machinery.
The health and safety issues identified are outline below: (1) Health infrastructures and utility facilities have sufficiently developed and annually improved. (2) Health issues caused by the noises, pollutions and various waste due to the increasing number of population. (3) Water puddle because of restrained water by toll road. This can lead to diseases. (4) The community security, which is related to the high number of migrant workers during the toll road construction and also the safety of working equipments. (5) At the health sector, there will not be any significant impact, however there will be health problem if the toll road construction will restrain the water flow and damage the environment sanitation systems. (6) Health issues concerned are related to air pollution, environmental damage and noises during the project implementation. (7) Crime issues are expected to be found around the exit lane, because of the crowded in- out flow of goods and human
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 153 (8) Security must be improved, especially against theft of equipments. Security recruitment of local people is recommended.
2.2.4. Working opportunity
As explained in earlier sections on influx livelihood and migration, the large-scale toll road development has a positive impact on the changes in livelihoods and influx migration, because it creates many employment opportunities and business opportunities. There are three categories of employment opportunities that are expected from the construction of the toll road, which is: 1. Recruitment of manpower for construction projects, 2. The need for manpower in similar sectors to anticipate or compensate the increasing opportunities due to rapid development of the region. 3. The emergence of services businesses for the workers and the migrant workers such as home rental services, cleaning services, food services and others.
Referring to the previous explanation, the job opportunity aspects will rise with the following trends: (1) In areas where there is no dominant economic sector (agriculture, industry and services), competition is high for employment opportunities (2) Toll road project opens opportunities for women in service sector. (3) Working opportunities for local community will increase as a result of the toll road construction and the possibility of new factories construction around the toll road. (4) Working opportunities will be more available in the supporting sectors in particular to supply the workers’ needs as food catering and any other essential needs. (5) There are community’s efforts to create their own working opportunities. (6) The toll road construction will support working opportunity at service sector, trading, and construction sector. The sector outside of toll road project will become the main opportunity for local people. (7) New business opportunities for women will be widely available especially in the service sector, related to the needs of toll road workers, such as food stalls. (8) Employment opportunities for local men will also be available enough so that it can suppress the rate of migration. (9) Opportunity for local entrepreneurs to become a managing partner of the toll road project. (10) Job opportunities in toll road projects and business opportunities to serve the toll road workers.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 154 2.2.5. Access to Infrastructure
The local access to streets and roads for the people to go to work or study and the irrigation systems will often be cut-off to accommodate the toll road project. The impacts of the missing local access and infrastructures are: 1. Disruption on access to agricultural land will result in a decrease in land productivity and land value. 2. Disruption on facilities will result in reduced supply of irrigation water to the fields or a new possibility of puddles on one side of the road beyond the toll road. 3. Access to working rice fields and socio-cultural facilities will be interrupted 4. The interrupted irrigation facilities influence the water supplies to rice fields and make land becomes unproductive. 5. Travelling between the villages / inter-hamlets will be difficult. 6. Irrigation facilities are disrupted so water availability becomes disturbed then fields become unproductive. If there is no irrigation development, flood is feared to occur. 7. The disturbed irrigation canals or drawn by the toll road should be held back.
2.3. Community Expectation Towards The Project
Community Expectation is related to some public survices for the poor. At least there are five aspects of community expectations, related to water facility, place of worship facility, sport facility, school facility and business support.
Generally, in the five regencies, the top priority of the five aspects is the business supporting aspect, followed by the clean water facility and place for worship facility. In Purwakarta Regency, the clean water facility and the place for worship facility are the highest expectations from the local community. In Cirebon, the expectations for the five aspects are similar.
Table 148. Communities’ Expectation on Public Facilities to be Built in Project Affected Regencies
Communities’ Expectation on Public Facilities to be Built (%)
Regency Place of No Water Sport School Business Village worship Other Facility facility facility Support facility 1 Purwakarta 25.53 19.15 0 4.26 4.26 46.81 2 Subang 4.96 9.92 0.83 5.79 16.94 61.57 3 Indramayu 8.89 4.44 2.22 0 24.44 60
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 155 4 Majalengka 10 7.5 1.67 6.39 25 49.44 5 Cirebon 11.11 13.33 5.19 10.37 25.93 34.07 Rate 10.12 9.51 1.98 5.36 14.36 50.37 Source: Primary Data, Baseline Survey, October 2011
There are some fundamental problems that will arise due to the development of the toll road, especially for the poor communities. Some of the problems that are questioned are as follows:
1. With regards to land acquisition problems, there are basic issues such as: (i) Incompletion of payments on land acquisition, where the communities hope that this will be completed immediately (ii) Lands that are not acquired for the toll road becomes cultivated land, but most lands become isolated by the toll road and in many cases the land becomes unavailable for farm land or cannot be utilized into certain purposes. This type of land is expected to be acquired directly by the government. 2. Regarding the remaining land along the toll road, the residents expect the government to buy it or the government must build an alternative function for this road such as rest area or other facilities. 3. Regarding the lack of socialization on various issues relating to the toll road construction, the poor villagers have problems and are confused with the loss of access to the agriculture land, access to social culture facility, access to irrigation system because there is a lack of transparency and lack of explanation for the land where the land use will change. 4. Local businessmen specializing in the construction sector, also hopes to be involved in the construction of the toll road. 5. The village road and village streets that are cut off also cut off the hamlets and resulted in the increase cost to socialize. There should be solutions to replace the roads and streets (and also the irrigation system) in the form of real answers such as to propose to build water tunnels and build causeways above the toll road. 6. Regarding employment opportunities, local residents wished to be recruited as the worker or labor during and after the construction of the toll road. It is expected to reduce social conflicts that are likely to rise regarding the issue of recruiting. 7. Besides the above problem, the local villagers wish for clean water systems and free medical facilities.
Real needs from the communities’ expectations must be studied case by case. Based on the communities’ ideas, there are some kinds of communities’ expectations that refer to their real need after toll project construction, such as: (1) Local businessmen expect to have partnership cooperation during the toll road construction.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 156 (2) The construction of crossing highways between villages (2) Women expect to be involved in the work at Rest Area. (3) Health services for the community and clean water system to be built, due to the disconnection of the service from the main village (4) Construction and maintenance of public facility especially if there are any damages caused by the project implementation. (5) Village youth group (Karang Taruna) and other social institutions in the village are being involved in the security team. (6) Constructing drainage and water canals (7) Constructing cross-road bridges between villages which connect villages. (8) The villagers would get compensation on the environmental impact of the toll road (such as dusts and noises).
2.4. Summary by Cluster and Regency
General findings as described in section 4.1. are general treatises of the findings in the regencies which also derived from the cases in each village. This section formulates the summary of the community view and Potential Impact of the Project based on each regency. The diversity of rural villages along the highway resulted in an extensive analysis. In order to simplify it, the data will need to be re-categorized based on a particular approach. The approach used so that the reader can understand the general characteristics of each regency before tracing village per-village.
Of the 62 villages scattered in 5 (five) regencies, the study was divided into ten clusters, which consist of: 1. Purwakarta Regency, with 6 villages, divided into two clusters, i.e. clusters of villages with livelihood from agriculture, services and industry, and Clusters of villages with livelihood from agriculture followed by industry. 2. Subang Regency, from 18 villages divided into three clusters, namely: cluster where the main livelihood are farmers and croppers, private sector employees / factory workers, cluster where agricultural villages have shifted significantly into industrial villages and clusters of villages with a dominant mining industry. 3. Indramayu Regency, divided into two clusters, i.e. clusters which are dominated by agricultural livelihoods and cluster where agricultural livelihoods is not dominant. 4. Majelengka Regency, consisting of two clusters, i.e clusters where agriculture is the
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 157 dominant livelihood and cluster where agriculture livelihood is not dominant. 5. Cirebon Regency, only one cluster; cluster of croppers community.
2.4.1. Purwakarta Cluster 1
In regards to the potential impact of the toll road project, the point of views of the community in Purwakarta Cluster 1 (only Kopo Village) are: Community knowledge: They know that the toll road construction will be followed by the increase number of factories construction around the toll road Livelihood: Where the service and local industry sector is dominant, it will not give any changes to the community’s livelihood Influx Migration: Influx migration is already saturated because the village has become an intersection area Health and safety issue: Health infrastructures and utility facilities have sufficiently developed Working opportunities: Working opportunity will be widely available for women especially at service and trading sector Local access and infrastructure: Access to working rice fields and socio- cultural facilities will be obstructed Community expectation: Local businessmen expect to have partnership cooperation during the toll road construction.
2.4.2. Purwakarta Cluster 2
In regards to the potential impact of the toll road project, the point of views of community in Purwakarta Cluster 2, which include Cimahi, Kartamukti and Cisaat Villages, are: Community knowledge: The toll road construction will support the growth of factories construction around the toll road and the access for villagers to travel outside the village become easier Livelihood: Their livelihood is mainly from the agricultural sector followed by industrial labor. Labor will be absorbed, and the livelihood pattern will change caused by the switch of land use Influx Migration: Business competition will eliminate local villagers from working opportunities. Influx migration and local development will support several kind of businesses as well as working opportunities in the construction sector There is no impact in health and safety issue
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 158 Working opportunity for local villagers will increase in the industrial sector. There is opportunity for partnership for local business organization Local access and infrastructure: Inter community access and agriculture irrigation access will be obstructed Local community expects to be hired as labor during the toll road construction and the follow-up projects, including the construction of crossing highways between villages
2.4.3. Subang Cluster 1
In regards to the potential impact of the toll road project, the point of views of community in Subang Cluster 1, which include: Wantilan, Sawangan, Karangmukti, Marengmang, Kaliangsana, Caracas and Ciruluk villages, are: Community knowledge: Farmers whose land have been acquired expect to be involved as rough workers during the toll road construction project The main livelihood is farmer and farming labor followed by private employee/factory labor. The toll road construction will impact their livelihood, i.e. switching professions from farmers to rough workers In areas where there are a lot of low quality labors with rare working opportunities, there will be more working opportunities. The security issues are more about safety associated with the heavy equipments for the toll road construction works. The toll road construction will support working opportunity within the service and trading sectors Agriculture irrigation and inter sub-village/village access will be interrupted The construction of border walls on the left and right edges of the toll road will also support the employment opportunities of the local community.
2.4.4. Subang Cluster 2
In regards to the potential impact of the toll road project, the point of views of the community in Subang Cluster 2, which include: Wanakerta, Balingbing, Gembor, Cidahu, Jabong, Sukamelang, Cisaga, Wanasari, Cibogo, Sumurbarang and Batusari villages, are: The toll road construction will be followed by the increase number of factories construction around the toll road. Land acquisition was not transparent, especially regarding the land price
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 159 Since 2005 community livelihood has shifted from agriculture to industry and service sectors including house rental. Local construction workers will try to get works on the toll road project. Influx migration has taken place since industrial development in 2005. Therefore, the presence of the toll road would only outline the existence of the village as a multi-ethnic village. Neighborhood safety issue due to potential increased number of in-migrants Working opportunity will be available through partnership in supplying workers’ needs Access to rice fields and socio-cultural facilities will be interrupted In-out village transportation access will be interrupted Settlement problem upon the requested appropriate land price.
2.4.5. Subang Cluster 3
In regards to the potential impact of the toll road project, the point of views of community in Subang Cluster 3, where there is a large scale Industry (only in Pada Asih Village), are: The toll road construction will be followed by the increase number of factories construction around the toll road. Toll road construction will be followed by ‘dead land’ around the toll road. Land acquisition with a "low" price would potentially affect the villagers economically in the long term Since the existence of PT. PERTAMINA in the area, the community has already had a distinctive pattern of relationship with migrants. There will be no significant impact Health issues related with air pollution during the dry season. There might be water puddles as surface water is potentially restrained by the toll road Working opportunity will be widely available in the supporting sectors especially through partnership in supplying workers’ needs Water channels from the springs to some villages will be interrupted; this will create water puddles along the edges of toll road. There will also be lack of water supplies in other villages
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 160 Community demands on the appropriate requested land price were not being granted that caused apathy within the community and refuse the existence of the toll road Community expectation are land acquisitions with appropriate price, realignment of water canal irrigation, the construction of crossing roads between villages and water drainage system
2.4.6. Indramayu Cluster 1
In regards to the potential impact of the toll road project, the point of views of community in Indramayu Cluster 1, where Agriculture is dominant (only in Bantarwaru Village), are: The toll road construction will be followed by the increase number of factories construction around the toll road. The access for villagers to travel outside the village will be easier Livelihood from agriculture sector is very dominant. There is a big possibility of a livelihood shifting from farmers to other farming labors, in particular women farming labor A relatively large influx migration is predicted to happen and needs supporting infrastructures. The influx migration could be limited by prioritizing local people as laborers Environmental sanitation is not relatively considered as a problem because the toll road is constructed at the edge of the villages New business opportunity both for men and women will be available especially in service sector Local access: Irrigation cannal and Inter sub-village/ village connections will be interrupted Community expectation: New water drainage canals and pedestrian crossing between villages to be constructed and more working opportunity for the local community to be available.
2.4.7. Indramayu Cluster 2
In regards to the potential impact of the toll road project, the point of views of community in Indramayu Cluster 2, where income from agriculture is not dominant and which include Sanca and Cikawung Villages, are: The toll road construction will be followed by the increase number of factories construction around the toll road
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 161 Livelihood from agriculture sector is not dominant, the compensation money from land acquisition is re-invested for agriculture sector to buy replacement land A relatively large influx migration is predicted to happen and there are needs of supporting infrastructures, especially housing facility. However, since the majority of the livelihood in this village are rough workers, influx migration caused the toll road construction could be limited by prioritizing in recruiting local people as laborers Environmental sanitation is not considered as a problem because the toll road is constructed far away from the housing area Working opportunity will be quite available for men, so influx migration could be limited Community expectation: Land price is increasing as well as the price of basic needs. The community expects there will be new water drainage canals, crossing roads between villages, and crossing bridges to be constructed. The community also expects employment opportunities for local people
2.4.8. Majalengka Cluster 1
In regards to the potential impact of the toll road project, the point of views of the community in Majalengka Cluster 1, where livelihood from agriculture is dominant and which include Balida, Pasir Malati, Mandapa, Babakan, Garawangi villages, are: The toll road construction will be followed by the increase number of factories construction around the toll road Livelihood from agriculture sector is dominant. There is a big possibility of a livelihood shifting from farming labor to toll road labor, particularly women A relatively significant influx migration is predicted to happen and there will be needs for supporting infrastructures, especially housing facility, socio- cultural facility, etc Environmental sanitation will decrease because there is a possibility of water puddle caused by restrained surface water flow from the toll road. New business opportunity for women will be available in the service sector in providing supply for the toll road construction workers’ needs and other
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 162 migrants. Working opportunity for men will also be available as rough workers in order to minimize the influx migration Irrigation cannals that will be interrupted/exposed by the toll road should be revitalized Community expectation: The community expects there will be new water drainage canals, crossing roads between villages, and crossing bridges to be constructed. They also expect that there will be more employment opportunities for the local community. In addition, they expect housing infrastructures, socio-cultural facilities, etc to be built as well.
2.4.9. Majalengka Cluster 2
In regards to the potential impact of the toll road project, the point of views of the community in Majalengka Cluster 2, where the livelihood from agriculture is not dominant and which include Karanganyar, Kertawinangun, Palasah, Sukawana, Mekarjaya, Pakubeureum, Salawana, Jatiwangi, Surawangi, Sutawangi, Beusi, Tegal Aren, Cisambeng, Bongas Kulon and Bongas Wetan Villages, are: The toll road construction will be followed by the increase number of factories construction around the toll road. There is an evolving rumor/information that an airport will be constructed in this particular village Livelihood from the agriculture sector is not too dominant, there is a small possibility for a livelihood shifting, and the compensation money from land acquisition is re-invested for agriculture sector to buy replacement land. There is also possibility of livelihood shifting from farming labor to toll road labor and factory labor. However, this is only temporary A relatively significant influx migration is predicted to happen and there will be needs for supporting infrastructures, especially housing facility, socio- cultural facility, etc. However, as the majority of the villagers are rough workers, then influx migration caused by the toll road construction could be limited by prioritizing in recruiting the local people as laborers Health issue: There is a concern of air pollution and respiration problem during the construction of the toll road New business opportunity for women will be widely available, especially in the service sector related to supplying the toll road workers’ needs, such as food kiosks. Working opportunity for men will be available too in order to minimize the influx migration Local Access: Agriculture irrigation and inter sub-village/village access will be interrupted
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 163 Community expectation: The community expects there will be new water drainage canals, crossing roads between villages, and crossing bridges to be constructed. They also expect that there will be more employment opportunities for the local community
2.4.10. Cirebon
In regards to the potential impact of the toll road project, the point of views of the community in Cirebon (only 1 cluster) are: Remaining land could not be utilized any longer, Toll road construction will be followed by “the dead zone field” around the toll road and the price of replacement land is way too high that creates difficulties to find new replacement land Livelihood as farmer and farming labor. Acquired land is a sugar cane plantation that was cultivated by workers from outside the villages, and using villager’s unproductive land. Therefore, the toll road construction will not affect the livelihood of local villagers Villagers are considered as service and building sector workers, working opportunity at toll road construction will be fulfilled by the local villagers. Therefore, the possibility of influx migration to Budur Village is very small Health issue: Air pollution and noises New business opportunity for women to provide services for the toll road construction worker and other migrants. Opportunity for local businessmen to be working partners in the project management Access to rice fields and inters sub-villages connection will be interrupted by the toll road. Damages on village roads caused by material transfer over this village road Social impact: Village security issues, Musyawarah is still functioned as an important decision making institution, Mutual cooperation (gotong royong) value is still strong Community expectation: The community expects there will be crossing roads between villages, and crossing bridges to be constructed. They also expect that the toll road construction will recruit local labors. In addition, they expect infrastructure repair and saving-loans program to be conducted
3. Conclusion and Recommendation 3.1. Conclusion
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 164
The aim of this research is: (i) to identify the key issues of the project affected community based on the baseline data, (ii) to identify and analyze the community’s view of the project and the potential impact of the project, and (iii) to identify the community’s expectations with regards to the community development.
Based on this study, it was found that majority of the lands acquired for the toll road project are mainly productive farmlands. The project affected community is mainly considered poor community who does not have good access to public facilities and are living below the minimum standard of living. For example, they cannot afford the minimum healthcare standard or having minimum sanitation standard.
At presence, influx migration is not considered to be a significant issue as there is a strong interaction between the local community with the communities outside the regencies, facilitated by a lot of roads that connect the regencies and provinces. However, there might be a potential issue in regards to influx migration after the toll road is completed. Another key issue is employment opportunities, where the local community expects there will be a lot of employment opportunities for them during the construction of the toll road. The community also hopes that there will be a positive economical impact to them. The local community also hopes that as the regencies become more accessible, there will be factories constructed, which lead to employment opportunities.
Based on the FGDs conducted, the expectations of the community in regards to the toll road costruction are: 1) New roads to be built to connect the villages that will be separated by the toll road 2) Recruitment of the local laborers are prioritized during the construction of the toll road 3) Improvement on infrastructures: roads, irrigation systems, crossing roads, and the development of rest areas that will employ the local community 4) Capital loans will be available for small businesses and training on setting up small businesses will also be given.
3.1.1. Purwakarta
On Baseline Data The project affected villagers in Purwakarta are considered to have strong interactions with other communities in other regencies. The average population density in Project Affected Area in Purwakarta Regency is 727 persons/km2.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 165 Purwakarta is considered a new industrial regency and the level of education of the community is still considered low, where university and high school graduates only made up 0.67% and 8%, respectively. The status of land ownership in Purwakarta is mainly Landholding Certification (SHM) with 67.33%, and the highest percentage in Cikopo Village (97.22%). However, in Cisaat Village, the majority status of land ownership is Tax Payment Reference (99.02%). Majority of the houses in Purwakarta Regency are brick-walled houses (65.38%), while only 9.62% of the housing is made of soft board- wall.
The avarage of project affected households’ income in Purwakarta Regency is IDR IDR 3,882,000 per year per household. Majority of the income is from the agricultural sector, which made up more than 89.79% of the total income. The remaining income is from non-agricultural income which is average of IDR 15,596,000 per year per household. The main non-agrictural income sources are merchants (48.69%), laborers (37.57%), civil services (8.18%) and other sectors (5.57%).
The average households’ expense in Purwakarta Regency is IDR 19,784,000 per year. The largest portion is food which made up 56.24% and followed by education (20.86%).
On Social Dynamic All of the respondents in Purwakarta Regency stated that they have lived in their villages for more than 25 years, with an average of 33.46 years. 98.33% of the respondents in Purwakarta stated that they have the desire to progress or advance. The toll road construction and its subsequent infrastructures that will be constructed will facilitate the community’s desire to progress or advance.
The local leaders are regarded very important for the local community to have a consultation with. The matters that are usually being consulted are family matters (66.07%), land conflict matters (17.59%) and debt loan matters (13.56%).
In general, 81.54% of the respondents in Purwakarta stated that they welcome visitors/migrants. In other words, the potential risk for conflict to occur regarding not employing the local communities is considered low and will not have significant effect on the relationship between the local communities and visitors/migrants. 67.93% of local community welcomes migrants and is happy to see successful migrants. In other words, the risk of potential social conflict with regards to employing people from outside the regency will not create a significant impact of the relationship between the local community and the migrants.
3.1.2. Subang
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 166 On Baseline data Most of the project affected villages in Subang Regency are isolated area or are currently difficult to access from the main road. The average population density in project affected area in Subang regency is 869 person/km2. The level of education in the affected villages is considered to be low, with only 0.67% of university graduates and 10.56% of high school graduates.
The status of land ownership in Subang regency is still using the tax payment reference for the legal ownership document with 57.72%, while 1.52% percent of the land is without any legal ownership documents. Only 19.83% of the land that is owned by household within the project affected villages in Subang Regency already have landholding certification. Majority of the houses in Subang Regency are brick-walled houses (74.35%). Only 10.71% of the housing is made of soft board-wall which is found in the 13 villages in Subang Regency.
The average of households’ income in Subang regency is IDR 5,417,000 per year per household. 56.2% of this amount is made up from the agricultural sector. Fishermen is only found in Gembor village, while merchants are found in seven villages, with fisheries’ income IDR 264,900,000. The remaining of them depends on non-agricultural sector for their income with an average households’ income is IDR 14,949,000 per year per household. The main non-agrictural income sources are merchants (44.67%), laborers (31.62%), civil services (9.02%) and other sectors (14.69%).
The average households’ expense is IDR 36,954,000 per year. The largest portion of expenses is food which made up 50.35%, followed by education (11.98%) and transportation (11.73%).
On Social dynamic All of the respondents in Subang Regency stated that they have lived in their villages for more than 17 years, with an average of 35.23 years. Approximately 94.74% of the respondents in Subang stated that they have the desire to progress/advance. The toll road construction and its subsequent infrastructures that will be constructed will facilitate the community’s desire to progress or advance.
The local leaders are regarded very important for the local community to have a consultation with. The matters that are usually being consulted are family matters (35.09%), debt loan matters (1.05%), land conflict matters (4.91%) an other matters (59.94%).
In general, 60.92% of the respondents in Subang stated that they welcome visitors/migrants. In other words, there is a potential risk for conflict to occur regarding employing people from outside Subang. Approximately 58.13% of the local communities in Subang are neutral to see successful
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 167 migrants. This suggests the risk of potential social conflict regarding successful migrants to occur will increase after the toll road has been built.
3.1.3. Indramayu
On Baseline Data In Indramayu, the project affected villages are mainly conventional agricultural villages. The average population density in project affected area in Indramayu regency is 392 person/km2.
The average number of communities who are university or high school graduates in the affected villages in Indramayu is high. Cikawung village has the highest educational level compared to other villages with 3.33% of university graduates and 9.67% of high school graduates.
The status of land ownership in Indramayu regency is still using the tax payment reference for the legal ownership document with 50.79%, while 19.02% of the land ownership is based on deed of sales purchase. Only 9.16%of the land that is owned by household within the project affected villages in Indramayu Regency already have landholding certification. Majority of the houses in Indramayu Regency are brick-walled houses (50%). In other words, the household in the project affected villages in Indramayu Regency is relatively in medium economic condition.
The villagers in Indramayu are mainly farmers (35.56%), where the highest percentage can be found in Sanca village (53.33%). The other main professions are laborers (26.67%), entrepreneurs (17.78%) and merchants (4.44%). In Indramayu, the average income is IDR 14,139,000 per year per household. 81.55% of this amount is made up from the agricultural sector. The remaining of them depends on non-agricultural sector for their income with an average households’ income is IDR 13,939,000 per year per household. The main non-agrictural income sources are merchants (61.06%), civil services (24.56%), laborers (12.02%) and other sectors (2.36%).
The average households’ expense is IDR 42,234,000 per year. The largest portion of expenses is food which made up 52.6%, followed by education (18.94%) and electricity bills (12.08%).
On Social Dynamic All of the respondents in Indramayu Regency stated that they have lived in their villages for more than 35 years, with an average of 39.24 years. 97.78% of the respondents in Indramayu stated that they have the desire to progress or advance. The toll road construction and its subsequent infrastructures that will be constructed will facilitate the community’s desire to progress or advance.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 168 The local leaders are regarded very important for the local community to have a consultation with. The matters that are usually being consulted are family matters (33.13%) and others (66.87%).
In general, 60% of the respondents in Subang stated that they welcome visitors/migrants. In other words, there is a potential risk for conflict to occur regarding employing people from outside Indramayu. Approximately 73.33% of the respondents in Indramayu stated that they welcome visitors/migrants. In other words, the risk of potential social conflict with regards to employing people from outside the regency will not create a significant impact of the relationship between the local community and the migrants.
3.1.4. Majalengka
On Baseline Data Majalengka is considered to be more developed regency, where there is a township area which is easily accessible from the big cities. There are rapidly developing small to medium sized industries, especially in the crafts sector. The average population density in project affected area in Majalengka regency is 222 person/km2.
The number of communities who are university or high school graduates in the affected villages in Majalengka is considered high with 2.71% of university graduates and 9.13% of high school graduates. Most of the affected villages are already in the stage of development into industrial villages, which encourage better education facilities and access roads to be built.
The status of land ownership in Majalengka regency is still using the tax payment reference for the legal ownership document with 43.59%, while 11.12% of the land ownership is based on deed of sales purchase. Only 36.94%of the land that is owned by household within the project affected villages in Majalengka Regency already have landholding certification. Majority of the houses in Majalengka Regency are brick-walled houses (74.45%). Only 10.07% of the housing is made of soft board-wall.
The average households’ income affected is IDR 3,935,000 per year. 64.95% of this amount is made up from the agricultural sector. The households’ income in 6 villages of the 24 projects affected villages are mainly from farming (more than 80%). Only Pakubeureum Village which has income from fisheries (10.12%). The average households’ income from non-agricultural sectors is IDR 10,771,000 per year per household. The main non-agrictural income sources are laborers (37.21%), merchants (36.75%), civil services (19.44%) and other sectors (6.6%).
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 169 In Majalengka Regency, the average households’ expense is IDR 29,942,000 per year. The largest portion of expenses is food which made up 63.31%, followed by education (9.7%) and other (13.08%).
On Social Dynamic All of the respondents in Majalengka Regency stated that they have lived in their villages for more than 25 years, with an average of 40.58 years. 91.94% of the respondents in Majalengka stated that they have the desire to progress or advance. The toll road construction and its subsequent infrastructures that will be constructed will facilitate the community’s desire to progress or advance.
The local leaders are regarded very important for the local community to have a consultation with (83.8%). The matters that are usually being consulted are family matters (71.39%), Debt loan matters (2.49%) and others (24.57%).
46.08% of the respondents in Majalengka stated that they welcome visitors/migrants. In other words, there is a potential risk for conflict to occur regarding employing people from outside Majalengka. 68.95% of the local community welcomes migrants and is happy to see successful migrants. Hence, the risk for potential social conflict regarding successful migrants to occur will increase after the toll road has been built.
3.1.5. Cirebon
On Baseline Data Cirebon is considered to be more developed regency, where there is a township area which is easily accessible from the big cities. There are rapidly developing small to medium sized industries, especially in the crafts sector. The average population density in project affected area in Cirebon Regency is 2,401 person/km2.
The number of university or high school graduates in the affected villages in Cirebon Regency is considered to be higher. Most of the affected villages are already in the stage of development into industrial villages, which encourage better education facilities and access roads to be built. The number of communities who are university graduates in the affected villages in Majalengka is 2%. Only four villages among the ten affected villages that have no university level of education.
The status of land ownership in Cirebon regency is mainly landholding certification (34.69%), which Budur Village has the highest percentage of the land that has landholding certification (74.13%). Some of the land is still using the tax payment reference for the legal ownership document with 19.29%, while 22.96% of the land ownership is based on deed of sales purchase. Majority of the
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 170 houses in Cirebon Regency are brick-walled houses (71.88%). Only 0.63% of the housing is made of soft board-wall which is found in Pegagan Village.
The average project affected households’ income is IDR 9,008,000 per year per household. 57.52% of the total income comes from the agricultural sector, while 25.01% of the income comes from other sectors. In 2 villages, more than 80% of the households’ income comes from the agricultural sector. Only Kempek Village which has income from fisheries (7.53%). The average households’ income from non-agriclutural sector is IDR 19,187,000 per year per household. The main non-agrictural income sources are merchants (43.51%), civil services (20.93%), laborers (17.94%) and other sectors (17.62%).
The average households’ expense is IDR 44,072,000 per year. The largest portion of expenses is food which made up 51.25%, followed by education (12.38%) and others (19.53%).
On Social Dynamic All of the respondents in Cirebon Regency stated that they have lived in their villages for more than 30 years, with an average of 42.61 years. 97.33% of the respondents in Cirebon stated that they want to progress. The toll road, together with other infrastructures that will be built, will facilitate the local communities’ desire to progress/advance.
86.57% of the respondents in Cirebon stated that the local leaders are very helpful in solving their day-to-day problems. The matters that are usually being consulted are family matters (62.51%), land conflict matters (2.5%), debt loan matters (0.71%) and others (34.27%).
The respondents in Cirebon stated that they welcome visitors/migrants (82.71%). In other words, there is a potential risk for conflict to occur regarding employing people from outside Cirebon. Only 52.32% of the local community welcomes migrants and is happy to see successful migrants. The risk of potential social conflict with regards to successful migrants will be higher after the toll road is built.
3.2. Recommendation
Based on the data and analysis undertaken in this study, the recommendation is mitigation on the impact from the construction of the toll road need to be focused on the vulnerable and poor community. In making comprehensive CSR planning, community’s involvement is very important in order to minimize potential conflict during the toll road construction phase. CSR programs will prioritize the vulnerable and poor community who are directly affected by the project.
The recommendations based on every aspect in the affected regencies are as follow:
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 171
A. To increase the potential benefit from the toll road development: i. To create a lot of employment opportunities during the construction of the toll road. ii. Prioritize the local community in recruitment of laborers and building the facilities/ infrastructure requested by the local community. iii. Partnership with the local businessmen who would like to be involved in the toll road project.
B. The social and economic impact from the toll road construction: i. To increase the accessibility of the local community to clean water facilities, social and cultural facilities, sports facilities, school facilities and other business support.
C. On the livelihood issues: i. Training to be given to the local community in anticipation to fill the increase number of employment opportunities in the service sector as a result of the domino effect of the toll road construction. ii. CSR program to be focused on the poor and vulnerable community in order to train them in entrepreneurship.
D. On the Influx Migration: i. To anticipate the influx migration issue, LMS needs to provide training on necessary skills to the local community so that they can be prioritized in being employed during the construction of the toll road. This will discourage influx migration.
E. On the Health and Safety Issue: i. LMS to provide supports to the available public health services, i.e. supplying medicines, supporting the public health services in socialization of health issues, etc.
F. On Employment Opportunity: i. LMS need to prioritize the local community in the recruitment process. ii. Engaging local sub-contractors to supply the needs of the laborers working on the construction of the toll road.
G. On the Access to Infrastructure: i. Revitalizing access roads that might be obstructed by the toll road to promote kinship, social gathering or other purposes, which might deteriorate due to the obstructed access and also to minimize the increase of transportation costs of the local community.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 172 Appendix 1: Photos
A. Economic Fasilities
Figure 49. Cooperative/Union in Pegagan Village, Palimanan District, Cirebon Regency
Figure 50. Cooperative/Union in Sukamelang Village, Subang District, Subang Regency
Figure 51. Bank in Ciwaringin Village, Ciwaringin District, Cirebon Regency
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 173
Figure 52. Bank in Pegagan Village, Palimanan District, Cirebon Regency
B. Public Facilities
Figure 53. Sport Fields in Wanasari Village, Cipunagara District, Subang Regency
Figure 54. Sport Fields in Panjalin Kidul Village, Sumberjaya District, Majalengka Regency
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT Picture 1. Desa Walahar, Kecamatan Gempol Kabupaten Cirebon 174
C. Community Activities
Figure 55. Cultural Activities in Jabong Village, Subang District, Subang Regency
Figure 56. Cultural Activities in Kaliangsana Village, Kalijati District, Subang Regency
Figure 57. Religious Aktivities in Sawangan Village, Cipeundeuy District, Subang Regency
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 175
Figure 58. Religious Aktivities in Karang Mukti Village, Cipeundeuy District, Subang Regency
Figure 59. Others Social Activities in Babakan Village, Kertajati District, Majalengka Regency
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CSA REPORT 176 ANNEX E Initial Assessment and Validation on Indigenous People Existence Along the Proposed Cikampek (Cikopo) Palimanan Toll Road Development Project
REPORT Initial Assessment and Validation on Indigenous People Existence Along the Proposed Cikampek (Cikopo) Palimanan Toll Road Development Project
Prepared for:
PT. Lintas Marga Sedaya
December 2011
Delivering sustainable solutions in a more competitive world
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Contents...... ii List of Tables...... ii Executive Summary ...... iii Executive Summary ...... iii 1 INTRODUCTION TO INDIGENOUS PEOPLE SCREENING AND VALIDATION...... 1 1.1 Background And Objective ...... 1 1.2 Methodology...... 2 1.2.1 Scope of Work...... 2 1.2.2 Scope Area for Data Gathering...... 3 1.2.3 Methodology of Screening and Validation Process ...... 3 1.2.4 Stage of Activities from Planning, Fieldwork, to Reporting...... 4 1.3 Time Frame ...... 5 2 National and Regional Regulatory Framework...... 6 2.1 Indonesian Government Concept on IP...... 6 2.2 The AMAN (the ‘Nusantara’ Indigenous People Alliance) Concept...... 7 2.3 Comparison of the Office of Social Department on ‘Remote Indigenous People’, the Office of Cultural and Tourism Department on ‘Indigenous Village’ and AMAN’s ‘indigenous people’ ...... 8 2.4 Indirect Social Impact to the two ‘IP’ ...... 11 3 Validation: Indigenous or ethnic group?...... 13 3.1 Consultation...... 13 3.2 Screnning and Validation Process...... 16 4 Conclusion and Recommendation ...... 18
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Indigenous People Definition by IFC, ADB, and World Bank...... 1 Table 2 Definition of RIC as accordingly to West Java ...... 6 Table 3 Remote Indigenous Communities (Office of Social Affairs), Indigenous Village (Office of Culture and Tourism) and Indigenous People (AMAN)...... 8 Table 4 Profile of Kampung Nunuk (Majalengka) and Banceuy (Subang) ...... 9
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CLIENT REPORT TITLE ii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Indonesian government will soon develop a new toll road that will connect Cikampek (Cikopo) and Cirebon. This toll road will run through 5 regencies: Purwakarta, Subang, Indramayu, Majalengka and Cirebon, which cover a total of 22 sub districts and 62 villages. The proposed toll road, which will be 116 kilometers long, will be one of the longest toll roads in Indonesia.
Following the customary procedure on a development project, multiple assessments and evaluations need to be conducted to assess the acceptance and readiness of the community who will experience the direct and indirect impact of that development project. One of the entities that need to be tracked is the existence of indigenous people along the project area.
In every development project, human rights and social culture rights are very important aspects to be considered, to include the rights of Indigenous People. It is assumed that if Indigenous People is identified, especially those who live in the proposed project area, they will become vulnerable.
This assessment focused on finding out whether there are indigenous people living in the area along the proposed Cikampek (Cikopo) – Palimanan Toll Road project. Through document reviews, observations and interviews, this study concluded that there is not a single community or group of people that can be identified as ‘indigenous people’ along the proposed Toll Road Project. Hence, there is no need for a future special policy to be issued for IP.
The people who live along the proposed project area are mostly Javanese, who live in Purwakarta, Subang and Majalengka, and Sundanese, who mostly live in Cirebon and Indramayu. Majority of them are generally Moslem. The two ethnics have social, culture and political characters which are not significantly different from the general Indonesian people.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT iii
1 INTRODUCTION TO INDIGENOUS PEOPLE SCREENING AND VALIDATION
1.1 BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE
The Indonesian government is developing a new toll road that will connect Cikampek (Cikopo) and Cirebon. This proposed toll road is anticipated to overcome the traffic issues in the north coast route that connects the cities in the West Java province to Central Java and East Java provinces, especially during the peak holiday season. The proposed development of this toll road is also intended to reduce government spending on annual road maintenance due to the high traffic flow and current road condition that are easily damaged.
This toll road will run through 5 regencies: Purwakarta, Subang, Indramayu, Majalengka, and Cirebon, which cover a total of 24 sub districts and 62 villages. The proposed toll road, which will be 116 kilometers long, will be one of the longest toll roads in Indonesia.
Following the accepted customary procedure on a development project, multiple assessments and evaluations need to be conducted to assess the acceptance and readiness of the community who will experience the direct and indirect impacts of that development project. One of the entities that need to be tracked is the existence of Indigenous People (IP) along the project area.
As outlined in any development project, the policy on IP should comply with: • Acknowledgement of the traditional customs and rights. Every project must actively understand the importance of the local custom and traditional rights where the project is located. This information should be considered in project planning and its implementation; • Recognizing the existing cultural sites; and • Providing compensation.
Therefore, it is important to find out if there are any IP living along the project area. In this study, we refer to the guidelines made by the IFC as a safeguard and refer to the policy from the World Bank and ADB as supplements in defining indigenous people. Table 1 shows the IP definitions according to IFC, ADB and World Bank guidelines.
Table 1 Indigenous People Definition by IFC, ADB, and World Bank IFC ADB WORLD BANK
1. Self-identification as 1. Descent from population 1. Self-identification as member of a distinct groups present in a given members of a distinct indigenous cultural area, most often before indigenous cultural group group and recognize this modern states or territories and recognition of this identity by others; were created and before identity by others; 2. Collective attachment to modern borders were 2. Collective attachment to geographically distinct defined geographically distinct
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT 1
IFC ADB WORLD BANK
habitats or ancestral 2. Maintenance of cultural habitats or ancestral territories in the project and social identities and territories in the project area area and to the natural social, economic, cultural, and to the natural resources resources in these and political institutions in these habitats and habitats or territories; separate from mainstream territories 3. Customary culture or dominate societies and 3. Customary cultural, economic, social and cultures. economic, social, or political political institutions that institutions that are separate Additional characteristics are separated from those from those of the dominant often ascribed to indigenous of the dominant society society and culture; and people include: or culture. 4. An indigenous language, of- 1. Self- identification and 4. An indigenous language ten different from the identification by others as often different than the official language of the being part of a distinct official language of the county-try or region. indigenous cultural group, country or region and the display of desire to
preserve that cultural identity 2. A linguistic identity different from that of the dominant society, 3. Social, cultural, economic, and political traditions and institutions distinct from the dominant culture, 4. Economic systems oriented more toward traditional systems of production than mainstream systems, 5. Unique ties and attachments to traditional habitats and ancestral territories and natural resources in these habitats and territories.
1.2 METHODOLOGY
1.2.1 Scope of Work
Information will be gathered through field visits, interviews with the government officials (national and regional), IP organizations, local public figures, the local communities and secondary data. Data and analysis will be focused on the following key aspects:
1. Determine whether the Sundanese people and/or other IP communities/groups within the Project Area are classified as “indigenous” according to Indonesian national and regional laws and IFC/ADB/World Bank definition. If IP was determined to exist in the project area, then we will determine the presence of adat land, or ulayat rights, ancestral territory titles or claims including natural resources used, occupied or claimed within the Project impact area. Inventories of all the affected land and non-land assets will be cross checked to see if the affected IPs have been identified, consulted and compensated;
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT 2
2. Determine the potential impacts created by the project on IP within the Project impact area (aside from physical and economic displacement, this may include impacts on the dignity, human rights, livelihood systems, culture, territories, natural or cultural resources that Indigenous People own, use, occupy or claim as their ancestral domain);
3. Conduct an inventory of cultural, sacred and other sites and landscapes which are important to any IP communities in the Project area;
4. Prepare a brief socio-cultural profile of IP communities in the Project area.
Besides providing an identification and assessment of Indigenous People in the Project area, this report will additionally:
1. Determine whether special measures are required for any identified IP community or group;
2. Identify pro-poor and culturally appropriate institutional arrangements;
3. Identify the needs of the communities, especially the women or other sub-groups of Indigenous People.
Recommendations will be included in this report.
1.2.2 Scope Area for Data Gathering
The scope area for this assessment is where the proposed toll road will pass through, which covers 5 regencies, 22 districts and 62 villages. Data gathering process which includes observations and interviews are conducted directly on site. Data gathering is also carried out in Bandung for any other data that are relevant to the West Java province such as interviews with the academicians and lecturers who mostly reside in the capital of the province.
1.2.3 Methodology of Screening and Validation Process
The screening and validation process were undertaken by the following steps:
1. In-depth interviews
In this case, interviews were conducted with people who were chosen based on their expertise in the topics and issues regarding this research or based on their political connection with the issues being addressed. Respondents selected for their expertise are the anthropologist and sociologist who wrestle with the issues. The respondents selected from the authorities or government bodies in the district and village level and in the Social department or Cultural and Tourism Department within the Regency or Provincial government level were based on their political affiliation;
2. Direct observation in the research location
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT 3
The daily activities and living conditions of the people in the research area were observed. From these in-depth observations we can identify the general social and cultural pattern of that community.
3. Document and library research
Secondary data gathering on government documents was carried out in libraries of the Universities and the Government.
4. Focus Group Discussion,
This step is used to dig deeper and identify a wider cultural profile of an indigenous people. This step is only applied if there is a group of indigenous people identified based on the definitions used. In this instance it was not required.
1.2.4 Stage of Activities from Planning, Fieldwork, to Reporting
a. Project management (consignment meeting, team recruitment, etc.)
The research was performed by a team that understands IP issues and the relationship with the development. The team is experienced in similar research and familiar with the research area. The team consists of three researchers, with one of them being the team coordinator. The team was under the supervision of ERM.
Before going to the research area, the team conducted a consultative meeting with experts and coordinated with other teams.
b. Document review
There are two documents considered appropriate to assess in this research: • Profile of Remote Indigenous Community in West Java, West Java Office of Social Affairs, 2005 (Profil Komunitas Adat Terpencil di Jawa Barat, Dinas Sosial Propinsi Jawa Barat, 2005), • Traditional Houses and Traditional Village in West Java, West Java Office of Culture and Tourism, 2002 (Kampung Adat dan Rumah Adat di Jawa Barat, Dinas Kebudayaan dan Pariwisata Propinsi Jawa Barat 2002).
Both documents, from the Provincial Office of Social Department and from the Provincial Office of Cultural and Tourism Department, respectively are considered important because both represent the government version of their definition of IP even though their definition of IP in this instance is not the same as the international definition or the NGO version. Both documents are used to map and identify the IP groups in the research area.
c. Fieldwork
In-depth interviews using the interview guidance were performed onsite
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT 4
d. Data processing and analysis
All the information gathered was processed and tabulated. Analysis on the information was carried out to assist in formulating conclusion and recommendation.
e. Drafting report
A draft is produced once all the data processing and analysis have been carried out. A draft report will then be submitted to be reviewed.
1.3 TIME FRAME
The Fieldwork was undertaken within four weeks starting from 1 to 30 November 2011. The fieldwork started with two-days consignment meeting led by ERM to enhance the team members’ understanding on the requirements from IFC, ADB and IIF plus developed a detailed fieldwork plan.
Series of interviews and professional observations combined with secondary data gathering were undertaken within five Regencies and the Provincial level. The fieldwork was finalized with a two-days meeting to consolidate data and information and synthesize the fieldwork results.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT 5
2 NATIONAL AND REGIONAL REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
2.1 INDONESIAN GOVERNMENT CONCEPT ON IP
In Indonesia, the government, through the Ministry of Social Affairs has its own restriction regarding IP, which they commonly refer to as “Remote Indigenous Communities” (Komunitas Adat Terpencil). Remote Indigenous Communities (RIC) are defined as “ social cultural group that is local and scattered and less or not involve in the network of social, economic and political services” (Article 1 point (1) President Decree No. 111 Year 1999 on Social Welfare Development on Remote Indigenous Communities).
RIC criteria as noted in the President Decree no. 111 year 1999 includes 7 features and more features might be added according to the local condition. These criteria and added features in West Java are:
Table 2 Definition of RIC as accordingly to West Java
NO CRITERIA DESCRIPTION
1 Community numbers Small and easily access by interpersonal relation 2 Ethnic Diversity homogenous, based on single ethnicity 3 Attitude on changes Usually closed 4 Geographical location Usually isolated and remote 5 Technology Simple but functional using local materials and as accordingly to needs 6 Social life Based on Kinship 7 Dependency on life and Relatively high natural resources 8 Economic System Subsystem economics 9 Basic Social Services Limited 10 Transportation Unavailable or only accessible using certain method of transportation 11 Social interaction The relationship within the community and other community are by specific interest 12 Occupation or Sustenance Mostly farmers 13 Social Institution Mostly Moslem but still practice some ancestral tradition Education: Formal and by family and community Science: transform from generation to generation Health: usually takes advantage on the closes health facility and alternative medicine/preventive cure by shaman or other knowledge Marriage : endogamy or exogamy (with outsider) Politics: under the influence of charismatic community leader through custom autonomy Ownership: limited individual ownership acquired through inheritance and social ownership becomes common interest set by custom law
Source: Indigenous People Profile in West Java,Office of Social Affairs, West Java Province, 2005
Besides the Provincial Office of Social Department, the Office of Cultural and Tourism Department has formulated of what they called ‘kampung adat’ or indigenous village. Indigenous village is defined as:
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT 6
a. The location is separated from other dwelling in its vicinity and not easily accessible; b. Houses are built using the natural resources provided from its environment and the houses are uniform and has the tradition strongly supported by the community; c. The people are homogenous; d. Because they are from one ancestor; e. Only have one believe or religion which came from the teaching of their ancestor; and f. Has a much respected community leader (elderly).
The definition above was issued by the Cultural and Tourism Department for the purpose of conservation and tourism.
2.2 THE AMAN (THE ‘NUSANTARA’ INDIGENOUS PEOPLE ALLIANCE) CONCEPT
The Nusantara Indigenous People Alliance or known as AMAN, is a consortium of indigenous people in Indonesia who has the ‘Indigenous People’ definition drafted as “a group of people who based on ancestral origin, live in a specific geographical area, have a distinct value and socio-cultural system, sovereignty over their land and natural resources and control and take care of their survival by means of customary laws and institutions”.
Indigenous people can be identified according to the following criteria: a. A group of people sharing the same cultural identities. Indigenous people have distinct characteristics in terms of language, spiritual values, norms, attitudes and behaviors that distinguish one social group from another; b. Living area Includes land, forests, sea and other resources, which cover not only goods but also religious and socio-cultural systems; c. Knowledge systems also called “traditional wisdom” or “local wisdom”, which is not only preserved but enriched/developed in line with the needs of indigenous people to sustain their existence; and d. A common regulation and governance system includes customary laws and institutions to regulate and govern themselves. (http://www.aman.or.id/en/indigenous-peoples-archipelago/who-are-indigenous- peoples.html)
AMAN estimates the population of IP in Indonesia ranges between 50 and 80 million. From this population, 1,163 indigenous communities in Indonesia are members of AMAN. AMAN recruits its member based on whether they have met the AMAN criteria of ‘Indigenous People’. AMAN only accepts its members after studying and verifying whether they have met the IP criteria.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT 7
Unlike the Remote Indigenous Communities drafted by the Office of Social Department or the ‘Indigenous Village’ outlined by the Office of Cultural and Tourism Department, AMAN emphasizes on avocation and empowerment to those considered as ‘indigenous people’ by highlighting on their basic human rights and their social and cultural rights. In this case, they sometimes have differences with the Office of Social Department who tends to see the indigenous people as culturally ‘behind’ and the Office of Cultural and Tourism Department whose sees them as unique and exotic entity for the benefit of tourism.
The AMAN definition of ‘indigenous people’ which in Bahasa Indonesia they call Masyarakat Adat is considered to correspond more closely to the definition used by the World Bank, ADB and IFC. Besides its similarity, the AMAN influence in the indigenous people’s issues in Indonesia especially in its divergence with the government is something that should be considered.
2.3 COMPARISON OF THE OFFICE OF SOCIAL DEPARTMENT ON ‘REMOTE INDIGENOUS PEOPLE’, THE OFFICE OF CULTURAL AND TOURISM DEPARTMENT ON ‘INDIGENOUS VILLAGE’ AND AMAN’S ‘INDIGENOUS PEOPLE’
Table 3 Remote Indigenous Communities (Office of Social Affairs), Indigenous Village (Office of Culture and Tourism) and Indigenous People (AMAN)
NO REGENCY KAMPONG/ DISTRICT VILLAGE RIC* IV* IP*
1 Ciamis Kampung Kuta Tambaksari Karangpaning x x x al Panjalu Panjalu Panjalu/bahar x a 2 Garut Kampung Dukuh Cikelet Cijambe x x x Kampung Pulo Leles Cangkuang x x Batuwangi Singajaya x Ciburuy Banyongbon Pamalayan x g Tandang Wesi Bungbulang x Dukuh Hilir x Dukuh Hira x Sancang Cibalong x 3 Sukabumi Kasepuhan Ciptagelar Cisolok Sirnaresmi x x Kampung Ciptarasa Cisolok Sirnarasa x Kiara Kuning x Cenguk x 4 Sumedang Ciwaru Jatinunggal Cimanintin x Cijere Jatigede Nagarawangi x 5 Tasikmalaya Kampung Naga Salawu Neglasari x x x 6 Majalengka Kampung Nunuk Maja Cengal x 7 Subang Kampung Nagara Kasumalang Sanca x Banceuy 8 Cianjur Kampung Miduana x 9 Bandung Cikondang Pangalengan Lumajang x 10 Bogor Kampung Mahmud Margaasih Mekarrahayu x Kampung Urug Sukajaya Kiarapandak x 11 Kuningan Kuningan Cigugur Cigugur x
Sources: 1) Profile of Remote Indigenous Community in West Java, West Java Office of Social Affairs, 2005 (Profil Komunitas Adat Terpencil di Jawa Barat, Dinas Sosial Propinsi Jawa
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT 8
Barat, 2005), 2).Traditional Houses and Traditional Village in West Java, West Java Office of Culture and Tourism, 2002 (Kampung Adat dan Rumah Adat di Jawa Barat, Dinas Kebudayaan dan Pariwisata Propinsi Jawa Barat 2002), 3). AMAN’s data are based on the interview of AMAN’s Javanese Region Head, Muhtarom, AMAN Administrator for Simahiang Area, Yayan Hermawan and Jakarta’s AMAN Staff, Anas Ladis Syarif on 16 November 2011 Remark: * RIC (Remote Indigenous Community), KA (Kampong Adat/Customary Village), IP (Indigenous People)
From the Table 3 above, there are 24 villages of indigenous people across West Java but not all of them are recognized. The Office of Social Department only recognizes 12 of them as ‘Remote Indigenous Communities’. Unlike the Office of Cultural and Tourism Department who identifies only 8 of them, AMAN recognizes 12 of them as their member. From the 24 on the list, only 3 of them are recognize by all of the organizations, which are: Kampung Dukuh, Kampung Naga and Kampung Kuta.
In relation to the research, there are 2 (two) out of the 24 indigenous people villages located in the research area, i.e. Subang and Majalengka. Both of these villages are recognized as IP existence villages by the Office of Social Department but not by the Office of Cultural and Tourism Department and AMAN.
Table 4 Profile of Kampung Nunuk (Majalengka) and Banceuy (Subang)
KAMPUNG NUNUK KAMPUNG BANCEUY
Historical Bacground Before the 1950s, Nunuk was First, it was named Negla Village. the name of a village which Derived from 7 families who built the oversaw Cikowoan, Kadut, houses, but then got hit by disaster. Babakan, and Cirelek. In 1950s, it became a part of the Village After the disaster, they held a meeting or Cengal, but at the year 2011 it Ngabanceuy to find a way to avoid any became a Nunuk Baru Village. disaster. On the advice of a psychic, they should; First be led by the descendants of Aki Ito. Second, implement 'Ruwatan Bumi'. The third, rename the village into Banceuy, taken from the word Ngabanceuy. Cultural practices Sundanese-speaking village, Sundanese-speaking village, and have a and there are some traditional complete 'ruwatan bumi' ceremony, and ceremonies such as Buku Taun, other traditional ceremonies Ngaruat, and Nyungsang local custom/ belief Islam, influenced by the Islam, with the influence of the elements system elements of local beliefs, the of local beliefs, the belief in ancestral belief in ancestral spirits spirits, as well as things like keris, ali stone, and others sacred place/land Status of the land for The Karuhun Tomb of Eyang generations and not taxed; the Singadiraksa tombs of ancestor / kabuyutan Custom organization None, political leadership is There is a customary chief who controls formal, led by the head of a and leads the local community temporary village, and later there will be an election Access 20 km from the Maja Sub 20 km away from Subang town, and 25 DIstrict, 17 km from the village km away from the toll road to be built of Cengal, 40 km to the South of Majalengka.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT 9
Adapted from: 1. Profil Komunitas Adat Terpencil Jawa Barat, Dinas Sosial, Jawa Barat 2005 (the Profile of West Java Remote Indigenous Communities, Office of Social Affairs, West Java 2005); Documents of BPSNT, West Java; newspaper clippings, and interviews
The two communities of IP identified are located significantly far away from the project area so they will not be impacted. The Nunuk community in Majalengka is located in Nunuk Baru village in the district, which is at least 40 kilometer south of the project. The Banceuy lives in Sanca Village of the Kasumalang Sub District, located 30 kilometers away.
It is important to note that the Remote Indigenous Communities (RIC) defined by the government is quite different than the one stipulated by the IFC, ADB and from the NGOs including AMAN. RIC places greater emphasis on the definition by geographical criteria, which is difficult to access. Therefore most of RICs are considered to be poor or have low economical activities. Furthermore, RIC cultures are considered weaker than the dominant culture. In this case, government projects tend to reduce their isolation from other areas by building roads and other modern facilities and assimilating them into the dominant society’s culture which are considered to be more advanced and superior. The government success is rated when aspects that were previously considered ‘less’ in RIC becoming ‘more’ advanced. It is considered very successful if the RIC is not classified as RIC anymore. This circumstance can be seen in Majalengka’s Nunuk communities. According to the Majalengka’s local government, in Majalengka there are no more indigenous people because the Nunuk area is easily accessible. Previously, The Nunuk is part of the Cengal village but now has become a new village entity that is called Nunuk Baru Village (based on the interview with H. Dedi Supriadi and Yoyo Sugianto, RIC department, Office of Social Department, Majalengka Regency 3/11/11).
The above can be explained through the example of the Banceuy people. According to Dedi Hardianto (54 yrs), Head of Recovery and Social Servicing Department from the Office of Social Department of Subang, there was once RIC or a kind of so-called IP, but now no longer in the category RIC (remote indigenous communities) it is called Banceuy Kampong in Sanca village of Kasumalang Sub District.
It is clear that based on the data; there were two indigenous communities located in Subang Regency (Kampung Nunuk) and in Majalengka (Banceuy Village). However, due to developments over time, these two are no longer considered as RIC. In this regard, each local government through its affiliated agencies and offices, and the Office of Social Department itself, no longer consider them to be indigenous communities.
AMAN did not include these two indigenous communities as members and the two communities have never applied to be members. AMAN Criteria does not allow either community to be considered as IP. This is because unique and isolated are not the only criteria to be considered as IP by AMAN.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT 10
It should be noted that the West Java Provincial Office of Cultural and Tourism Department recently classified Banceuy as an ‘Indigenous Village’ or 'Kampung Adat' by making it a tourism village. This was advised by Eddy Sunarto (51 yrs), Section Chief of Museum and Archaeology, Office of Cultural and Tourism Department of West Java Province. It is considered indigenous because of its rituals and traditions. One of the rituals and traditions is called ‘ruwatan bumi’ (cleansing the earth) and is still performed today. As advised by Mr. Dedi Hardianto, the Office of Cultural and Tourism Department has regular contacts with the community while the Office of Social Department does not consider it as indigenous people because they are considered to be advanced, prosperous, not isolated and having access to modern amenities.
2.4 INDIRECT SOCIAL IMPACT TO THE TWO ‘IP’
There are two IP communities identified by the provincial government, especially the Social Department; the Banceuy community in Subang and the Nunuk Majalengka Village. Over time and due to developments carried out in the surrounding areas, these communities are now no longer considered to be IP.
These two communities are located far away (30 and 40 Km, respectively away from the project area) and would only be indirectly and slightly impacted from the proposed toll road development project. The proposed toll road will be developed in the northern part of the regency. Since these two communities are located in the southern part of the regency, the proposed toll road development will not obstruct
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT 11
the access paths of the communities to the public facilities, i.e. hospitals, schools, government offices, etc.
It is important to note that the proposed toll road development is not the first road that connects these five regencies to another area, including Banceuy and Nunuk Majalengka Village. There are a few wide asphalt roads for motorbikes and cars that have been built in the region previously. For example, Banceuy community lives not far away from the wide asphalt road that connects Bandung and Subang, while asphalt road to Nunuk Majalengka Village has been built in the past few years. As asphalt roads are becoming available to these communities, it is becoming common for the villagers to go to the nearby towns for work and study. It can be concluded that the proposed toll road development will indirectly increase the associations of these two communities with other regions.
These two communities are mainly farmers; however, they have utlilised modern farming skills such as tractors, organic fertilizers, etc. Introduction to modern farming skills started a long time ago and the proposed toll road development will only slightly impact the farming culture as they already understood modern farming skills previously.
As the proposed toll road development is located far away from the communities, they have a low level of interest in the development. In fact, majority of the communities are not even aware of the proposed toll road development. Due to the long distance from the development, the communities have limited access to be part of the development itself and have no expectation of being involved. The negative impacts such as dust, noise, traffic jams, etc, will certainly not to impact these two communities.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT 12
3 VALIDATION: INDIGENOUS OR ETHNIC GROUP?
3.1 CONSULTATION
Based on our consultations throughout the region that will be traversed by the proposed toll road project coupled with 50 interviews with academics, government officials, community leaders, and ordinary people, it is concluded that there are no indigenous people along the route of the proposed toll road project.
The following are some statements that were obtained from the interviews:
Government
• Eddy Sunarto (51 years), Section Chief of Museum and Archaeology, Cultural Affairs, Office of Cultural and Tourism Department of West Java Province.
“In West Java, there are many 'traditional villages' that we have identified. We train them in local organization, prepare them for any tourist who might visit, if they are willing to accept, if not then it is also fine because we are not turning them as a tourist attraction, but also provides recommendations to several institutions when relevant issues in custom and tradition arise and consult with the indigenous people chief. I have seen a map of the proposed toll road plan Cikopal, there is no 'traditional village’ that will be passed through by the proposed toll road”.
• H. Dedi Supriadi, Office of Social Department, Majalengka Regency.
“Almost all of the villages here still retain their custom. Yes, there are customs and rituals in marriages, customs and rituals when giving birth, custom and tradition during Eid Mubarak (Islamic feast). There are many and not unusual in a village, including customary to work together.
But for indigenous people in the sense of unique and generally different from the general public, it does not exist in Majalengka here. Indeed there had been Nunuk Village, as you mentioned. It was called the indigenous communities, but in fact they are equal to the average person. Clothes they wear, the food they consume, the ceremonies they practice are the same as other people in Majalengka. Nothing is different. They are all also Muslims.
They were once considered as RIC because of its isolation not because of different custom or traditions. They live in the mountains so far away and not easily accessible, education facilities are almost non existent. That's what makes them considered to be RIC. But now the accessibility to the village is relatively easy, the road is not damaged as it was before.
Individuals
• H. Edith (73 Years), artists, community leaders, Subang.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT 13
“In 1965 until the 1970s, I worked in the area to be traversed by the proposed toll road in "Opmen Pancasila" (Operation Mental Pancasila) (military operation) cooperation and artists. At that time the territory was still part of Purwakarta. My work area is also up to areas where the sub-district military officer (Korem) coaches the people of Majalengka. As long as I can remember, there were no indigenous communities in these areas. I have never met an indigenous name that is unique.”
Picture 1. Interviewer with Pak H. Edith, artist and local customary leader
• Muhtarom, AMAN Board member of West Java Region.
“In West Java, our records show there are 12 indigenous people who are members of AMAN, the village of Kuta and Panjalu in Ciamis, Kampung Dukuh, Kampung Pulo, Batuwangi, Ciburuy, Away Wesi, Dukuh Hilir, Dukuh Hira, Sancang, all in Garut, Kampung Naga in Tasikmalaya and Kuningan. Members were either accepted by us receiving a registration or because we offer them to become a member. Clearly it is in accordance with our criteria concerning indigenous people”
“If in the area Majalengka and Cirebon, so far there are no Indigenous people. If there is they are usually part of the Kuningan communities who are everywhere. If you are in Indramayu, the Dayak Losarang is still not a member. We are still reviewing. In fact many are registering to be members, but still must be studied and consulted with the board, whether it is in accordance with the criteria or not“
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT 14
Picture 2. Team member consult with Bapak. Syahrim, Government officer at Jabong village, Sub-district Pagaden, Subang regency
Academics
• Ade Makmur Ph.D a researcher on indigenous community in West Java.
“In the five regencies that you mentioned, as far as I know, there are only in Majalengka (the Nunuk) and in Subang (the Banceuy). For the Dayak Losarang Community it is more like a sect rather than indigenous people, because it is newly formed. As for the concept and definition of indigenous people that I use is to have a clear territory and boundaries with others, have maintained traditions from generation to generation, myths and legends and the same ancestor, has local political leaders (chiefs), the subsistence system is still traditional livelihoods, and have a relatively different languages. If a community completely fulfills the above definition, then it can only be called indigenous people”
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT 15
Picture 3. Team member consult with Bapak Karnali, Head of village at Gembor village, Subang Regency
3.2 SCRENNING AND VALIDATION PROCESS
1. Screening Process
The screening process was conducted by the assessment team based on the map of IP existence obtained from the government, which identify Indigenous People in West Java, especially in the regional area that will be crossed by the proposed road toll development project. IP is a very important aspect that has to be considered by the government. The map of IP existence was assessed by our team who visited the provincial Cultural and Tourism Department and the Social Department.
The screening process also involved our assessment team assessing the point of view of the Aliansi Masyarakat Adat Nusantara (AMAN), a local NGO. This point of view was considered in our study as there are differences in the definition of IP, according to the government and NGO. AMAN has its own version of the map of IP existence in the area.
After obtaining the two maps of IP existence in the area from the government and AMAN, the local universities were consulted as it was assumed they would have conducted researches on the issue previously.
The screening process was completed by combining the point of views of the government, NGO and the academics. The next step to this study was the validation process.
2. Validation Process
Validation on the information obtained was first conducted by consultation with the Cultural and Tourism Department and the Social Department officers of the regency
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT 16
government. These officers play a vital role as they exercise the special law for IP, if there are any IP in the area. The information regarding the IP existence obtained from the provincial government might not be valid; hence, the more trusted source of information was obtained from the regional government.
Following the consultation with the regency government officials, a more in-depth consultation was conducted with the local government from the villages, public figures and the society in the villages. This validation process was a more in-depth process as we also conducted direct observations in the area to determine whether IP actually existed. In the area where it was classified that IP existed by the government, we conducted an assessment to determine whether this was the case based on the FIP – ADB – World Bank definitions. The distance from this area to the proposed toll road development project was also assessed.
‘Indigenous People’ In-Depth Output Interviews Screening and Validation Process and Observatio 2 IP was ns indicated in the screening Information process but they are Assessment Output Regional Governmen located far and Interviews t (Cultural away from and the Touris m proposed Department toll road. and Social 2 ‘RIC’ (Subang & They are West Java Social Deparment) Majalengka) not Department classified as IP anymore West Java according to Tourism and the Regional Validation Governmen Culture No ‘TV’ Local Village t. Screening Department Government
NGO Pu blic No IP Figures There was (AMAN) no IP based on the definitions No IP Local Academician Society
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT 17
4 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
In general, the people who live along the toll road projects are Javanese and Sundanese Muslims, which are the two most dominant ethnics in West Java. These are the general characteristic:
Majalengka, Subang and Purwakarta
Ethnicity : Sundanese
Religion : Islam, most are oriented on the Nahdlatul Ulama (Islam Group), some of the community are “Puritan Moslem” (Persis).
Language : Sundanese, which is the main language in West Java. Due to its proximity to Cirebon, some of the community speaks the Cirebon- Javanese language, especially those in Majalengka.
Culture : Sundanese, but there are traces of Javanese influences. Ruwatan Bumi ritual is still performed in some villages, although this tradition is not as strongly held as it used to be. Beside the traditional ritual, each region has its own type of performing art such as Sisingaan in Subang and Masked Dance in Majalengka. The communities in Subang, Majalengka, and Purwakarta also have a tradition to respect the ancestor called kabuyutan, although the connection appears to be starting to fade.
Economy : The occupations of the people vary but most are farmers with very advanced agricultural skills and knowledge. The people also make a living through trade, labor and many other activities. It is also very common to move to the city and work both permanently or seasonally. Many also become migrant workers, moving abroad to countries such as Malaysia and Saudi Arabia.
Politic : The political structure follows the formal organization, which begins with head of sub village, head of village, head of sub district, to regent. At the local level, the election for the head of village is very competitive. Formal leaders and religious leaders (Kyai) have political influence in the community.
Cirebon and Indramayu
Ethnicity : Javanese-Cirebon
Religion : Islam, with the general orientation toward the Nahdlatul Ulama (Islam Group), with a very few puritans.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT 18
Language : Javanese-Cirebon, due to its proximity with Central Java, but with different dialect and several distinct vocabularies.
Culture : Javanese-Cirebon, which leans to the Cirebon Kasunanan (Kingdom) and Kasepuhan palace, which in turn is connected with the Mataram Kingdom. Traces of the Mataram influence can be seen from the puppet show style both in the sense of the inlays and its language. The Ruwatan Bumi ritual is still being performed in every village but not as strongly held as it used to be. Beside these rituals and art form, the people of Indramayu and Cirebon have a special art performance, the Cirebon Mask dance. It is also well-known with the Mega Mendung batik pattern and Macan Ali becoming the symbol of the Kasepuhan Palace. Cirebon and Indramayu communities also have a tradition to respect the ancestors called Kabuyutan, although this connection is starting to fade. Most of the people here are urban communities because of its close proximity with large, easily accessible cities.
Economy : The occupations of the people vary but most are farmers with highly advanced farming skills and knowledge. The people also make a living through trade, labor, and many activities. It is also very common for the people to move to the city and work both permanently or seasonally. Many also become migrant workers abroad to countries such as Malaysia and Saudi Arabia.
Politic : The political structure follows the formal organization, which begins with head of sub village, head of village, head of sub district, to regent. At the local level, the election for the head of village is very competitive. Formal leaders and religious leaders (Kyai) have political influence in the community.
From the document review as well as observation and broad in-depth interviews, we can conclude that along the proposed Cikampek (Cikopo) - Palimanan toll road development project area, there is not a single community that can be identified as indigenous people with based on the IFC criteria.
Based on our observation, the people who live along the proposed toll road project are mostly Javanese and Sundanese Muslims, two ethnic identities and religion that are dominant in west Java. The social, economic and cultural characters are neither distinct nor unique; it is a ‘national’ representation which reflects the character of most modern Indonesian, except in cases known as the local identity in a region inhabited by an ethnic group or a tribe such as language and art.
In this case, as far as concerns regarding indigenous people, it is not necessary to have specific policies that must be put into consideration as indigenous people do not exist in the proposed toll road project area.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT 19
Appendix I: List of Consultation
Timing Stakeholders Information No Location Issues Discussed (2011) Involved Shared
1 31-Oct Palimanan H. Totok IP identification History, tradition, community economy 2 1-Nov Cirebon Ahmad IP identification History, tradition, community economy 3 1-Nov Palimanan Entin/ Khusnun IP identification History, tradition, community economy 4 1-Nov Palimanan Ustad Munawir IP identification Religious tradition and history 5 1-Nov Palimanan Pak Sumadi/ Kobil IP identification History, tradition, community economy 6 1-Nov Babakan Nurzaman IP identification Religion, economy and pesantren’s role 7 1-Nov Babakan Masrifah Anfa' IP identification Religion, economy and pesantren’s role 8 1-Nov IISIP Nurul Huda IP identification Religion, economy and pesantren’s role 9 1-Nov IISIP Asrie IP identification Religion, economy and pesantren’s role 10 1-Nov Bandung Achmad West Java IP map Definition, category and IP mapping in West Java 11 1-Nov Bandung Ria Andayani West Java IP map Definition, category and IP mapping in West Java 12 2-Nov Bandung Endang West Java IP map Definition, category and IP mapping in West Java 13 2-Nov Jatinangor Ira Indra Wardhana West Java IP map Definition, category and IP mapping in West Java 14 2-Nov Jatinangor Dede Mulyanto West Java IP map Definition, category and IP mapping in West Java 15 2-Nov Ciwaringin Mulyadi IP identification History, tradition, Sub District community economy 16 2-Nov Babakan Sumarno IP identification History, tradition, Village community economy 17 2-Nov Koramil Karnita IP identification History, tradition, Ciwaringin community economy 18 2-Nov Babakan Jahari IP identification History, tradition, Village community economy 19 3-Nov Bandung Ade Makmur West Java IP map Definition, category and IP mapping in West Java 20 3-Nov Majalengka David Susandi key informant Community’s response on the project 21 3-Nov Unima Muhammad Ridwan IP identification Community’s response on the project 22 3-Nov Pasir Malati Ono Sudarsono IP identification History, tradition, Majalengka community economy 23 3-Nov Pasir Malati Nono Sartono IP identification History, tradition, Majalengka community economy 24 3-Nov Social Agency Dedi Supriadi data/ information IP identification and its Majalengka on IP map 25 3-Nov Social Agency Yoyok Sugiyanto data/ information IP identification and its Majalengka on IP map 26 3-Nov Sanca VIllage, Mulus IP identification History, tradition, Gantar, community economy Indramayu
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT 20
Timing Stakeholders Information No Location Issues Discussed (2011) Involved Shared
27 4-Nov Social Agency H. Ahmad Rifaii data/ information IP identification and its Cirebon on IP map 28 8-Nov Jabong Syahrim IP identification History, tradition, Village, community economy Pagaden Sub District, Subang 29 9-Nov Subang H. Yoyo Suharyono data/ information IP identification and its on IP map 30 9-Nov STSI Aton R. Mulyana IP identification History, tradition, community economy 31 9-Nov Cigadung, H. Edith IP identification History, tradition, Subang community economy 32 9-Nov Gembor Karnali IP identification History, tradition, Village community economy 33 9-Nov Social Agency Dedi Harianto data/ information IP identification and its Subang on IP map 34 9-Nov Cultural Asep Ruchiat data/information IP identification and its Agency, on IP map Indramayu 35 9-Nov Social Agency Abdul Kalim data/ information IP identification and its Indramayu on IP map 36 10-Nov Bandung Eddy Sunarto data/ information IP definition according to on IP Social Agency and the IP Map 37 10-Nov Cisambeng Sadi IP identification History, tradition, Village, community economy Palasah Sub District, Majalengka 38 10-Nov Majasuka wahyudin IP identification History, tradition, Village, community economy Palasah Sub District, Majalengka 39 10-Nov Majasuka Nasihin IP identification History, tradition, Village, community economy Palasah Sub District, Majalengka 40 10-Nov Majasuka Sutarsah IP identification History, tradition, Village, community economy Palasah Sub District, Majalengka 41 10-Nov Majasuka Endang Sulaiman IP identification History, tradition, Village, community economy Palasah Sub District, Majalengka 42 10-Nov Purwakarta Yuyun data/ information History, tradition, on IP community economy 43 10-Nov Purwakarta Toni Budiasa data/ information History, tradition, on IP community economy 44 10-Nov Purwakarta Ahmad Sanusi data/ information History, tradition, on IP community economy 45 10-Nov Purwakarta Rohdiat data/ information History, tradition,
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT 21
Timing Stakeholders Information No Location Issues Discussed (2011) Involved Shared
on IP community economy 46 11-Nov Bandung Yoki Suwardi data/information History, tradition, on IP community economy 47 11-Nov Purwakarta Ondo data/information History, tradition, on IP community economy 48 11-Nov Purwakarta Rasam data/information History, tradition, on IP community economy 49 11-Nov Purwakarta Timan data/information History, tradition, on IP community economy 50 11-Nov Tegal Aren, Bastam IP identification History, tradition, Ligung Sub community economy District, Majalengka 51 11-Nov Beusi Village, Didi IP identification History, tradition, Ligung Sub community economy District, Majalengka 52 11-Nov Beusi Village, Karsono IP identification History, tradition, Ligung Sub community economy District, Majalengka 53 16-Nov Jakarta Annas Ladins Syarif data/information IP Map and definition in on IP West Java according to AMAN 54 17-Nov Garut, West Yayan Hermawan data/information IP Map and definition in Java on IP West Java according to AMAN 55 17-Nov West Java Muhtarom data/information IP Map and definition in on IP West Java according to AMAN
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT 22 ANNEX F Cultural Heritage Assessment (CHA)
REPORT
Cultural Heritage Assessment
Prepared for:
PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA
January 2012
Delivering sustainable solutions in a more competitive world
PT. ERM Indonesia Wisma Aldiron Dirgantara CULTURAL HERITAGE ASSESSMENT 2nd floor, Suite 238-239 Jl. Gatot Subroto Kav. 72
Jakarta 12870 Indonesia
Telephone +62 21 7918 1904 Facsimile +62 21 7918 1905 Website: www.erm.com
Client. Project No.
PT. Lintas Marga Sedaya 0143051
Summary. Date. 21 January 2012
Approved by
Paul Douglass President Director Included in this report. ERM Indonesia
Revision Description By Checked Approved Date This report has been prepared by Environmental Resources Distribution Management with all reasonable skill, care and diligence within the terms of the Contract with the client, incorporating our General Terms and Conditions of Business and taking account of the Internal resources devoted to it by agreement with the client. Public We disclaim any responsibility to the client and others in respect or Confidential any matters outside the scope of the above. This report is confidential to the client and we accept no responsibility of whatsoever nature to any third parties to whom this report, or any part thereof, is made known. Any such party relies upon the report at their own risk.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS ...... 1
1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 1
2 INTRODUCTION ...... 4 2.1 BACKGROUND...... 4
2.2 OBJECTIVES OF CHA...... 4 2.3 SCOPE OF WORK ...... 5
3 COMPLIANCE FRAMEWORK...... 6 3.1 NATIONAL...... 6
3.2 INTERNATIONAL ...... 7
4 CULTURAL HERITAGE ON THE NORTH COAST OF WEST JAVA...... 10 4.1 TANGIBLE HERITAGE...... 10
4.2 INTANGIBLE HERITAGE ...... 12
5 METHODOLOGY ...... 15 5.1 METHODOLOGY EMPLOYED AND SUPPORTING RATIONALE...... 15
6 CONSULTATION ...... 23 6.1 OBJECTIVES...... 23
6.2 GOVERNMENT...... 24 6.3 CIVIL SOCIETY ...... 25
6.4 STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION HELD...... 25 6.5 RESULTS OF STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATIONS ...... 26
7 FIELD AND ANALYTICAL FINDINGS ...... 28 7.1 CULTURAL HERITAGE SURVEY RESULTS...... 28
7.2 LIVING HERITAGE FINDING RESULTS...... 33 7.3 IMPACT ANALYSES (FIELD SCREENING AND SURVEY)...... 34
7.4 MITIGATION PLAN...... 41
8 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 45
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA DRAFT CULTURAL HERITAGE ASSESSMENT REPORT 1
Executive Summary
The work undertaken as part of this study seeks to address heritage issues within a discrete planning area related to the proposed Cikampek (Cikopo) – Palimanan (Cirebon) Toll Road along the north coast line. Detailed historical research of human activity in these areas is beyond the scope of this study. In order to provide a framework for the consideration of cultural heritage, a number of broad historical themes of past human activity were identified. Through desk research at the University of Indonesia in Jakarta, Archeological Service in Bandung, and Office of Conservation of Archaeological Heritage in Serang, it was found that within the assessment area several cultural pattern of long history related to the Sundanese culture.
The following data sources were used to identify, record, and analyze:
1. Primary data includes the results of an on-site and off-site survey along the corridor of the proposed toll road plan to identify cultural heritage resources and cultural heritage landscapes potentially affected by the undertaking; and
2. Secondary data includes information obtained through consultation with the Head of the village and local guardian of the site within the corridor.
Law Number 11 of the Republic of Indonesia 2010 concerning Cultural Property define such properties as monuments, structures and sites that have value for the purposes of knowledge, history, culture shall be protected under this law. According to the Law, cultural property that has been registered at the local, regional and national level is protected under the law. Suspected cultural heritage found should be treated as cultural property. Therefore, further investigation should be conducted to determine if the object found is actually cultural property.
The study area for the Cikampek – Palimanan (Cirebon) Toll Road crosses through five regencies, comprising Purwakarta, Subang, Majalengka, Indramayu and Cirebon. Based on the on-site and off-site survey of the study area, there are several Potential cultural heritage features and landscapes identified both on-site and off-site.
Results of on-site and off-site survey have shown that cultural heritage features found along the corridor are not considered archaelogically significant and not considered to be at the level of national heritage.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA DRAFT CULTURAL HERITAGE ASSESSMENT REPORT 1
The existing sites are considered to be of local heritage interest due to historical and social values.
Types of cultural heritage features within the study area, can be seen as mention below (1) Purwakarta Regency, there are tombs, sacred tree, well, furnace stones, plantation landscape from colonial period; (2) Subang Regency, there are tomb and well; (3) Majalengka Regency, there is old sugar factory; (4) Indramayu regency, there is bridge structure, and (5) Cirebon Regency, there are several tombs.
From the total sites surveyed, only 4 sites that will be directly affected by the project (within the corridor and potentially affected during the construction), including (1) Tombs of Buyut Sijem, in Bongas Kulon Village, Sumber Jaya District Majalengka Regency; (2) Tomb of Mbah Kentong and nearby spring, Babakan Royom – Batusari village, District of Dawuan, Subang regency; (3) Sacred Well at sub-village Pasir Ceuri, Sukamelang Village, Subang District, Subang Regency, and (4) Pandan Sacred Well at Kertawinangun village, district Kertajati, Majalengka regency.
These sites have not yet been registered as cultural property protected under Law No.11, year 2010. The communities surounding the three sites, in Batusari Village, Kertawinangun Village, and Bongas Kulon Village, have agreed the sites to be relocated, though the community expects that they will still be able to access the tomb. For the sacred well in Pasir Ceuri Hamlet, Sukamelang Village, Subang District, Subang Regency, the decision for the site to be relocated has not been agreed by all group of affected community.
Throughout the whole of the survey there is only one cultural site (located off-site) which is identified has been legally registered, The Ranggadipa Tomb, located at Selahaur Hamlet, Jabong village, Subang District, Subang Regency.
If a site does not appear on the national heritage register, either at the Ministry of Culture and Tourism or the local and regional authority, this does not automatically mean that the site not is significant archaeologically, since there are lots of cultural heritage throughout Indonesia that have not been registered yet.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA DRAFT CULTURAL HERITAGE ASSESSMENT REPORT 2
Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS ...... 1
1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 1
2 INTRODUCTION ...... 4
2.1 BACKGROUND...... 4
2.2 OBJECTIVES OF CHA...... 4 2.3 SCOPE OF WORK ...... 5
3 COMPLIANCE FRAMEWORK...... 6 3.1 NATIONAL...... 6
3.2 INTERNATIONAL ...... 7
4 CULTURAL HERITAGE ON THE NORTH COAST OF WEST JAVA...... 10 4.1 TANGIBLE HERITAGE...... 10
4.2 INTANGIBLE HERITAGE ...... 12
5 METHODOLOGY ...... 15
5.1 METHODOLOGY EMPLOYED AND SUPPORTING RATIONALE...... 15
6 CONSULTATION ...... 23
6.1 OBJECTIVES...... 23 6.2 GOVERNMENT...... 24
6.3 CIVIL SOCIETY ...... 25 6.4 STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION HELD...... 25
6.5 RESULTS OF STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATIONS ...... 26
7 FIELD AND ANALYTICAL FINDINGS ...... 28
7.1 CULTURAL HERITAGE SURVEY RESULTS...... 28 7.2 LIVING HERITAGE FINDING RESULTS...... 33
7.3 IMPACT ANALYSES (FIELD SCREENING AND SURVEY)...... 34
7.4 MITIGATION PLAN...... 41
8 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 45
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA DRAFT CULTURAL HERITAGE ASSESSMENT REPORT 3
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND
This Cultural Heritage Assessment (CHA) Report is part of the Environmental and Social Impact Assesment (ESIA) for the proposed Cikampek (Cikopo) – Palimanan Toll Road (Project) is a document instigated by PT ERM Indonesia for PT Lintas Marga Sedaya (LMS) to complete the necessary lender requirement. The proposed project is an extension of the Jakarta – Cikampek Toll Road route. It will be ±116 kilometers long and will impact the 62 villages, 24 districts and 5 regencies.
There are suburban and rural areas along the proposed toll road with a significant portion of the population are farmers who have strong customs beliefs and traditional rituals related to their farming activities. Local beliefs such as ‘karuhun’ (Sundanese, meaning opening a village) and ‘ruwatan bumi’ (Javanese, meaning cleansing the earth) are still performed in some group of communities where the research was conducted.
The result of this report in which the assessment was conducted through research and screening of cultural properties along the proposed toll road, should be considered by the project to establish a proper mitigation measure to address any issue identified during the process.
1.2 OBJECTIVES OF CHA
The Cultural Heritage Initial Assessment Report will describe the social-cultural and socio-economic environmental settings of the Project via a preliminary scoping. Such a scoping is necessary to be undertaken prior to a detailed assessment as it assists in identifying the relevant cultural issues and terms of the human environment.
The objective of this task is to assess the cultural heritage in the Project’s area of influence in order to align with the IFC PS and EP Requirements. In particular it aims to: 1. Identify whether the Project operations in general and a CHA specifically are likely to trigger local and/or national heritage preservation policy requirements;
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA DRAFT CULTURAL HERITAGE ASSESSMENT REPORT 4
2. Deal with actions on an ongoing basis as required by Indonesian Government Regulations and the IFC and EP. A follow up program may include a Community Development Program; and 3. Protect cultural heritage from the identified impacts of the Project activities and support the preservation of local culture and heritage.
The initial assessment will be undertaken by an archaeological survey, archaeological mapping, a historical survey and a desktop policy review.
1.3 SCOPE OF WORK
The results of the initial assessment will determine whether a detailed Cultural Heritage Assessment (CHA) will need to be carried out. If a detailed CHA need to be carried out, it has to be undertaken in close collaboration with local authorities.
1. Desktop Archaeological Survey and Mapping
The first part of the study shall consist of a literature review to identify any past archaeological research conducted in the affected regency. The study will map these sites, as well as potential sites of past human habitation in the area.
2. Desktop Historical Survey
A review of past historical events can contribute to assessments of the likelihood of encountering cultural property that have significance to local cultural groups.
Objects that are defined as cultural heritage may include: a. Features associated with human occupation. b. Features associated with sacred places such as cemeteries, or objects believed to have connection with the local ancestors.
3. Policy Review
To prepare for the possibility of a detailed Cultural Heritage Study, the third part of the study will involve a review of national and international laws and regulations, as well as consultations with the government, academician, and civil society experts. The purpose of this investigation is to determine whether Project operations in general and a CHA specifically are likely to trigger local and/or national heritage preservation policy requirements.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA DRAFT CULTURAL HERITAGE ASSESSMENT REPORT 5
2 COMPLIANCE FRAMEWORK
2.1 NATIONAL
Any discussion about the history and cultural heritage, are always associated with legislation. In Indonesia, the particular legislation is the Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 11 Year 2010 regarding Heritage. The observation and data collection of cultural heritage that are potentially affected by this toll road project must comply to this law, especially the understanding, preservation (protection, development and utilization) and determination of the zoning boundaries of the cultural heritage. Consequently, the object of the research according to article 1 of UURI No. 11 Year 2010 stated that Heritage is an immaterial form of cultural heritage objects, i.e. Heritage Buildings, Heritage Structure, Heritage Sites and Heritage Area on land and / or the existence of water that needs to be preserved because it has significant value for history, science, education, religion, and / or cultures through registration process.
Based on the definition, there are 4 (four) important things that are considered as important or ‘tifak’ namely: 1) is immaterial, 2) need to be conserved, 3) have significant value, and 4) registration process. While the definition of the Heritage Area by CB Law 11/2010 on Article 1 point 6 describes Heritage Area as a unit of geographic space that has two or more Cultural Properties situated close to each other or showing a typical spatial characteristics.
In this context, an object, a building or a natural feature that supposedly has heritage value does not automatically accepted as heritage by the community. At the same time, the government does not automatically consider it as a cultural heritage when it is valued by the community. It needs to meet the specified requirements to be considered to have a heritage value. Defining Heritage status of an object, buildings, structures, locations and geographical space or unit is carried out by the Regency office based on the recommendation from a team of culture heritage expert. Preservation of National Cultural Heritage is considered a national priority by the Ministry.
At the local level, West Java Regional Government itself has issued a Local Regulation No.7 of 2003 on the management of archeological, historical, Traditional Values and Museum, where it stated in the content of the regulation that in protecting cultural heritage it needs to
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA DRAFT CULTURAL HERITAGE ASSESSMENT REPORT 6
involve the active role of communities and local governments. This Regulation stresses the importance of cultural heritage values and management of the existing culture in western Java area, where it should be preserved and protected.
2.2 INTERNATIONAL
Cultural heritage is legally protected in almost every country. The UNESCO Convention for the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage of 1972 has become the foundation for national and other legislation since it requires signatories to adopt general policies; establish appropriate organizations and services; and develop legal, scientific, and financial measures for the protection and conservation of cultural and natural heritage.
The concept of World Heritage has created an internationally shared responsibility for identification, conservation and management of the global patrimony. One mean of addressing this responsibility is by promulgating standards in various documents, including international and regional conventions, recommendations, charters and policies. These are consensus documents on best practice, formulated during a span of over 50 years, and intended to guide governments, non- governmental organizations and professionals in the fields of cultural heritage, environmental protection, infrastructure development and public administration. The standard-setting documents fall into two categories according to purpose: those issued by cultural heritage organizations for general protection and management; and those created by development institutions for safeguarding cultural heritage in planning and implementing infrastructure projects.
The Convention is widely referred to by a lot of countries including Indonesia as a common understanding on Cultural Heritage. Agencies that provide assistance loans, such as ADB, IFC, refer to this convention with the aim of achieving common understanding or perception on cultural.
Standards for the protection and management of cultural heritage in general have been issued by a variety of institutions; the leading institutions are the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO); the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS); the Council of Europe (COE); and national governments. Most of these standards pertain to material culture, often termed ‘tangible’ cultural heritage; however, there is increasing
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA DRAFT CULTURAL HERITAGE ASSESSMENT REPORT 7
attention also to ‘intangible’ heritage, including the products and processes of artistic and creative expression.
Material cultural heritage is divided into three groups: monuments, groups of buildings, and sites. These must have ‘outstanding value,’ and monuments and groups of buildings must have outstanding universal value (Cernea 2001: 2). The 1986 World Bank operational policy OPN 11.03 mandated a “do not harm the heritage” approach to development, so that projects were required to avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse impacts on cultural property.
ADB define Cultural Heritage is a record of humanity’s relationship to the world, past achievements, and discoveries. Cultural heritage, also termed cultural property, cultural patrimony or cultural resources, can be defined as the present manifestation of the human past. It refers to sites, structures, and remains of archaeological, historical, religious, cultural, or aesthetic value. In conserving this heritage we are conserving those elements of our past that have the potential to contribute to our understanding of human history.
UNESCO has confirmed that the ‘cultural heritage’ may be defined corpus material signs –either artistic or symbolic- which are handed on by the past to the current culture. This forms part of the enrichment of cultural identities and gives each particular place its recognizable features. The presentation and preservation of culture heritage is therefore the foundation of any cultural policy.
The following is a comparison of the definition of cultural heritage by IFC, ADB and the World Bank
IFC ADB WORLD BANK 1. Tangible forms of cultural 1. ADB define Cultural This policy addresses physical heritage, such as tangible Heritage is a record of cultural resources,’ which are moveable or immovable humanity’s relationship to defined as movable or objects, property, sites, the world, past immovable objects, sites, structures, or groups of achievements, and structures, groups of structures, structures, having discoveries. Cultural and natural features and archaeological heritage, also termed cultural landscapes that have (prehistoric), property, cultural patrimony archaeological, paleontological, paleontological, or cultural resources, can be historical, architectural, historical, cultural, defined as the present religious, aesthetic, or other artistic, and religious manifestation of the human cultural significance. Physical values; past. It refers to sites, cultural resources may be structures, and remains of located in urban or rural 2. Unique natural features archaeological, historical, settings, and may be above or or tangible objects that religious, cultural, or below ground, or under water. embody cultural values, aesthetic value. In Their cultural interest may be at such as sacred groves, conserving this heritage we the local, provincial or national rocks, lakes, and are conserving those level, or within the international
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA DRAFT CULTURAL HERITAGE ASSESSMENT REPORT 8
IFC ADB WORLD BANK waterfalls; and elements of our past that community. have the potential to Physical cultural resources are 3. Certain instances of contribute to our important as sources of intangible forms of understanding of human valuable scientific and historical culture that are proposed history. information, as assets for to be used for commercial economic and social purposes, such as cultural 2. Archaeological resources development, and as integral knowledge, innovations, (e.g., occurrences and sites parts o f a people’s cultural and practices of which may include artifacts, identity and practices. communities embodying plant and animal remains traditional lifestyles. associated with human activities, burials, and architectural elements) which may or may not be an integral part of the cultural heritage of the local inhabitants; and
3) Cultural landscapes which consist of landforms and biotic as well as non-biotic features of the land resulting from cultural practices over historical, or even prehistoric times, by generations of peoples of one or more cultural traditions. These resources constitute the cultural heritage of a people, a nation, of humanity.
Source: Operational Policy Note 11.03, “Managing Cultural Property in World Bank-Financed Projects” (currently being converted into an Operational Policy) and in the Environmental Assessment Sourcebook (World Bank 1994)
The three definitions of culture heritage are similar and do not contradict each other, so can be used as a guideline for references and safeguard policies to classify Culture Heritage. Cultural Heritage is also termed as cultural properties, cultural patrimony or cultural resources and now broadened to include human and natural environment that covers the non-physical cultural heritage including signs and symbols passed on by oral transmission, artistic and literary form of language, way of life, myth, beliefs, rituals, value system, and traditional knowledge and know how.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA DRAFT CULTURAL HERITAGE ASSESSMENT REPORT 9
3 CULTURAL HERITAGE ON THE NORTH COAST OF WEST JAVA
3.1 TANGIBLE HERITAGE
The North Coast of West Java is geo-culturally located in the middle of two significant cultures that make up the community in Cirebon, Indramayu, and (partially) Majalengka (Ciayumaja), and have two native languages. The two cultures are Sundanese in the west and south, and Javanese in the east and north. Sundanese influences in the history are more political as a result of Cirebon (Ciayumaja) being occupied by Buddhist kingdoms such as Ancient Hindu Galuh, Pajajaran, and Sumedang–Larang.
The oldest evidence of human habitation in the area of West Java's north coast is characterized by archaeological findings in Anyer – Banten which dates back to the prehistory era (the metallic bronze and Iron Age), before the first millennium. The most significant findings in the area are the clay pottery with the distribution of being in Buni (old Jakarta) and extending to Anyer and Cirebon. Potteries from these sites are found along with human remains, which according to the research by the late paleoanthropologist Professor Teuku Jacob (Archaeologist – University of Gadjah Mada), are remains derived from the Mongoloid race and Australomelanesoid race.
The Prehistoric culture (Buni pottery complex) on the north coast of West Java was first in contact with the international community (India) and this later intensified over a long period of time. Prehistoric society in the area accepted and adopted the Hindu-Buddhist culture that settlers brought. This is proven by the discovery Batu Jaya site and Cibuaya site, 10 km apart, both located in the Karawang area, northwestern coast of West Java. This site is a complex of brick enshrinement suspected of having an area of 5 km2 from the final period of Tarumanegara Kingdom, about 6-7 century AD. According to Hasan Djafar study, these sites are from the final period of Tarumanegara Kingdom, about 6-7 century AD, which has significant value because it is an example of the early work of architecture that can still be observed nowadays.
Along with the acceptance of the Hindu-Buddhist cultural influence, the Hindu-Buddhist Tarumanagara Kingdom emerged in West Java until VII century AD. One interesting aspect in West Java is that
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA DRAFT CULTURAL HERITAGE ASSESSMENT REPORT 10
Buddhistic temples have never been found other than the Batu Jaya temple. Batu Jaya temple is the only existing Buddhist temple that was discovered in West Java up until today. When the Empire collapsed, the Kingdom of Sunda replaced Tarumanagara. However, The Batujaya complex was still used as a place of worship.
Using the C-14 Carbon dating test on the charcoal remains found in Temple Blandongan and a number of findings in the form of votive tablets depicting Amitabh Buddha, the temple structure complex was concluded to have been around since the third or fourth century AD and was concluded as Buddhist. If the temple complex is paralleled by a number of findings of the classical temples (Hindu-Buddhist) in Indonesia, then the existence of Batujaya enshrinement complex is the largest Buddhist temple complex (5 Kilometers2) and even possibly the oldest (3rd or 4th Century AD) in Indonesia.
It seems that the destruction of the complex is in line with the weakening of the Hindu-Buddhist influences in West Java, which resulted in the fall of the Sunda kingdom fell in 1521 AD and was replaced by the Kingdom Galuh (the 8th century to 15th century AD), and Sumedang–Larang (1580-1620), as recorded in the history of Indonesia.
The Cirebon Sultanate (1479-1809) and the Sultanate of Banten (1552- 1832) emerged at almost the same time. With the establishment of the two sultanates, West Java became one of the centers of spreading of culture in the region. In the 17th century, parts of West Java, particularly Pranging was under the influence of the Mataram Kingdom (1620-1677). Furthermore, West Java was the center of Dutch colonial ruling activity in the archipelago, which is the center activity of the Company / VOC (the 17th century until the late 18th century) and the administrative center of the Dutch East Indies (the beginning of the 19th century until March 1942).
The presence of the Dutch colony on the island of Java affected the social life of the society and governance, in many ways. One footprint that is still visible today is the Subang area, which was ruled under the Sumedang – Larang Kingdom before being occupied by the colonial.
In 1812, the region established a large plantation in Subang known as Pamanoekan & Tjiasem Landens (P & T Lands). The area covered a total of 212,900 acres, with the Eigendom right (property right), that spanned with the Java Sea as its northern boundaries, Cipunagara
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA DRAFT CULTURAL HERITAGE ASSESSMENT REPORT 11
River on the east and part of the Residency Cirebon, south of the land stretching to the mountains, and to the west was the Residency of Priangan and Cilamaya River. To implement the governance in this area, the Dutch government established districts that were overseen by an onderdistrik. At that time, Subang area was under the leadership of a BB controller (Bienenlandsch Bestuur) based in Subang (Kusma et al., 2007). This area was divided into several plantations. Each plantation had an emplacement in the middle of the plantation which was used as the center of plantation management.
The landscape of this colonial plantation legacy is still existing and managed by PT. Sang Hyang Series (Limited) / PT SHS, a State Owned Enterprises (SOEs) which is a continuation of the colonial era plantation companies. This Plantation region was once part of Sukamandi Plantation.
3.2 INTANGIBLE HERITAGE
The Intangible Heritage found in West Java include ruwatan bumi and mapag sri or munjung. Ruwatan bumi is a ritual that is held to show gratefulness to God for the plantation products that were given. ‘Ruwatan’ comes from the word ‘rawat’ or ‘merawa’, which means to collect or to look after, which relates to gather all the communities and also to gather all agricultural products, both the raw and processed products. Ruwatan bumi usually includes puppet show and charity works that are led by the religious and local leaders.
Mapag sri or munjung is usually carried out at the start the planting season. ‘Mapag sri’ in Sundanese means ‘fetch the rice’. ‘Mapag’ means ‘fetch’ and ‘sri’ means ‘rice’. ‘Fetch the rice’ means harvest. This ritual is carried out as a form of gratitude to God for giving the farmers a fulfilling harvest. Mapag Sri Ritual is carried out towards the harvesting season. This ritual is normally carried out every year but this is not the case for the last few years. A few factors are affecting this, which include: 1. Safety factor as there are riots during the ritual; 2. Harvesting season is not always at the same time in different areas; and 3. If harvest result is not good enough, the result is in not enough funds to carry out the ritual.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA DRAFT CULTURAL HERITAGE ASSESSMENT REPORT 12
Ruwatan Bumi and Mapag Sri Rituals are not carried out in exactly the same way in the different villages as each village has a different way and tradition. These rituals are still commonly carried out today by the communities in Subang, Majalengka and Cirebon regencies.
The villages that still carry out ‘ruwatan bumi’ include Batusari, Gembor, Jabong, Palasah, Babakan Cuyu, Bongas Kulon, Pajalin Kidul, Panjalin Lor, Galagamba, Lung Benda, Tegal Karangand Kempek villages. The similarity of the ‘ruwatan bumi’ ritual carried out in those villages is parading the agricultural products and livestock around the villages before processing and cooking them to be consumed by the communities, as a sign of gratitude to the earth. The common rules for ‘thanking the earth’ ritual are showing off agricultural products, parading around the villages and puppet shows.
There are two sessions of puppet shows. The first session is strongly associated with sacred values and is played by particular puppeteers. The puppets for the first session have to be made of cow skin. The second session is for entertainment purposes. These puppets can be either made of wood or cow skin.
On the ‘thanking the earth’ ritual day, the villagers will first hang / show off agricultural products (vegetables, rice, cassavas, fruits, etc.) in front of their houses, while for traders, they will show off their trading goods in the frontyard or the pathway / porch of their houses. Then, the communities start the ritual by first slaughtering some goats, and then gather at the sacred places of the village, i.e. tombs, sacred wells, to pray before parading around the villages.
During the parade, the villagers will dress according to their professions, where the professions are not only associated with farming but also include military, teachers and other professions. The parade goes around passing every house in the villages and visits some of the sacred places in the villages. During the parade, the people participating will compete to collect the agricultural products that were hung / showed off at the front yard of the houses, while the owner of the house will be spraying the people with water.
The important message to be noted is that the communities appreciate their history and ancestors by keeping some historical locations sacred and making these to be part of their traditional activities and rituals. Additionally, the rich cultural heritage of showing gratitude for the year hard work is expressed with the involvement of all the villagers.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA DRAFT CULTURAL HERITAGE ASSESSMENT REPORT 13
The parade route is actually considered to be flexible. If there are new roads in the village, the parade will cover the new roads, which will pass the new houses along the new roads too. The essence of ‘ruwatan bumi’ ritual is to greet and to visit all the houses in the village.
Besides the ‘Ruwatan Bumi’ (Bongkar Bumi, Guwar Bumi, Sedekah Bumi) rituals, there are other traditional rituals held in the villages, which include Mapag sri, Munjung (Mapag Rendengan), dan Sedekah Makam (Munjung Buyut).
All of these rituals are carried out in similar ways; the only difference is the purposes. Mapag Sri is carried out to welcome the harvest season, Munjung is to welcome the raining season, while Sedekah Malam is carried out for the villagers to recall the history of the village and its elders/ ancestors by visiting the tombs and sacred places in the village.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA DRAFT CULTURAL HERITAGE ASSESSMENT REPORT 14
4 METHODOLOGY
4.1 METHODOLOGY EMPLOYED AND SUPPORTING RATIONALE
In order to fulfill the aim and purpose of the research, the method used is field observation based on the references from related institutions. Desk review on literature is used as a reference to locate the cultural heritage sites.
Our team used this background information as guidance in conducting the field observation. We also verify the background information by interviewing the village chiefs, community leaders and key informants.
The data sources used to identify, record, and analyze include primary and secondary data. Primary data includes the results of an on-site and off-site survey along the corridor of the toll road plan to identify cultural heritage resources and cultural heritage landscapes potentially affected by the undertaking and Secondary data includes information obtained through consultation with the Head of village, local guardian of the site within the corridor.
The method employed includes the following steps:
1. Preparation
Preparation begins with setting the schedule and workload that must be performed and fulfilled by the team. It was decided then to divide the three teams with respected tasks as follows: (1) conduct consultations with the stakeholders and conducting secondary data search in the Department of Archaeology, University of Indonesia, Jakarta; (2) seek information in Bandung Institute of Archaeology and Historical Preservation Hall and West Java Traditional Values; and (3) search the field data in the villages along the path that will be traversed by the Cikopo – Palimanan toll road.
The field survey involves a local guide to quickly detect and understand the existing situation in the area
2. Field study
a. Living Heritage Survey
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA DRAFT CULTURAL HERITAGE ASSESSMENT REPORT 15
In conducting the survey on the living heritage existence, the method employed is direct observation. This is undertaken to obtain information about morphological terms used by the community and to observe traditions that are still carried out by the community.
CHA team will also conduct interviews with competent authorities on the existence of tangible and intangible cultural heritage / living heritage in the region. Interviews will be conducted with: The village head; a. Indigenous leaders or people who are considered as community elders; and b. Caretakers or people who are considered as experts in the historical background of each cultural heritage.
After interviews were undertaken, the locations discussed in the interviews were visited and the co-ordinates of these locations were recorded using a GPS. b. Archaeological Reconnaissance
Before conducting the field study of the archaeological sites, a literature study on records writing and reports about the objects that exist in each area / village to be visited were carried out. Literature study was conducted in Bandung Archaeology Agency and Historical Preservation and Traditional Values Hall in Bandung West Java.
Field observations were carried out to cross-check the data obtained from the literature study and to observe archeological remains that have not been documented previously. Archaeological observations are followed by documentation of the narrative, and coordinates of every cultural heritage.
History and archaeological relics in West Java, particularly in the area, which may be affected by the Cikopo – Palimanan toll road project, show an important historical role dating from the prehistoric period. These historical patterns need to be re-identified through field observations. The predictive model is the adopted method to identify the areas where there are potential archaeological remains.
3. Field activities and schedule a. Schedule
No Activities November
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA DRAFT CULTURAL HERITAGE ASSESSMENT REPORT 16
31/10 1/11 2/11 3/11 4-16/11 17/11 18/11 19/11 20/11 21/11 1 Preparation 2 Library research 3 Consultation Jakarta
Bandung
Filed work
4 Filed survey
5 Demobilization
b. Document Review
No. Documents Document source 1. LHPA (Laporan Hasil Penelitian Arkeologi) in Indramayu Bandung Regency, 18-27 July 1994 Archaeological Agency
2 Article by Dadan Mulyana “Penelitian Kepurbakalaan di Bandung Daerah Subang dalam Mosaik Arkeologi” 2003 (The Archaeological Agency archeological research in the area of Subang in the Journal of Mosaics of Archaeology) 3 Kabupaten Subang Suatu Kajian Sejarah by Drs. Heru Historical Preservation Erwantoro 2005 (An Historical Study of Subang Regency) and Traditional Values Agency in Bandung 4 Sejarah Kabupaten Subang: Studi Perkembangan Kabupaten Historical Preservation Subang, by Drs. Iwan Roswandi, 2005 (History of Subang and Traditional Values District: Studies on the development of Subang Regency) Agency in Bandung 5 Penelitian Peninggalan Kesejarahan di Kabupaten Subang Historical Preservation by Drs. Heru Erwantoro, 2001 (Research on historical relics in and Traditional Values Subang Regency). Agency in Bandung 6 Upacara Ngruwat Bumi pada Komunitas Adat Kampung Historical Preservation Nagara Banceuy, Desa Sanca District Jalan Cagak and Traditional Values Kabupaten Subang, by Drs. Rosyadi, 2005 (Ngruwat Bumi Agency in Bandung ceremony at the village of Indigenous Communities Kampong of Banceuy, Sanca Village, Subang District) 7 Laporan Penelitian Arkeologi, 2010, Permukiman Puncak- Bandung puncak Peradaban Awal Masehi Sampai Masa Kolonial Di Archaeological Agency Kabupaten Subang Jawa Barat (Report of Archaeological Research, 2010, Settlement in the Early Colonial Period Until AD Subang Regencyin West Java) 8 Subang dalam Mosaik Arkeologi tahun 2003 yang Bandung mengulang laporan-laporan sebelumnya (Subang in the Archaeological Agency Mosaics of Archaeology in 2003 which repeat earlier reports) 9 LHPA Situs Patenggang Kabupaten Subang (Tahap I) Tahun Bandung 2000 (LHPA on-site Patenggang Subang District (Phase I) of Archaeological Agency 2000) 10 LHPA Gerabah Situs Talun, District Sagalaherang, Bandung Kabupaten Subang tahun 1998/1999 (LHPA about Talun Archaeological Agency Pottery Site, District Sagalaherang, Subang Regency in 1998/1999) 11 LHPA Penanggulangan kasus kepurbakalaan di situs Talun, Bandung Desa Talagasari, District Sagalaherang, Kabupaten Subang Archaeological Agency tahun 2006 (LHPA of Mitigation cases at Talun archeological site, Talagasari Village, District Sagalaherang, Subang Regency
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA DRAFT CULTURAL HERITAGE ASSESSMENT REPORT 17
No. Documents Document source in 2006) 12 LHPA Paleoekologi & Paleontologi Kabupaten Subang 15 - Bandung 30 Nopember 2011 di Situs Pasir Cabe Kelurahan Wanareja, Archaeological Agency District Cibogo Kabupaten Subang (LHPA about Palaeoecology & Paleontology in Subang district, 15 to 30 November 2011, at the Pasir Cabe Site, Wanareja Village, Sub- District Cibogo, Subang Regency) 13 LHPA Tinggalan masa klasik di Kabupaten Subang tahun Bandung 2004 (LHPA about the classical heritage in Subang Regencyin Archaeological Agency 2004) LHPA Cirebon di Lemah Abang, kecamatan Sumber, Bandung 14 District Cirebon Selatan tahun 1993/1994 (LHPA Cirebon at Archaeological Agency Sub-district Lemah Abang, District Sumber, at South Cirebon area 1993/1994) LHPA Penanggulangan Kasus Kepurbakalaan tentang Bandung temuan fosil stegodon Desa Tegalgubug, District Archaeological Agency Arjawinangun Kabupaten Cirebon tahun 1998/1999 (LHPA about Case Management relating to the Antiquities of fossil stegodon Tegalgubug Village, District Arjawinangun Cirebon 1998/1999). 15 LHPA Kabupaten Cirebon 27 Januari – 7 Februari 1994 Bandung Archaeological Agency 16 LHPA Perkembangan Pemukiman Etnik Cina Pada Abad Bandung XV-XIX di Cirebon tahun 2006 (LHPA about the development Archaeological Agency of China's Ethnic Settlement In the XV-XIX Century in Cirebon in 2006) 17 LHPA Situs pelabihan Kuna Gunung Jati Kabupaten Bandung Cirebon 2002 (LHPA about ancient harbor site of Sunan Gunung Archaeological Agency Jati at Cirebon District in 2002) 18 LHPA Geo-arkeologi situs Amparan Jati Cirebon tahun 2001 Bandung (LHPA on Geo-archaeological sites of Amparan Jati Cirebon in Archaeological Agency 2001) 19 LHPA Geologi dan Paleontologi di daerah Palimanan dan Bandung sekitarnya tahun 1996/1997 (LHPA Geology and Paleontology Archaeological Agency in Palimanan and surrounding area in 1996/1997) 20 Laporan Penelitian Geomorfologi Situs Huludyeuh dan Bandung Gunung Singkil, 1994 (Site Geomorphology Research Report Archaeological Agency Huludyeuh and Mount Singkil 1994) 21 Laporan Kegiatan Perekaman Objek Purbakala Tinggalan Bandung Arkeologi Islam di Daerah Cirebon, Tasikmalaya dan Garut, Archaeological Agency 2003 (Recording Activity Report of Objects Islamic archeological relics in the Region Cirebon, Tasikmalaya and Garut of 2003) c. Source of Consultation
No. Source Capacity Location 1. Drs. Nanang Saptono Archaeologist Bandung Archaeological Agency
2 Dra. Endang Widyastuti Archaeologist Bandung Archaeological Agency
3 Drs. Heru Erwantoro Historian Historical Preservation and Traditional Values Agency in Bandung 4 Bp. H. Moestopo Local leader Cinangka, Bungursari, Purwakarta 5 Bp. Engken Customary leader Cinangka, Bungursari, Purwakarta
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA DRAFT CULTURAL HERITAGE ASSESSMENT REPORT 18
No. Source Capacity Location 6 Bp. Olin Government officer Cisaat, Cempaka Purwakarta 7 Bp. Uta Government officer Cisaat, Cempaka Purwakarta 8 Bp. Rasam Supendi Government officer Ciparungsari, Cibatu, Purwakarta 9 Bp. Darsim Local leader Wantilan, Cipeundeuy, Subang 10 Bp. H. Warsim Government officer at Wanakerta, Purwadadi, Subang village 11 Bp. Suherman Customary leader Wanakerta, Purwadadi, Subang 12 Bp. Tori Local leader Marengmang, Kalijati, Subang 13 Bp. Suhadi Government officer at Kaliangsana , Kalijati, Subang village 14 Bp. Karmin Government officer at Batusari , Dawuan, Subang village 15 Eyang Sarwin Customary leader Batusari , Dawuan, Subang 16 Bp. Amil Religion leader Cidahu, Pagaden, Subang 17 Bp. Ajo Local leader Cidahu, Pagaden, Subang 18 Bp. Darun Head of village Balingbing , Pagaden, Subang 19 Anak Eyang Jami Local leader Balingbing , Pagaden, Subang 20 Nyi Atim Customary leader Balingbing , Pagaden, Subang 21 Bp. Sarmid Customary leader Gembor , Pagaden, Subang 22 Bp. Sahrim Government officer at Jabong , Subang, Subang village 23 Bp. Emun Customary leader Sukamelang , Subang, Subang 24 Ibu Tarsih Customary leader Cisaga , Cibogo, Subang 25 Bp. Karsiwan Government officer at Cibogo, Cibogo, Subang village 26 Bp. Sayudi Customary leader Cibogo, Cibogo , Subang 27 Bp. Isyum Customary leader Sumurbarang , Cibogo, Subang 28 Bp. Maman Customary leader Bantarwaru , Gantar, Indramayu 29 Bp. Mulus Sukmawinata Head of village Sanca , Gantar, Indramayu 30 Bp. Saju Customary leader Cikawung , Terisi, Indramayu 31 Bp. O. Suhro Government officer at Palasah, village Kertajati, Majalengka
32 Bp. Suja Local leader Pakubeureum , Kertajati, Majalengka 33 Bp. Uuy Abdul Syukur Government officer at Babakan Cuyu , Kertajati, village Majalengka 34 Bp. Udin The house owner Sukawana , Kertajati, Majalengka 35 Bp. Subur Customary leader Kertawinangun , Kerjataji, Majalengka 36 Bp. Karsono Local leader Beusi , Ligung, Majalengka 37 Bp. Deddy Local leader Beusi , Ligung, Majalengka 38 Bp. Hendy Local leader Surawangi , Jatiwangi, Majalengka 39 Bp. Ade Customary leader Balida , Dawuan, Majalengka
40 Ibu Marsih Customary leader Pasir Melati , Dawuan, Majalengka 41 Bp. Ata Customary leader Mandapa , Dawuan, Majalengka 42 Bp. Adi Local leader Salawana , Dawuan, Majalengka 43 Bp. Duli Local leader Bongas Kulon , Sumber Jaya, Majalengka 44 Bp. Panadi Local leader Bongas Kulon , Sumber Jaya, Majalengka
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA DRAFT CULTURAL HERITAGE ASSESSMENT REPORT 19
No. Source Capacity Location 45 Bp. Restu Local leader Bongas Kulon , Sumber Jaya, Majalengka 46 Bp. Wira Local leader Panjalin Kidul , Sumber Jaya, Majalengka 47 Bp. Iang Saiful Ihsan Local guardian for Panjalin Kidul , Sumber Jaya, the sites Majalengka 48 Bp. Iang Local leader Babakan , Ciwaringin, Cirebon 49 Bp. Marjuki Local leader Babakan , Ciwaringin, Cirebon 50 Bp. Sodikin Local leader Galagamba , Ciwaringin, Cirebon 51 Bp. Warsi/Marjaya Customary leader Galagamba , Ciwaringin, Cirebon 52 Bp. Kadira Local leader Pegagan , Palimanan, Cirebon d. Off-Site Cultural Heritage
No Cultural Type of Location GPS Coordinate Heritage/Property Heritage Name Property 1 Tomb of Mbah Rabil Building Cinangka, Bungursari, Purwakarta 2 Boundaries Marking Structure Cisaat, Cempaka S 06027’18.4” Purwakarta E 107032’17.9” 3 Sacred Tree - Kertamukti, N/A Campaka, Purwakarta 4 Tomb of Mbah Kaneo Building Kertamukti, S 06029’32.1” Campaka, E 107041’54.9 Purwakarta 5 Tomb of Panembahan Building Ciparungsari, Cibatu, N/A Suryagati Purwakarta 6 Batu Tungku Structure Wantilan, S 06031’50.2” Cipeundeuy, Subang E 107041’35.5” 7 Standing ground of Building Wanakerta, Anggayasa and Wirayasa Purwadadi, Subang 8 Gedong Hejo Building Marengmang, S 06031’13.5” Kalijati, Subang E 107039’09.1” 9 Gedong Satu Building Marengmang, S 06031’15.1” Kalijati, Subang E 107038’32.6” 10 Well and Tomb of Mbah Building Kaliangsana, Kalijati, S 06030’24.3” Tanu and Mbah Raden Subang E 107040’55.6" 11 Tomb of Pionir desa Building Ciruluk, Kalijati, N / A Subang 12 Standing ground of Building Batusari, Dawuan, S 06031’15,1” unknown person Subang E 107044’02,1” 13 Water Spring Structure Batusari , Dawuan, S 06030’29.1” Subang E 107043’30.6” 14 Tomb of Eyang Godeg Building Batusari , Dawuan, S 06030’50.7” Subang E 107043’19.5” 15 Standing ground of a Wali Building Cidahu, Pagaden, S 06025’31.1” (Syeh Abdul Malik) Subang E 107048’22.6” 16 Tomb of Mbah Dalem Building Balingbing , Pagaden, N / A Subang 17 Gede Well Building, Gembor , Pagaden, S 06031’37.5” Structure Subang E 107048’42.1” 18 Tomb of Mbah Building Jabong , Subang, S 06030’46.2” Ranggadipa and wife Subang E 107045’40.0” 19 Tomb of Eyang Buyut Building Sukamelang , N / A Esmor Subang, Subang
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA DRAFT CULTURAL HERITAGE ASSESSMENT REPORT 20
No Cultural Type of Location GPS Coordinate Heritage/Property Heritage Name Property
20 Water Spring Pasir Ceuri Building Sukamelang , S 06031’53.5” Subang, Subang E 107046’50.3” 21 Standing ground of Mbah Building Cisaga , Cibogo, S 06032’12.2” Jaya Perkasa bin Ratu Subang E 107047’51.6” Kusuma 22 Tomb of Eyang Kasban Building Cibogo, Cibogo, S 06032’58.4” Subang E 107049’20.8” 23 Tomb of Eyang Mardi Building Cibogo, Cibogo, S 06033’00” Subang E 107048’27.2” 24 Tomb of Eyang Buyut Building Wellbarang , Cibogo, E 06033’13.4” Mangir Subang S 107052’33.2” 25 Tomb of Eyang Buyut Building Bantarwaru , Gantar, S 06034’11.1” Pangamukan Indramayu E 107052’31.7” 26 Tomb of Mbah Dalem Building Bantarwaru , Gantar, S 06033’31.2” Jaga Derpa Indramayu E 107053’05.0” 27 Tomb of Mbah Uyut Building Bantarwaru , Gantar, S 06033’45.4” Asmar Indramayu E 107052’58.0” 28 Statue of Sentot Building Sanca , S 06035’56.9” Gantar, E 107056’36.4” Indramayu 29 Colonial era Bridge Building Sanca , S 06035’47.6” Gantar, E 107056’49.9” Indramayu 30 Tomb of Sanca Building Sanca , S 06035’41.5” Gantar, E 107056’53.5” Indramayu 31 Tomb of Mbah Alen Building Cikawung , S 060 38’ 03.7” Terisi, E 1080 01’16.3” Indramayu 32 Well Turangga Structure Palasah, S 060 41’ 48.1” Kertajati, Majalengka E 1080 07’ 42.0” 33 Tomb of Turangga Building Palasah , S 060 42’ 25.0” Kertajati, Majalengka E 1080 07’ 47.3” 34 Bridge and aquaduct Building Pakubeureum , S 060 43’ 54.0” Kertajati, Majalengka E 1080 10’ 00.5” 35 Boundary marking/ Structure Babakan Cuyu, N / A monument Kertajati, Majalengka 36 Colonial era House Building Sukawana , Kertajati, S 060 41’ 52.9” Majalengka E 1080 11’ 42.9”
37 Well Panand and Pohon Building Kertawinangun, S 060 41’ 59.7” Trembesi Kerjataji, Majalengka E 1080 09’ 56.2” 38 Tomb of Ki Gambir Building Kertawinangun, S 060 42’ 09.8” Kerjataji, Majalengka E 1080 09’ 55.7” 39 Buyut Krapyak, Buyut Building, Beusi , Ligung, S 060 41’ 22.7” Well, Buyut Barang, Structure Majalengka E 1080 15’ 48.8” Mbah Buyut Gandok 40 Old Sugar Factory Building Sutawangi , S 060 43’ 11.0” Jatiwangi, E 1080 15’ 03.4” Majalengka 41 Tama Well Structure Surawangi , S 060 43’ 11.0” Jatiwangi, E 1080 15’ 03.4” Majalengka 42 Mbah Buyut Santri Building Balida , Dawuan, S 060 43’ 52.3” Majalengka E 1080 12’ 26.7” 43 Mbah Buyut Bali Winata Building Pasir Melati , S 060 42’ 24.7”
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA DRAFT CULTURAL HERITAGE ASSESSMENT REPORT 21
No Cultural Type of Location GPS Coordinate Heritage/Property Heritage Name Property Dawuan, Majalengka E 1080 12’ 14.5” 44 Buyut Garuda Building Karanganyar , S 060 41’ 24.9” Dawuan, Majalengka E 1080 12’ 41.0” 45 Suci Negara Building Mandapa , Dawuan, S 060 44’ 04.1” Majalengka E 1080 13’ 10.1” 46 Tomb of Eyang Jangkung Building Salawana , Dawuan, S 060 41’ 57.2” Majalengka E 1080 13’ 57.4” 47 Pohon Eyang Jangkung - Salawana , Dawuan, S 060 41’ 51.1” Majalengka E 1080 13’ 31.0” 48 Buyut Sijem Building Bongas Kulon , S 06041’39,1” Sumber Jaya, E 108018’57,5” Majalengka 49 Traditional house Building Panjalin Kidul , S 060 41’ 53.3” Sumber Jaya, E 1080 21’ 22.6” Majalengka 50 Tomb of Kyai Building Babakan , S 060 41’ 34.2” Hanan Ciwaringin, Cirebon E 108022’ 12.7” 51 Tomb of Ki Jatia Building Babakan , S 06040’30.3” Ciwaringin, Cirebon E 108022’25.8” 52 Colonial house Building Ciwaringin , S 060 41’39.3” Ciwaringin, Cirebon E 108022’26.2” 53 Bale Gede/ Great Hall Building Galagamba , S 06040’20.6” Ciwaringin, Cirebon E 108023”14.2” 53 Pegagan Village Office Building Pegagan , Palimanan, S 06042’32.0” Cirebon E 108026’03.4”
4. Validation
The validation process of the archaelogical findings involves consultation with the stakeholders (local communities and local government) as well as the Archaelogy agency.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PT. LINTAS MARGA SEDAYA DRAFT CULTURAL HERITAGE ASSESSMENT REPORT 22
5 CONSULTATION
5.1 OBJECTIVES
As a guideline in data gathering, the CHA team conducted interviews to the following parties: 1. Provincial Government offices and agencies that are in charge of cultural heritage management. In regards to the tangible and Archaeological Heritage, the parties interviewed include the Bandung Archeology Agency and the Archaeological Heritage Preservation Office of Serang. In regards to the intangible or living heritage, the History and Traditional Values Preservation office in Bandung, West Java was interviewed. Interviews were also conducted to other institutions that are associated with heritage of West Java. 2. Regency level government agencies that are in charge of the management of cultural heritage in the territory. This is undertaken considering that the district government also receives some revenue out of the management of cultural heritage, so it is the responsibility of the government agencies at this level to have documentation on cultural heritage. Interviews were also conducted with other institutions at the regency level that are associated with cultural heritage. 3. The district level authorities in charge of cultural issues and the district level community organizations that have interest in the field of culture were interviewed; and 4. The village level authorities and communities who have good knowledge of cultural heritage in the village.
The local community usually gives the authority to an appointed caretaker to look after / manage the cultural heritage. When our team visited the village, they were referred to the appointed caretaker by the local community as none of the community has the authority to answer questions regarding the cultural heritage.
The majority of the information collected by our team was mainly from the appointed caretakers and the village elders who have a good knowledge about the heritage structures in their villages. This is because the community feels that they do not have the authority to tell, they are unsure or sometimes they feel it is taboo to tell the story about the heritage structures as these structures are considered to be sacred. Each heritage structure, which includes sacred tombs, wells, and tree, has its own appointed caretaker to look after and maintain the heritage structure and its surrounding area.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CLIENT REPORT TITLE 23
The current caretaker received the information about the sacred cultural structure verbally from the previous caretaker. This cannot be regarded as historical evidence but is regarded as the local myth.
There are a few criterias that will allow a person to be the appointed as the caretaker of a heritage structure. They are: 1. The caretaker is the descendant of the previous caretaker and he needs to continue his parent’s duty to look after the sacred tomb / site. This case was found in Wantilan Village. 2. The caretaker is not a descendant of the previous caretaker but he learned from the previous caretaker and then appointed to look after the sacred tomb / site. This case was found in Marengmang, Sukamelang and Cisaga Villages. 3 The caretaker is appointed by the community or the local government to look after the sacred site. This case was found in Bantarwaru and Ciparungsari Villages. 4 The caretaker is a villager or local leader who has a strong interest on cultural heritage in his village and volunteers to be the caretaker of that particular sacred site. This case was found in Cidahu Village.
The Caretaker is a part of the village tradition which is regarded as very important in preserving the cultural heritage of the village. The caretaker follows a few traditional rules with regard to maintaining and scheduling the visiting hours of the heritage site as a means to preserve the heritage site and its surround area.
5.2 GOVERNMENT
To get information on the list of ancient relics, consultations are conducted with the central government Directorate of Archaeological Heritage, Ministry of Tourism and Economic Creative, formerly known Ministry of Culture and Tourism. From the consultation, it was recommended that a third party who was undertaking research on this topic to be regarded as the key informant to facilitate the CHA research. The third party was the Office of Archaeological Heritage Conservation in Serang – Banten. This third party will be able to provide data and map of cultural heritage material spread at the location where the toll road construction project is planned.
At the provincial level, interviews are directly addressed to the staff of government agencies that are associated with the management of
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CLIENT REPORT TITLE 24
cultural heritage, namely the Bandung Archeology Agency and the Office of Historical and Traditional Values Preservation in Bandung. While at the regency level, the Office of Culture and Tourism is the target for an effective interview.
Officials at the village level are the government representatives who are often interviewed because they have a close relationship with the local society and also understand the existence of their cultural heritage.
5.3 CIVIL SOCIETY
Individuals targeted in the interview are people who have good knowledge on cultural heritage, especially the civil society in each village that still utilize and manage their cultural heritage. For example, the youth organization that accommodated in the structure hierarchy of the village. This organization was chosen as the target of the interview to find out the process of cultural inheritance between generations.
5.4 STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION HELD
Provincial Level Regency Level District/Village Level Civil Society Organization
Bandung The Office of Culture Village head and Youth Organization of Archaeological and Tourism of village chief in the Jabong in Subang, Agency Subang Regency of Subang Purwakarta History and The Office of Culture Village head and Heritage enthusiast Traditional Values and Tourism of village chief in the community in Preservation Majalengka. Regency of Subang Indramayu Office, West Java Archaeological The Office of Culture Village head and Heritage and Tourism of village chief in the Preservation Office Cirebon Regency of Indramayu of Serang Village head and village chief in the Regency of Majalengka Communities whose land are are affected or not affected by the toll road project
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CLIENT REPORT TITLE 25
5.5 RESULTS OF STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATIONS
1. Province
Based on the stakeholders consultations carried out at the provincial level, and in particular with the government agencies in charge of cultural heritage, they confirmed that they had conducted archaeological research in the areas to be affected by the toll road plan. Research was conducted at the colonial buildings in Jalupang latex plantation in the Marengmang Kalijati Village, Subang Regency. The area consists of houses and office buildings built during the colonial Dutch era and Japanese bunkers. The information obtained from the Bandung Archaeology Agency, implies that in Majalengka regency, there are many colonial buildings, including private houses and a sugar factory, which will be traversed by the proposed toll road, in particular the path that connects Jatitujuh and Indramayu. However, when the field study was undertaken, the private houses and sugar factory are found to be located away from the proposed toll road project..
Unfortunately, to date today there is no map that charts the spread of cultural heritage in the region. In areas where the toll road will traverse, any public information about the existence of valuable archaeological heritage has never been recorded.
Figure 5-1 Consultation with Majasuka village authority
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CLIENT REPORT TITLE 26
2. Regency
In Subang, based on the consultations and discussions held with the stakeholders at the Regency level, the cultural heritage site is found to be located far away from the proposed toll road construction project. The Department of Culture and Tourism in the Regency of Subang states that there are megalithic buildings near Al-Zaytun boarding school in Cikamurang, Indramayu.
Department of Culture and Tourism in the three Regencies do not have a distribution map of cultural heritage in the area. The Department of Culture and Tourism of Cirebon states that there are no cultural heritage sites in the region that will be directly affected by the proposed project.
3. Local Authority (Village & District)
Local authority indicated in the districts and the villages that will be affected by the proposed toll road development indicate that they would make amicable approach as to investors and the public if the cultural heritage properties in their villages are affected. Village-level governments will act as a mediator in such an approach.
4. Civil Society Organization
Discussions with the civil society organizations indicate that they are also concerned for cultural heritage in the region, which is the remaining evidence of the ever evolving history. They hope the government can accommodate the problems associated with the management of cultural heritage, as well as acting as the problem solver for the problems arising due to the proposed toll road development project.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CLIENT REPORT TITLE 27
6 FIELD AND ANALYTICAL FINDINGS
6.1 CULTURAL HERITAGE SURVEY RESULTS
No Cultural Location Finding Finding Site Reasons/background for Property (Village, Status location & Importance site importance District, (Registered project (On- (Major/Mod Regency) & Non site & Off- erate/Minor) registered) site) 1 Tomb of Mbah Cinangka, Non- Off-site Minor It is believed that this is Rabil Bungursari, Registered the tomb of the village Purwakarta founder and leader. This tomb is still visited by many villagers but has no significance historical role in the village 2 Village border Cisaat, Non- Off-site Minor This mark was not from mark Cempaka Registered the Colonial era. It does Purwakarta not clearly shows boundaries to which area but still shows the material used to build it, cement and calk similarly used during the colonial era. 3 Sacred Tree Kertamukti, Non- Off-site Minor The tree is no longer Campaka, Registered there, just little remains Purwakarta 4 Tomb of Mbah Kertamukti, Non- Off-site Minor The tomb cannot be Kaneo Campaka, Registered identified, just a head Purwakarta stone and folklore 5 Tomb of Ciparungsari Non- Off-site Minor Unidentified Panembahan , Cibatu, Registered Suryagati Purwakarta 6 Batu Tungku Wantilan, Non- Off-site Minor A stone regarded only by Cipeundeuy, Registered the local communities Subang 7 Petilasan Wanakerta, Non- Off-site Minor Very strong supporting Anggayasa Purwadadi, Registered community. There is an dan Wirayasa Subang existing building supported by the community leader and authority. 8 Gedong Hejo Marengman Non- Off-site Minor Currently being g, Kalijati, Registered renovated, there is also a Subang new building 9 Gedong Satu Marengman Non- Off-site Moderate The house is still occupied g , Kalijati, Registered but it represents its era. Subang Only 1 house in its original state. 10 Well and Tomb Kaliangsana , Non- Off-site Moderate A possible prehistoric of Mbah Tanu Kalijati, Registered cultural property dan Mbah Subang (pyramid like), there is Raden menhir and block of stone. 11 Tomb of Pionir Ciruluk, Non- Off-site Minor A few people know about desa Kalijati, Registered this tomb and if they Subang know they decline to tell the story 12 Tomb of Mbah Batusari , Non- On-site Moderate Located close to the toll Kentong Dawuan, Registered road. It is still used as part Subang of the traditional ceremonies and rituals 13 Spring water Batusari , Non- On-site Moderate Exactly in the middle of Dawuan, Registered the proposed toll road
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CLIENT REPORT TITLE 28
No Cultural Location Finding Finding Site Reasons/background for Property (Village, Status location & Importance site importance District, (Registered project (On- (Major/Mod Regency) & Non site & Off- erate/Minor) registered) site) Subang route. The spring is still used by the villagers for their daily use and traditional ceremonies. 14 Tomb of Eyang Batusari , Non- Off-site Minor Only local visitor Godeg Dawuan, Registered Subang 15 Guardian Cidahu, Non- Off-site Minor Just a location, no remains (Syeh Pagaden, Registered building or remains found Abdul Malik) Subang 16 Tomb of Mbah Balingbing , Non- Off-site Minor Still being visited by the Dalem Pagaden, Registered local community Subang 17 Sumur Gede Gembor , Non- Off-site Minor Was re-build by the Pagaden, Registered villagers and used for Subang village ceremonies and ritual 18 Tomb of Mbah Jabong , Registered Off-site Major Registered by the UU No Ranggadipa Subang, 5 tahun 1992 signange dan istri Subang regarding cultural heritage preservation. The access to the site will not be affected by the proposed toll road project 19 Tomb of Eyang Sukamelang Non- Off-site Minor Still being visited by the Buyut Esmor , Subang, Registered local community Subang 20 Spring/ Well Sukamelang Non- On-site Minor Still being visited by the Pasir Ceuri , Subang, Registered local community but not Subang related with any rituals or ceremonies 21 Mbah Jaya Cisaga , Non- Off-site Minor Has high importance for Perkasa bin Cibogo, Registered the pilgrims visiting from Ratu Kusuma Subang outside of Cisaga but has standing no ceremonial importance ground for the community 22 Tomb of Eyang Cibogo, Non- Off-site Minor Tomb of the first village Kasban Cibogo, Registered chief. Subang 23 Tomb of Eyang Cibogo, Non- Off-site Minor It is unknown who was Mardi Cibogo , Registered burried here but it is a site Subang visited during the ‘Ruwatan Bumi’ ceremony 24 Tomb of Eyang Sumurbaran Non- Off-site Minor Still being used by some Buyut Mangir g , Cibogo, Registered of the communities for Subang traditional ritual 25 Tomb of Eyang Bantarwaru , Non- Off-site Minor There is a roofed building Buyut Gantar, Registered Pangamukan Indramayu 26 Tomb of Mbah Bantarwaru , Non- Off-site Minor A part of the tomb of the Dalem Jaga Gantar, Registered Buyut Pangamukan and Derpa Indramayu Mbah Dalem Jaga Derpa 27 Tomb of Mbah Bantarwaru , Non- Off-site Minor A part of the tomb of the Uyut Asmar Gantar, Registered Buyut Pangamukan and Indramayu Uyut Asmar 28 Sentot statue Sanca , Non- Off-site Minor Abandoned. It just show Gantar, Registered homage to a person Indramayu ‘Sentot’ 29 Dutch Era Sanca , Non- Off-site Minor Just the footing remains Bridge Gantar, Registered Indramayu 30 Tomb of Sanca Sanca , Non- Off-site Minor The history of this tomb is
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CLIENT REPORT TITLE 29
No Cultural Location Finding Finding Site Reasons/background for Property (Village, Status location & Importance site importance District, (Registered project (On- (Major/Mod Regency) & Non site & Off- erate/Minor) registered) site) Gantar, Registered unknown and the Indramayu community does not use it for their ceremonies but it is still being visited by pilgrims from the vicinity 31 Tomb of Mbah Cikawung , Non- Off-site Minor Still being used for local Alen Terisi, Registered ceremony Indramayu 32 Turangga Well Palasah, Non- Off-site Minor New brick material but Kertajati, Registered the community regard it Majalengka with strong historic influence 33 Tomb of Palasah , Non- Off-site Minor The tomb is renovated Turangga Kertajati, Registered with ceramics tiles but Majalengka still regarded as historical 34 Bridge and Pakubeureu Non- Off-site Major Original tower, bridge, Aquaduct m , Kertajati, Registered aquaduct, need Majalengka preservation 35 Boundaries Babakan Non- Off-site Minor Far from the toll road marking Cuyu , Registered access and possibly Kertajati, missing Majalengka 36 Colonial Sukawana , Non- Off-site Minor Many original structures House Kertajati, Registered but most have collapsed Majalengka 37 Pandan well Kertawinang Non- Off-site Minor Newly planted. Most of and dan un , Kerjataji, Registered (in the side the community do not Trembesi tree Majalengka of the believe in it proposed toll road) 38 Buyut Beusi , Non- Off-site Minor Have been moved several Krapyak, Ligung, Registered times. Historic Buyut well, Majalengka significance are told Buyut Barang, verbally Mbah Buyut Gandok 39 Sugar Factory Sutawangi , Unknown Off-site Major Some parts are still used Jatiwangi, but only limited parts Majalengka 40 Sumurtama Surawangi , Non - Off-site Minor Has potential historic Jatiwangi, Registered value to the community Majalengka 41 Mbah Buyut Balida , Non- Off-site Minor Sort history and toponimy Santri Dawuan, Registered are told related to this Majalengka tomb. 42 Mbah Buyut Pasir Melati , Non- Off-site Minor Related to toponimi Bali Winata Dawuan, Registered Majalengka 43 Buyut Garuda Karanganyar Non- Off-site Minor Little information. Far , Dawuan, Registered from the toll road project Majalengka 44 Suci Negara Mandapa , Non- Off-site Minor Mixed with other Dawuan, Registered common tomb. Little Majalengka information about it 45 Tomb of Eyang Salawana , Non- Off-site Minor Only local community Jangkung Dawuan, Registered knows about it Majalengka 46 Eyang Salawana , Non- Off-site Minor Its sacred attributes are Jangkung Tree Dawuan, Registered only believed by the local Majalengka community 47 Tomb of Buyut Bongas Non- Off-site Moderate The community asked the Sijem Kulon , Registered (in the side tomb to be moved to Sumber Jaya, of the another place
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CLIENT REPORT TITLE 30
No Cultural Location Finding Finding Site Reasons/background for Property (Village, Status location & Importance site importance District, (Registered project (On- (Major/Mod Regency) & Non site & Off- erate/Minor) registered) site) Majalengka proposed toll road) 48 Traditional Panjalin Registered Off-site Major In the middle of a hamlet, House Kidul , approved by the BP3 and Sumber Jaya, has a tourism potential Majalengka 49 Tomb of Kyai Babakan , Non- Off-site Minor Tomb of the village Hanan Ciwaringin, Registered founders. No significant Cirebon ritual values 50 Tomb of Ki Babakan , Non- Off-site Minor Related with Tomb of Jatia Ciwaringin, Registered Kyai Hanan Cirebon 51 Colonial Ciwaringin , Non- Off-site Moderate Has tourism potential House Ciwaringin, Registered Cirebon 52 Bale Gede Galagamba , Non- Off-site Minor Already moved. Still used Ciwaringin, Registered by the community Cirebon 53 Kantor Desa Pegagan , Non- Off-site Minor Colonial building but has Pegagan Palimanan, Registered been altered significantly Cirebon Information: 1. Site importance : Major (very important/National) & registered (must be protected), Moderate (Important/local/Need mitigation), & Minor (not important/local/no need for mitigation/need public consultation) 2. Finding Location : On-site (on the route of the proposed toll road) & Off-site (outside the toll road) 3. Finding Status: Registered (listed on the government cultural property record) & Non Registered (not listedon the government cultural propertyrecord)
Cultural Heritage Survey on the proposed Cikopo – Palimanan toll road project covering the 5 regencies resulted in the following findings:
No Type of Cultural properties Amount 1 Tomb 27 2 Standing ground 4 3 Colonial and Japanese Era building & structure 8 4 Sacred well 6 5 Boundary Marking 2 6 Statue 1 7 Great tree 2 8 Independence monument 1 9 Traditional house 1 10 Great hall 1 Total amount 53
1. Legal Status: Registered
From the screening process, two registered cultural properties were found located along on the proposed route of the Cikopo-Palimanan toll road project, (1) The Tomb of Mbah Ranggadipa in Jabong, Subang District, Subang regency, and (2) The Sundanese traditional house in Panjalin Kidul village, Sumber Jaya district, Majalengka regency.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CLIENT REPORT TITLE 31
However, those two cultural properties are located 25 km away from the proposed toll road project.
2. Importance Status: Major/Minor/Etc.
From the importance status analysis, 3 heritage properties were found to have importance values based on the Heritage Act no. 11/2010 and IFC guideline: (1) Tomb of Mbah Ranggadipa in Jabong Village, Subang District, Subang Regency, (2) Sundanese traditional house in Panjalin Kidul village, Sumber Jaya District, Majalengka Regency, and (3) Old Sugar Factory from the Colonial era in Sutawangi Village, Jatiwangi District, Majalengka Regency.
3. Finding Site: On-site & Off-site
The following two cultural properties are on-site, will be traversed by the proposed Cikopo – Palimanan toll road: a. Spring/Well of Pasir Ceuri in Sukamelang Villange, Subang District, and Subang regency; b. Tomb of Mbah Kentong in Batusari, Dawuan District, Subang Regency.
The following two cultural properties are off-site but located in the side of the toll road, and will be potentially impacted by the project during construction: a. Pandan well and Trembesi tree in Kertawinangun village, Kerjataji District, Majalengka Regency. b. Tomb of Buyut Sijem Bongas Kulon Village, Sumber Jaya District, Majalengka Regency.
Whenever an object or a location is alleged to be a culture heritage site or property, its substance of the culture heritage should be considered, and it can be classified as non-renewable, finite, and fragile. Therefore, every action on recovering, preserving, safe guarding or the renovating must be documented and must be kept as original as possible.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CLIENT REPORT TITLE 32
6.2 LIVING HERITAGE FINDING RESULTS
Based on the screening result, some communities are still carrying out cultural rituals at certain times. To some extent these cultural rituals are related to the cultural heritage (cultural property) that exist in the area. The nature of the cultural rituals performed by the existing Sundanese in the Cikopo – Cirebon area is very important because it deals with tradition and their subsistence.
“Ruwatan Bumi” is one of the ceremonies that are being performed by the ancient agrarian society since the 1800s up to now in Selahaur sub- village in Jabong Village, Subang District, Subang Regency. ‘Ruwatan’ comes from the word ‘rawat’ or ‘merawa’, which means to collect or to look after, which relates to gather all the communities and also to gather all agricultural products, both the raw and processed products. The ceremony was also addressed “Ruwatan Bumi” as the beginning reinforcements in their farm so that they are spared from any failure of the farm. Farmers in Selahaur term this event as a "farmer's birthday."
“Ruwatan Bumi” Ceremony as one of the cultural heritage is still carried out in Selahaur sub-village of Jabong Village Subang District in Subang Similarly, the stories are also found in the other villages along the proposed toll road project. “Ruwatan Bumi” is a tradition that is familiar to agrarian society. Along with the progress of time, “Ruwatan
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CLIENT REPORT TITLE 33
Bumi” tradition, especially in this village community is feared to disappear naturally due to the declining number of youth participants. In the implementation of this Ruwatan ceremony, residents bring their offerings to the Tomb of the ancestral Mbah Ranggadipa.
The existence of living heritage associated with the ritual becomes important to protect the existence of Cultural Property because it is still used by people today.
The table below shows the villages where ‘ruwatan’ ritual is still carried out.
No Villages Cultural Practices 1. Kaliangsana, Kalijati Ruwat bumi 2. Batusari, Dawuan Ruwat bumi 3. Jabong Ruwat bumi 4. Gembor Ruwat bumi 5. Palasah, Kec. Kertajati Ruwat bumi 6. Pakubeureum, Kec. Kertajati Ruwat bumi 7. Babakan, Kec. Kertajati Ruwat bumi 8. Tegalaren, Kec. Ligung Ruwat bumi 9. Bongas Kulon, Kec. Sumberjaya Mapag rendengan/munjung 10. Panjalin Lor, Kec. Sumberjaya Bongkar bumi 11. Panjalin Kidul, Kec. Sumberjaya Guwar bumi 12. Galagamba, Kec. Ciwaringin Munjung dan mapag sri 13 Kempek, Kec. Gempol Sedekah bumi 14. Tegalkarang, Kec. Palimanan Munjung buyut 15. Lung Benda, Kec. Palimanan Sedekah bumi dan sedekah makam
6.3 IMPACT ANALYSES (FIELD SCREENING AND SURVEY)
From some of the Cultural Property which is found in the screening process of the Cultural Property acquired some of the following:
No Cultural Property Significant Cultural Effect Category Property 1. Tomb of Mbah An Adesit structure It is located in the proposed rest Kentong. Batusari with modern cement area. It is not acceptable by some Village in the District under a Banyan and of the community that the tomb is of Dawuan in Subang Kiara tree Is a sacred to be removed or relocated. They Regency. tomb, the pioneer of expect to be given access to the the village, visited by tomb like a bridge or the proposed pilgrims and rest area to be moved so that it will worshipped by the not disturb the tomb. villagers. It has an active role in the village ritual (Ruwatan Bumi). Located just 25 meters away from the toll road project.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CLIENT REPORT TITLE 34
No Cultural Property Significant Cultural Effect Category Property Spring in Batusari A spring in the Located near to the tomb. The Batusari village that community requesting the spring is utilized by the to be channeled to the village so villagers for daily use that they can still utilize the water and this spring is also for their daily consumption/use. visited during the ruwatan bumi ritual. 2. Spring Pasir Ceuri in People always visit Located in the proposed toll road Sukamelang Village the spring on the 12th route. It is identified from the land on the District of Maulud until the acquisition team that the land in Subang Subang 14th of Maulud. It is which the well is located is belong Regency considered the only to village government official spring in Subang that (Tanah Bengkok). The community is never dry out during willing to discuss this issue to find the Hot the best solution. season/drought. 3. Pandan Well in A well used for Located in the side of the proposed Kertawinangun sacred and profane toll road. It will be impacted village in purposes. directly during the construction Majalengka. and the community will be impacted for acces to the site. 4. Tomb of Buyut Sijem, This sacred tomb of Located in the side of the proposed Bongas Kulon the village founder is toll road. It will be impacted Village, Majalengka located in the public directly during the construction cemetery which will and the community will be be affected by the toll impacted for acces to the site. road project.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CLIENT REPORT TITLE 35
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CLIENT REPORT TITLE 36
Mbah Kentong Tomb. Sub-village/Kampoeng: Babakan Royom. Village: Batusari. District: Dawuan. Regency: Subang.
Mbah Kentong Tomb Structure. Sub-village/Kampoeng: Babakan Royom. Village: Batusari District: Dawuan. Regency: Subang.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CLIENT REPORT TITLE 37
The hut next to the sacred well, is used to rest and gathering place during the ‘Ruwatan Bumi’ rituals. Location: Sub-village/Kampoeng: Pasir Ceuri. Village: Sukamelang. District: Subang. Regency: Subang.
Sacred Well. Sub-village/Kampong: Pasir Ceuri. Village: Sukamelang. District: Subang. Regency: Subang.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CLIENT REPORT TITLE 38
Pandan Well. Village: Kertawinangun. District: Kertajati. Regency : Majalengka.
The well also use for daily activities.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CLIENT REPORT TITLE 39
Buyut Sijem Tomb. Bongas Kulon Village Founder.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CLIENT REPORT TITLE 40
6.4 MITIGATION PLAN
The mitigation plan is developed in accordance with the findings, in which the cultural heritages that will be impacted by the project are not archaelogically significant but has social and historical value for the surrounding community. Public consultation with related stakeholders, community, and the land owners, which is led by the local government need to be held to produce a mutual agreement on the follow up action to be carried out on regards to the cultural heritage.
No Cultural Heritage Site Process Mitigation Plan 1. Tomb of Mbah Kentong. - An approach and a - To discuss with the Batusari Village, Dawuan discussion need to be community to have District, Subang held with the local mutual agreement in Regency. government and local protection of the Issue: Located very close leaders. tomb. to the proposed rest area - Tomb of Mbah Kentong, - and the access to this located inside of rest - tomb will be intersected area (consultation has by the proposed toll road already conducted with development. the land owner in which the tomb is located, and the land approved to be compensated, and the tomb will be relocated).
Spring in Batusari - An approach and a - Channeling the Village in the District of discussion need to be water from the Dawuan in Subang held with the local existing spring to Regency. government and local the village or Issue: the community leaders. alternatively utilizes this spring for construct a new their daily use and also extraction this spring is visited for well/spring located rituals. This spring will near to the village. be located below the proposed toll road.
2. Pasir Ceuri Spring in - An approach and a - The well in Subang Sukamelang Village in discussion need to be Regency, belong to Subang District, Subang held with the local village government Regency government and local official (tanah Issue: this cultural leaders. bengkok), which heritage spring is located - Identify the uniqueness already consulted in the existing of this cultural heritage with related parties. agricultural land and it - The community needs to The project has will be located in the be engaged in creating committed to middle of the proposed the relocating plan. relocated the well, toll road. However, the Socialization need to be and protect the well. community refuses to given to the community relocate this spring. that the uniqueness of this spring will be preserved even though it
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CLIENT REPORT TITLE 41
No Cultural Heritage Site Process Mitigation Plan is relocated. For example, carrying out ritual that will be accepted by the community during the relocating process. 3. Pandan Well in - An approach and a - To ensure the water Kertawinangun village in discussion need to be channel to the Majalengka. held with the local village or to ensure Issue : this well is located government and local community access to 1 meter away fom the leaders. the well proposed toll road. This well is still utilized by the community for their daily consumption/use. 4. Tomb of Buyut Sijem, - An approach and a - To ensure Bongas Kulon Village, discussion need to be community access to Majalengka. held with the local the tomb Issue: this tomb will be government and local traversed by the leaders. proposed toll road .
The tomb and well in Majalengka Regency are not located in the middle of the proposed toll road. However, despite that in the construction process will affect the existence of the sites. It is important to ensure that the rituals associated with these sacred places can still be carried out. It is need intensive consultation with the public to ensure all the process.
The mitigation plan is designed to avoid a serious conflict with the community during the construction phase of the proposed toll road. The communities would like to communicate their wants in regard to the impacted existing cultural heritage in the villages. In regards to relocation of the heritage and other mitigation plans, as long as the socialization process is carried out well, it is expected that the communities will be able to accept it.
The cases in Batusari Village, Dawuan District and in Sukamelang Village, Subang District, both in Subang Regency need to be classified as priority. This is because these cultural heritage sites are located in the middle of the proposed toll road and the communities are expecting more with regards to these sites. For example, in Batusari Village, the community hopes to be provided with an access to the cultural heritage site and a new well. This community is also willing to provide an alternate piece of land to relocate the proposed rest area of the toll road.
The community in Sukamelang Village refuses to relocate the sacred well due to the following reasons:
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CLIENT REPORT TITLE 42
a. It is not in line with their belief; and b. The uniqueness of the well as it is located in the surface of the agricultural land.
These issues can be resolved through good socialization on the relocating process which can be accepted by the community. The relocating process will consider the community cultural aspect, which include carrying out an acceptable traditional ritual during the relocating process to preserve the sacredness of the well. Regarding this situation, LMS should discuss intensively with local community and local government to reach a mutual agreement to protect the cultural heritage structures.
7.5 Chance Find Procedure
In relation to the above mitigation plan, the cultural heritage findings in the area should not be only the one that has been recorded. Legends and folklores that have developed in the area sometimes have some correlation to actual past human activites in that area. The ‘Ruwatan Bumi’ ceremonies, for example, have been performed for several centuries in the area. This living heritage activities associated with rituals will have some significant detritus that will become artifacts in several years. Therefore, there is always a chance for cultural heritage findings in the area.
As the surface survey has already indicates many heritage sites that has some importance or significance to the communities and the visitors, respect and protection to those finding should not stop on the recorded cultural heritage properties. During the construction phase of the toll road project, should a suspected cultural heritage properties be found, according to the UU no. 11 Year 2010, ot should be reported to local government officials or local cultural agency. This is due to the fact that most construction activities will involved some sort of excavation, which consequently have a chance to add more heritage properties in the record. a Chance Find Procedure plan will need to be added to identify what measures should be taken in the event of coming across a cultural heritage property.
If encountered, the client is expected not to disturb any chance finds further until a competent specialist can assess the find and the project custodian can identify actions consistent with the requirements of IFC PS 8. Chance finds procedure, which is a specific procedure that outlines the contingency actions when previously unknown cultural heritage finding or physical resources are encountered during project construction and operation. These actions should include:
1. Stopping construction activities
2. Mark out and record the discovered site or area
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CLIENT REPORT TITLE 43
3. Secure the sites to prevent damages or loss to of any removable findings
4. Notify experts and consult with local authority related to the type of finding and to verify its significance. They will also be in charge of protection and preserving the sites and conduct preliminary evaluation, before deciding on subsequent procedures.
5. Decision on the subsequent procedures such as how to handle the finding should be taken only by responsible authority. This could include changes of layout when finding irremovable remains archeological importance, conservation, preservation, restoration and salvage.
6. Implementation for the authority decision concerning the management of the finding shall be communicated in writing by relevant local authorities; and construction works could resume only after permission is granted from the responsible local authorities concerning safeguard of the physical cultural resource.
Therefore, when cultural heritage is expected to be found in the proposed location, in addition to implementing the country’s regulation under international law, it should also refer to the IFC Performance Standard 8 on Cultural Heritage which has indicates that this toll road project is expected to undertake internationally recognized practices for the protection, field-based study and documentation of cultural heritage (paragraph 4). The toll road project are also required to consult with affected communities within the host country who use, or have used within living memory, the cultural heritage for longstanding cultural purposes to identify cultural heritage of importance, and to incorporate into the Project’s decision-making process the views of the affected communities (paragraph 6). As the above mentioned, consultation must also involve the relevant national or local regulatory agencies that are entrusted with the protection of cultural heritage (paragraph 6). If the requirements of IFC PS 8 paragraphs 7-11 apply (i.e. guidelines on removal of cultural heritage, critical cultural heritage and use of cultural heritage), the toll road project will retain qualified and experienced experts to assist in the Assessment.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CLIENT REPORT TITLE 44
7 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the survey conducted, there is one cultural heritage site that has been registered as a cultural protected property under the Heritage Act No. 11, year 2010, i.e. the Ranggadipa Tomb, located in Selahaur Hamlet, Jabong Village, Subang District, Subang Regency. However, this site is located off-site from the proposed toll road.
As mentioned earlier, there are 4 sites located in 4 villages in 4 districts in Majalengka and Subang Regencies that will be affected by the proposed toll road development. These sites have not yet been registered as cultural properties protected under the Heritage Act No.11, year 2010.
Based on the cultural heritage survey, the cultural heritage structures found are considered to have no significant value archaeologically as the material used in these structures are relatively new, i.e. less than 50 years old. However, these structures are considered to be sacred by the local community, hence socialization process need to be carried out to the community so that they will agree to relocate these structures.
Basically, TPT has informed the local government and the local community that the tombs of Mbah Kentong and the Pasar Ceuri Spring will be traversed by the toll road and hence the lands need to be acquired. The acquisition will relocate these tombs and wells.
If an item or site is not recorded in the national heritage register, either at the ministry of culture and tourism or at the local and regional authority, this may not mean that the site does not have heritage and archaeological significance. According to the Law, sites that are 50 years old have defined a level of statutory of protection.
Based on the field observation, the assumed cultural heritage properties by the communities that will be affected by the toll road have no physical indications to be classified as cultural heritage but based on in-depth consultations with the caretakers, these sites are believed to have historical significance and are still being visited by many people from time to time so they are considered to be important, locally.
To obtain assurance on the cultural heritage sites found in this study, the team proposes to follow up this study in the approach:
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CLIENT REPORT TITLE 45
The Heritage Act No.11/2010 in Article 23 paragraph 1 stated that every person who discovered the suspected object of heritage objects, buildings suspected of heritage buildings, structures suspected of Heritage Structures, and / or location of the alleged Heritage Sites must report it to relevant authorities in the field of culture, the Indonesian National Police, and / or related agencies by the latest 30 (thirty) days from discovery.
Therefore, a Chance Finds Procedure Plan is recommended when there is an indication of new findings, where a consultation need to be carried out with the Archaeological Heritage Conservation Office (Balai Pelestarian Peninggalan Purbakala – BP3) in Serang – Banten as the Technical Unit from the Directorate of History and Archaeology from the Ministry of Culture and Tourism.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CLIENT REPORT TITLE 46 ANNEX G List of Rivers River Starting Point Length (metres) Location (Chainage) (Regency)
Ciherang 95+006 212 Purwakarta
Cilandak 99+300 187 Purwakarta
Cilamaya 101+902 223 Purwakarta
Cisiluman 104+304 73 Subang
Kalijati 105+009 64 Subang
Pakuhajara 106+073 43 Subang
Cicadas 106+652 64 Subang
Cibeunying 107+575 46 Subang
Cijengkol 107+779 34 Subang
Cibeuleutok 107+905 46 Subang
Cibuang 109+950 52 Subang
Cibuang 110+175 64 Subang
Ciburangrang 111+000 97 Subang
Ciracas 114+432 54 Subang
Kalijambe 116+350 52 Subang Pembawa
Kalijambe 116+714 48 Subang Pembuang
Cicongok 118+579 49 Subang
Cilarangan 120+224 62 Subang
Cibodas 120+624 100 Subang
Cigintung 120+912 46 Subang
Cibening 122+745 71 Subang
Ciasem 123+458 240 Subang Sampan 124+227 49 Subang
Cidahu 126+021 72 Subang
Circling 126+313 54 Subang
Cipejeuh 127+510 77 Subang
Cigaduh 127+740 76 Subang
Cigede 129+675 58 Subang
Cikadeuplak 130+551 60 Subang
Handiwung 130+904 34 Subang
Cipuling 134+472 53 Subang
Cibeureum 135+016 42 Subang
Cibogo 136+278 40 Subang
Cilamatan 138+810 90 Subang
Jdibalakuya 141+654 82 Subang
Cipunegera 142+350 360 Subang
Cipapan 143+716 56 Indramayu
Cikale 144+159 47 Indramayu
Cicadas 144+985 58 Indramayu
Cibuan 144+932 56 Indramayu
Cikandung 146+826 44 Indramayu
Cibiuk 148+130 41 Indramayu
Ciburlal 150+558 34 Indramayu
Cipancu 152+500 42 Indramayu
Cipahit 154+091 37 Indramayu
Cipondoh 159+500 50 Indramayu
Ciluncat 160+518 43 Indramayu Cipanas 161+500 120 Majalengka
Saluran Alami 164+140 56 Majalengka
Saluran Alami 171+610 41 Majalengka
Cuyu 1 173+57 54 Majalengka
Cuyu 2 173+992 40 Majalengka
Cidudut 175+165 25 Majalengka
Cilamaning 177+890 44 Majalengka
Lebak 178+229 37 Majalengka
Saluran Alami 179+692 46 Majalengka
Cimanuk 180+700 315 Majalengka
Cicadas 181+652 50 Majalengka
Cibuluh 183+235 49 Majalengka
Cilutung 184+802 25 Majalengka
Cibogor 187+075 70 Majalengka
Cibunut 190+226 66 Majalengka
Cibayawak 193+542 42 Majalengka
Cikawangi 194+852 39 Majalengka
Ciporong 195+402 45 Majalengka
Cibuang 195+536 38 Majalengka
Rawa 196+455 50 Majalengka
Ciranggon 197+575 44 Majalengka
Cikawung 198+389 47 Majalengka
Cikadongdong 198+758 52 Majalengka
Rawa 200+300 38 Cirebon
Rawa 200+450 38 Cirebon Ciwaringin 201+200 180 Cirebon
Cikaranti 202+526 67 Cirebon
Ciseeng 204+452 66 Cirebon
Winong 205+237 30 Cirebon
Caplek 206+038 51 Cirebon
Wadas 206+658 43 Cirebon
ANNEX J Flora and Fauna Survey Results for the Toll Road Route Flora and Fauna Survey Results for the Toll Road Route
Flora and Fauna Results for the Supplementary AMDAL
ANNEX K LMS MMP Matrix - Social Chapter Annex K - LMS MMP Matrix - Social and Health Impact Assessment
Aspect Impact Before Mitigation Phase/ Monitoring Monitoring No (Potential Mitigation Measures Performance Indicator Lead Responsibility Budget (Source of Impact) Timeline Frequency Parameters Impact)
I. PRE-CONSTRUCTION PHASE A. Impact to Community Safety 1 Community Impacts associated with increased traffic of the >> LMS will improve its >> H&S Manual has been LMS, Contractors, During Annual monitoring for >> Document of H&S Safety road due to project construction activities could H&S standard to be established and implemented, Transportation preparation for number of traffic Manual result in minor to serious injuries or even implemented by contractor, including its incorporation Agency construction accident within the fatalities particularly where the alignment in according to its H&S into Contractor's contractual phase. project impact zone >> Report of H&S Training passes through settlements area. Manual. The manual will arrangement. which has been conducted also include emergency response and preparedness >> Record keeping for plan, and construction consultation meeting which traffic management plan. has been conducted
>> Record of traffic accident number
B. Impact to Workplace Incidents and Injuries 2 Workplace Potential for workplace injuries among LMS The manual will also Health and Safety training LMS, Contractors Throughout Training for employees Annual monitoring Record keeping for number Incidents and employees and workforce, particularly during include emergency plans sessionsfor all employees/ Project phases throught all project of workplace incidents and Injuries construction phase. and mitigation plan for workforces throughout the phases injuries injured worker, as required Project phase on IFC performance standards. C. Impact of Land Acquisition by the Project 3 Loss of Asset and Significant loss of income will be experienced >> LMS will give priority to >> Significant affected people LMS, related Throughout >> Target beneficiaries Annual monitoring >> Document of HR Plan and Income particularly by affected people with over than employ suitable qualified has been identified through Government Agency/ Project phases to be identified through (twice a year) report of recruitment process. 10% loss of household income due to the loss of candidates, direct and Field Validation Survey. Institution Field Validation Survey throughout Project asset. indirect through its phases >> Land Acquisition and contractor, in accordance >> HR Plan which include >> Community Corrective Action Plan is with the project local employment, and Empowerment Program established and to be requirements. number of local people are budget will be provided implemented. employed, direct and indirect. in Land Acquisition and >> Community Corrective Action Plan The loss of income also impact to small and empowerment program, >> Series number of medium business owners, particularly during such as Small Medium participatipatory program the replacement (transitional) process. Other Enterprise Empowerment planning meeting (FGD) has significant impact to the affected businesses Program which including been conducted. occurred when they can not maintain the capacity building, technical business in equal condition after replacement business asistance, and >> Number of empowerment process. capital support, as well as program has been women empowerment. implemented.
Another group which will be affected through >> Engage with >> Compensation has been TPT/P2T, LMS During the once before > Documentation of loss of income are the illegal settlers (squatters). government and related paid for the affected completion of the construction being coordination meeting with Approximately 28 structures on the government parties to ensure the squatters. land acquisition commenced related parties which include land and APN land in Purwakarta Regency; and compensation payment for process agreement regarding 48 structures on the government land in Cirebon the affected squatters is >> Livelihood assistane has compensation for affected Regency will be affected by the Project, include sufficient for their been provided to significant squatters food kiosk, newspaper stand, and other small livelihood restoration. affected squatters. business merchants. > Report/ documentation of >> Livelihood assistance compensation payment for through providing access to the affected squatters business opportunities directly linked to toll road operation such as providing business locations/parcels at toll road rest areas.
The acquisition of the forestry land for the >> Monitor to ensure that >> The compensation Perhutani, TPT, LMS During once before > Documentation of project will affect community activities, Sharecropoers recieve framework for sharecroppers preparation for construction being coordination meeting with particularly croppers, in the area. This issue has compensatiion from has been established. construction phase commenced related parties which include not been addressed in the agreement with the Perhutami for transitional agreement regarding Perhutani, in which the compensation livelihood during the >> The compensatory forestry compensation for affected framework has not yet been established for the process for Perhutani- land has been obtained. sharecroppers. croppers. alocated compensated forestry land. > Report/ documentation of compensation payment for >> Ensure that the the affected sharecroppers. compensatory forestry land are provided to the entitled affected sharecroppers. Aspect Impact Before Mitigation Phase/ Monitoring Monitoring No (Potential Mitigation Measures Performance Indicator Lead Responsibility Budget (Source of Impact) Timeline Frequency Parameters Impact)
4 Change in land Delayed timing of compensation payment Monitoring is needed, Updated land appraisal has TPT/P2T, LMS During the Updated Land once during the Progress report of land values compare to asset valuation particularly for the process been conducted and the result completion of the Appraisal: completion of the land acquisition completion from of compensation payment to be included in the land acquisition In accordance with the acquisition TPT/P2T to the claimants in the ompensation framework for process Land Acquisition realignment area based on claimants in the realignment Budget by TPT the updated land valuation. area.
Land has not been compensated due to Ensure that compensation TPT/P2T, LMS During the In accordance with the once during the Court Decree which stated consignment process has been deposited to the completion of the Land Acquisition completion of the land that the compensation has court. land acquisition budget acquisition been deposited to court process
Loss of access to income source Engage with government to >> Series number of LMS, related Throughout USD 300,000 Annual monitoring Community Development develop community participatipatory program Government Agency/ Project phases (for 6 years) (twice a year) Plan, community proposal, services program to planning meeting (FGD) has Institution throughout Project and documentation of support community social been conducted to identify phases program which has been condition improvement, community need regarding delivered to the community such as educational, health the public services. assistance, and public facility improvement. >> Collaboration with related government agency to implement the community services program
5 Change in social The changes to physical linkages will occur as in Communitty Services to Number of program has been LMS Throughout USD 300,000 Annual monitoring Community Development networks some of the affected villages, the toll road will suport community- implemented, due to Project phases (for 6 years) (twice a year) Plan, community proposal, pass through the middle of settlement area. proposed activities and community proposal, in throughout Project and documentation of People who previously had a close relationship events (such as national which the approval should be phases program which has been or common social, religious, or economic day, educational, and evaluated based on delivered to the community activities in the same village might won't religious events) Community Development associate with one another as much when they Plan live in two separate areas.
6 For all impact due to land acquisition by the Project >> Field Validations Survey >> Field Validation Survey to LMS During pre- USD 200,000 Once during pre- Significant affected people (No. 8 - 17): shall be conducted to be conducted to identify construction phase construction phase are identified and final Land identify Significant Affected Significant Affected People. Acquisition Audit and people, as part of Land Corrective Action Plan is to Acquisition Audit and >> Land Acquisition Audit be implemented Corrective Action Plan. and Corrective Action Plan to be established and implemented.
>> LMS will have a >> Community relation and LMS Throughout In accordance with Annual monitoring Document of HR Plan and Community Relation and development persons have Project phases HRD Plan (twice a year) report of recruitment process Development Person who been recruited with specific throughout Project will work with communities job description in the HR phases to resolve any Plan. issues/concerns regarding livelihood restoration.
>> Improving Grievance >> PCDP which include LMS Throughout In accordance with Document of PCDP which Mechanism Procedure and Grievance Mechanism Project phases Public consultation include Grievance Public Consultation and Procedure which comply to improvement budget (in Mechanism Procedure and Disclosure Information for IFC/ADB requirements has PCDP) record keeping for the affected communities. been established and consultation meeting which implemented. has been conducted.
D. Impact to Cultural Heritage 7 Tangible heritage Pasir Ceuri Spring in Sukamelang Village, >> The Land Acquisition >> Previous consultation TPT, LMS During the once before Documentation of the which are Subang District, Subang Regency, usually visited Team (TPT) and Committee process has been documented completion of the construction being socialisation: minutes of directly impacted by the community for ‘Maulud Day’ ceremony (P2T) have conducted properly land acquisition commenced meeting, signed attendance by the project, (Islamic day). Although the structure of the well consultation with the owner process list, picture/ video located within the has been rebuilt into modern form, the well is of the land where the corridor of the part of the ‘ruwatan bumi’ ritual pathway, and cultural heritages are toll road is considered the only spring in the surrounding located and with local area that never dry out even during the dry government, to discuss the season. possibility of the cultural heritages to be relocated, but maintain the water source for surrounding community. Aspect Impact Before Mitigation Phase/ Monitoring Monitoring No (Potential Mitigation Measures Performance Indicator Lead Responsibility Budget (Source of Impact) Timeline Frequency Parameters Impact)
Tomb of Mbah Kentong in Batusari Village, >> Additional consultation >> Affected community is LMS, Cultural During the CH Consultation once before Documentation of Dawuan District, Subang Regency and the is still required with the identified to be consulted. Agency or local completion of the meeting: construction being consultation meeting has nearby spring, are being visited routinely by local communities to reach government (village land acquisition USD 10,000 commenced been conducted, including pilgrim and surrounding community, including an agreement on how to: >> Number of consultation or sub district) process, and the the number of affected those from other District and Regency, and meeting with the affected agreement to be community attend the worshipped by the villagers as part of the - Protect and preserve tomb community has been conduct implemented consultation meeting and the ‘ruwatan bumi’ cultural practices. and to ensure community and documented properly. during result of the meeting access. construction Phase (agreement). >> The implementation of - Maintain access to original agreement with affected spring water source community to protect or through catchment and relocate the affected cultural piping of water or provide heritage new access to alternative water sources to replace original spring water source.
II. CONSTRUCTION PHASE A. Impact to Health 1 Community Project activities during construction will >> Public consultation to >> Public consultation plan LMS, Local Construction >> In accordance with Annual monitoring Record keeping for Health potentially cause noise, dust, and air pollution disseminate information regarding health issue has Government (village Phase Public consultation during construction consultation meeting which which will cause inconvenience to the surround and knowledge regarding been established and and sub district) improvement budget (in has been conducted community, especially where the toll road the potential impact of the implemented. PCDP) passes through populated areas. This may result project to community in increased number of respiratory illness and health, as well as >> Public consultation in the vectors breeding grounds e.g. mosquitoes. preventing action, such as form of Public Awareness using masks whenever Campaign and Socialization crossing the construction events, once in each affected area, and other possible area (24 Sub-districts) during actions to be undertaken, the construction phase, are refer to the corporate H&S undertaken. Manual.
Non local workers and migrant numbers will >> Engage with >> community need LMS, Health Agency Construction >> Public Health Annual monitoring for Health Improvement likely increase due to the project development. government to develop regarding the health issue and Phase and Facilities Improvement 6 years during Program Planning Report This can potentially also introduce new types or community services target beneficiaries is Operational Phase Program for 6 years construction and early and documentation of strains of diseases that may spread in local program to improve identified through Field USD 600,000 phase of operation program which has been communities, including the potency of increased community health condition Validation Survey to identify delivered to community numbers of STD and HIV/AIDS. through health facilities and Significant Affected People. >> Healthcare healthcare assistance Assistance Program, support. >> number of Public Health target beneficiaries to be Facilities Improvement identified through Field program has been Validation Survey implemented, align and support (matching fund) to It is identified that Diarrhea is the most occured local government program in illness case. It can be concluded that inadequate 24 sub districts. environmental and food hygiene as a cause of Diarrhea can be a major community health >> Healthcare Assistance issue, which should be considered by the project, Program to Significant particularly during the construction phase. Affected People, align and support related government programs at 24 sub districts.
B. Impact to Workplace Incidents and Injuries 2 Workplace Potential for workplace injuries among LMS The manual will also Health and Safety training LMS, Contractors Throughout Training for employees Annual monitoring Record keeping for number Incidents and employees and workforce, particularly during include emergency plans sessions for all employees/ Project phases throught all project of workplace incidents and Injuries construction phase. and mitigation plan for workforces throughout the phases injuries injured worker, as required Project phase on IFC performance standards.
D. Impact of Land Acquisition by the Project 3 Loss of Asset and Significant loss of income will be experienced >> LMS will give priority to >> Significant affected people LMS, related Throughout >> Target beneficiaries Annual monitoring >> Document of HR Plan and Income particularly by affected people with over than employ suitable qualified has been identified through Government Agency/ Project phases to be identified through (twice a year) report of recruitment process. 10% loss of household income due to the loss of candidates, direct and Field Validation Survey. Institution Field Validation Survey throughout Project asset. indirect through its phases >> Land Acquisition and contractor, in accordance >> HR Plan which include >> Community Corrective Action Plan is with the project local employment, and Empowerment Program established and to be requirements. number of local people are budget will be provided implemented. employed, direct and indirect. in Land Acquisition and >> Community Corrective Action Plan Aspect Impact Before Mitigation Phase/ Monitoring Monitoring No (Potential Mitigation Measures Performance Indicator Lead Responsibility Budget (Source of Impact) Timeline Frequency Parameters Impact)
>> Community Corrective Action Plan The loss of income also impact to small and empowerment program, >> Series number of medium business owners, particularly during such as Small Medium participatipatory program the replacement (transitional) process. Other Enterprise Empowerment planning meeting (FGD) has significant impact to the affected businesses Program which including been conducted. occurred when they can not maintain the capacity building, technical business in equal condition after replacement business asistance, and >> Number of empowerment process. capital support, as well as program has been women empowerment. implemented.
4 Land dislocation Loss of access to public asset To ensure the community number of people crossing LMS, Regional Construction In accordance with the Annual monitoring Documentation of agreement access through the bridges (JPO) have been built, Planning Agency phase construction budget during construction with BAPPEDA regarding the construction of the bridges in accordance with the phase JPO location and Progress for people crossing, in agreement with Regional report of construction accordance to the Planning Agency agreement with Regional Development Planning Agency, as already being included in AMDAL.
Loss of access to income source Engage with government to >> Series number of LMS, related Throughout USD 300,000 Annual monitoring Community Development develop community participatipatory program Government Agency/ Project phases (for 6 years) (twice a year) Plan, community proposal, services program to planning meeting (FGD) has Institution throughout Project and documentation of support community social been conducted to identify phases program which has been condition improvement, community need regarding delivered to the community such as educational, health the public services. assistance, and public facility improvement. >> Collaboration with related government agency to implement the community services program
5 Change in social The changes to physical linkages will occur as in Communitty Services to Number of program has been LMS Throughout USD 300,000 Annual monitoring Community Development networks some of the affected villages, the toll road will suport community- implemented, due to Project phases (for 6 years) (twice a year) Plan, community proposal, pass through the middle of settlement area. proposed activities and community proposal, in throughout Project and documentation of People who previously had a close relationship events (such as national which the approval should be phases program which has been or common social, religious, or economic day, educational, and evaluated based on delivered to the community activities in the same village might won't religious events) Community Development associate with one another as much when they Plan live in two separate areas.
6 For all impact due to land acquisition by the Project >> LMS will have a >> Community relation and LMS Throughout In accordance with Annual monitoring Document of HR Plan and (No. 8 - 17): 'Community Relation and development persons have Project phases HRD Plan (twice a year) report of recruitment process Development Person who been recruited with specific throughout Project will work with communities job description in the HR phases to resolve any Plan. issues/concerns regarding livelihood restoration.
>> Improving Grievance >> PCDP which include LMS Throughout In accordance with Document of PCDP which Mechanism Procedure and Grievance Mechanism Project phases Public consultation include Grievance Public Consultation and Procedure which comply to improvement budget (in Mechanism Procedure and Disclosure Information for IFC/ADB requirements has PCDP) record keeping for the affected communities. been established and consultation meeting which implemented. has been conducted.
E. Impact to Cultural Heritage 7 Tangible heritage Tomb of Mbah Kentong in Batusari Village, >> Additional consultation >> Affected community is LMS, Cultural During the CH Consultation once before which are Dawuan District, Subang Regency and the is still required with the identified to be consulted. Agency or local completion of the meeting: construction being directly impacted nearby spring, are being visited routinely by local communities to reach government (village land acquisition USD 10,000 commenced by the project, pilgrim and surrounding community, including an agreement on how to: >> Number of consultation or sub district) process, and the located within the those from other District and Regency, and meeting with the affected agreement to be corridor of the worshipped by the villagers as part of the - Protect and preserve tomb community has been conduct implemented toll road ‘ruwatan bumi’ cultural practices. and to ensure community and documented properly. during access. construction Phase >> The implementation of - Maintain access to original agreement with affected spring water source community to protect or through catchment and relocate the affected cultural piping of water or provide heritage new access to alternative water sources to replace original spring water source. Aspect Impact Before Mitigation Phase/ Monitoring Monitoring No (Potential Mitigation Measures Performance Indicator Lead Responsibility Budget (Source of Impact) Timeline Frequency Parameters Impact)
>> To implement chance >> The chance find procedure LMS, Contractors Construction once before Document of Chance Find find procedures, to has been established and to be phase construction being Procedures to be immediately stop the impelemnted by contractors commenced implemented by contractors. project activities if any historical and cultural heritage items there are discovered and inform the related government cultural agency for investigations.
>> Provide cultural heritage >> number of cultural LMS, Contractors Construction Training for employees twice every year Documentation of the training to workforce staff heritage training has been phase and contractors: during construction training: minutes of meeting, and contractors who will be conducted in stages to USD 35,000 signed attendance list, working especially during improve workforce picture/ video construction to improve understanding regarding the workforce understanding of cultural heritages, and heritage sites, local history, participated by all workforce customs and cultural staff and contractors who will practices. conduct construction works.
8 Intangible ‘Ruwatan bumi’ is a local cultural practice Ensuring that the cultural Number of people crossing LMS, Regional Construction In accordance with twice every year heritage (cultural which is strongly associated with farming heritage site will still bridge (JPO) has been built in Planning Agency phase construction budget, during construction practices) which activities. The practice involves a travelling accessible for the local the surrounding/near area. due to agreement with will be impacted procession, the proposed toll road development communities for cultural Regional Planning due to the access project will obstruct some of the pathways that practices purpose. Agency to the tangible are usually used for this ritual. The practice is heritage commonly practiced by the community in Subang Regency, by comparison to the other 4 regencies.
III. OPERATION PHASE A. Impact to Health 1 Community Non local workers and migrant numbers will >> Engage with >> community need LMS, Health Agency Construction >> Public Health Annual monitoring for Health Improvement Health likely increase due to the project development. government to develop regarding the health issue and Phase and Facilities Improvement 6 years during Program Planning Report This can potentially also introduce new types or community services target beneficiaries is Operational Phase Program for 6 years construction and early and documentation of strains of diseases that may spread in local program to improve identified through Field USD 600,000 phase of operation program which has been communities, including the potency of increased community health condition Validation Survey to identify delivered to community numbers of STD and HIV/AIDS. through health facilities and Significant Affected People. >> Healthcare healthcare assistance Assistance Program, support. >> number of Public Health target beneficiaries to be Facilities Improvement identified through Field program has been Validation Survey implemented, align and support (matching fund) to It is identified that Diarrhea is the most occured local government program in illness case. It can be concluded that inadequate 24 sub districts. environmental and food hygiene as a cause of Diarrhea can be a major community health >> Healthcare Assistance issue, which should be considered by the project, Program to Significant particularly during the construction phase. Affected People, align and support related government programs at 24 sub districts.
B. Impact to Community Safety 2 Community During the operation, the proposed toll roal will >> Public consultation >> Public consultation plan LMS, Transportation Construction and In accordance with Annual monitoring for >> Document of H&S Safety be a restricted area, only for motor vehicle with (H&S Awareness regarding safety issue has Agency Operation phase Public consultation number of traffic Manual four wheels and more. However, it is also Campaign) to the been established and improvement budget (in accident within the identified during the baseline survey that some community surrounding the implemented. PCDP) project impact zone >> Report of H&S Training of the affected community, particularly the project area. which has been conducted vulnerable groups, still have a low level of >> Zero - low number of knowledge about relevant regulation regarding >> Traffic monitoring accident >> Record keeping for the operation of the toll road. This has the during operation and consultation meeting which potential to cause accidents. emergency response and has been conducted preparedness plan >> Record of traffic accident number
C. Impact to Labour Right and Standard Aspect Impact Before Mitigation Phase/ Monitoring Monitoring No (Potential Mitigation Measures Performance Indicator Lead Responsibility Budget (Source of Impact) Timeline Frequency Parameters Impact)
3 Labor Right and The main risk for LMS will be not only ensuring LMS will have an Employee >> Develop Employee LMS, Workforce During employee In accordance with Annual monitoring Document of Employee Standard its own implementation of labour requirements, Handbook, which will be Handbook, include worker Agency recruitment and HRD Program throught all project Handbook but to a larger extent ensuring contractors are also implemented by grievance mechanism, and HRD induction phases on the compliant and regularly monitored, especially contractor. It will consider integrate into HR employee program implementation of during the construction period. specifically the labour induction program. Employee Handbook rights and standards including non- >> Public consultation to discrimination, equal disclosure the policy to opportunity for surrounding community information, and policy against forced labour and child labour.
D. Impact to Workplace Incidents and Injuries 4 Workplace Potential for workplace injuries among LMS The manual will also Health and Safety training LMS, Contractors Throughout Training for employees Annual monitoring Record keeping for number Incidents and employees and workforce, particularly during include emergency plans sessions for all employees/ Project phases throught all project of workplace incidents and Injuries construction phase. and mitigation plan for workforces throughout the phases injuries injured worker, as required Project phase on IFC performance standards. E. Impact of Land Acquisition by the Project 5 Loss of Asset and Significant loss of income will be experienced >> LMS will give priority to >> Significant affected people LMS, related Throughout >> Target beneficiaries Annual monitoring >> Document of HR Plan and Income particularly by affected people with over than employ suitable qualified has been identified through Government Agency/ Project phases to be identified through (twice a year) report of recruitment process. 10% loss of household income due to the loss of candidates, direct and Field Validation Survey. Institution Field Validation Survey throughout Project asset. indirect through its phases >> Land Acquisition and contractor, in accordance >> HR Plan which include >> Community Corrective Action Plan is with the project local employment, and Empowerment Program established and to be requirements. number of local people are budget will be provided implemented. employed, direct and indirect. in Land Acquisition and The loss of income also impact to small and >> Community Corrective Action Plan medium business owners, particularly during empowerment program, >> Series number of the replacement (transitional) process. Other such as Small Medium participatipatory program significant impact to the affected businesses Enterprise Empowerment planning meeting (FGD) has occurred when they can not maintain the Program which including been conducted. business in equal condition after replacement capacity building, technical process. business asistance, and >> Number of empowerment capital support, as well as program has been women empowerment. implemented.
6 Land dislocation Loss of access to income source Engage with government to >> Series number of LMS, related Throughout USD 300,000 Annual monitoring Community Development develop community participatipatory program Government Agency/ Project phases (for 6 years) (twice a year) Plan, community proposal, services program to planning meeting (FGD) has Institution throughout Project and documentation of support community social been conducted to identify phases program which has been condition improvement, community need regarding delivered to the community such as educational, health the public services. assistance, and public facility improvement. >> Collaboration with related government agency to implement the community services program
7 Change in social The changes to physical linkages will occur as in Communitty Services to Number of program has been LMS Throughout USD 300,000 Annual monitoring Community Development networks some of the affected villages, the toll road will suport community- implemented, due to Project phases (for 6 years) (twice a year) Plan, community proposal, pass through the middle of settlement area. proposed activities and community proposal, in throughout Project and documentation of People who previously had a close relationship events (such as national which the approval should be phases program which has been or common social, religious, or economic day, educational, and evaluated based on delivered to the community activities in the same village might won't religious events) Community Development associate with one another as much when they Plan live in two separate areas.
8 For all impact due to land acquisition by the Project >> LMS will have a >> Community relation and LMS Throughout In accordance with Annual monitoring Document of HR Plan and (No. 8 - 17): 'Community Relation and development persons have Project phases HRD Plan (twice a year) report of recruitment process Development Person who been recruited with specific throughout Project will work with communities job description in the HR phases to resolve any Plan. issues/concerns regarding livelihood restoration.
>> Improving Grievance >> PCDP which include LMS Throughout In accordance with Document of PCDP which Mechanism Procedure and Grievance Mechanism Project phases Public consultation include Grievance Public Consultation and Procedure which comply to improvement budget (in Mechanism Procedure and Disclosure Information for IFC/ADB requirements has PCDP) record keeping for the affected communities. been established and consultation meeting which implemented. has been conducted. ANNEX L LMS MMP Matrix – Environmental Chapter
Annex L - LMS MMP Matrix - Environmental Impact Assessment
Aspect Impact Before Mitigation Lead Monitoring Monitoring No Mitigation Measures Performance Indicator (Potential Impact) (Source of Impact) Responsibility Frequency Parameters
I. CONSTRUCTION PHASE A. Impact to Air Quality 1 Greenhouse Gas Construction vehicles: combustion species >> Adoption of at least Euro IV >> Test combustion species LMS and Emissions (NO2, SO2, PM10 and CO) from the standards for vehicles accessing the concentration of construction contractors tailpipe of construction vehicles. site would reduce emissions from vehicles and compare with Euro construction traffic. IV standards. >> Use equipment and vehicles with emission parameters satisfied the Euro IV standards.
2 Particulate Emissions Particulate emissions are caused by >> Watering on unmade haul roads, >> LMS will assign a construction LMS and Real time >> Particulate size, TSP and PM10 mechanical disturbance of the topsoil stockpiles and soil movement site manager to monitor and contractors acceptable to the >> Averaging over 15 minutes (four layer, vehicle movement over activities during periods when rain inspect these measures regularly. Ministry of the measurements per hour) unconsolidated surfaces, and materials has not occurred for the past 18 >> Regularly inspect Environment >> Located between the road and handling. hours or when visible dust emissions implementation of mitigation sensitive receptors when occur as the result of an activity. measures and present detail in construction occurs within 500m of the monitoring report. the sensitive receptors >> Where receptors are located both sides of the road, the monitor should be placed downwind of the road, using the dominant wind direction that occurs at the time of year the construction of the section will occur >> Use of a trigger threshold over 30 minutes for use of additional mitigation or cease of construction activities to ensure compliance with the WHO 24 hour criteria of 50 μg/m3 The grievance mechanism will be utilised to record complaints received from affected stakeholders.
Existing vegetation will be retained, with any cleared areas being revegetated or consolidated as soon as reasonably practical. Areas of construction, stockpile areas and other exposed soils will be designated clearly. Utilising overburden material and stockpiles as physical barriers and windbreaks. Dry materials will be watered prior to haulage (applied for all loads with exception of enough moisture places or where watering it would render it unsuitable for the construction material. Covering all loads of dirt, soil and other similar loose materials. Aspect Impact Before Mitigation Lead Monitoring Monitoring No Mitigation Measures Performance Indicator (Potential Impact) (Source of Impact) Responsibility Frequency Parameters Dirt, mud and debris migration onto public roads (outside of the management influence of LMS) through either the tyres on construction material or accidental spillages to be limited. Batching plants and rock crushers/sorters (where utilised) to be fitted with filters to assist with dust suppression, except for where it can be adequately demonstrated that there is sufficient separation distance from sensitive receptors, or other mitigation measures are appropriate, to reduce dust and particulate emissions to a negligible level.
None of the vegetation cleared during the initial phases of corridor establishment will be disposed of by burning. B. Impact to Surface and Ground Water 3 Flooding and The construction of the highway in low Culvert and drainage tunnel >> A construction LMS and Drainage Regimes lying areas requires filling in part to raise construction and associated implementation plan including contractors the road level above the design flood embankments will be designed to mitigation measures will be level. limit the increase in upstream flood prepared prior to the construction levels and flow velocities through phase and approved by LMS and these channels. contractors.
The construction of numerous bridges and Waterway openings will be sized other drainage structures. and shaped to at least the current drainage sizes. Bridges will be constructed across rivers and tributaries of greater than 25 metres width. Box culverts will be used for rivers and tributaries of less than 25 metres width. Box culverts will be used to convey low flows and provide fish passage.
Scour protection will be provided in areas at risk of creek bank erosion.
Irrigation canal culverts will be customized to match existing flow capacities. 4 Surface Water Quality Disturbance of Erodible and Dispersive A detailed Soil and Water >> LMS will prepare the SWMP LMS and Soils. Management Plan (SWMP) for the and periodically inspect the contractors management of all identified implementation of articles in the waterways impacted by the Project SWMP. will be prepared. >> Regularly inspect implementation of mitigation Aspect Impact Before Mitigation Lead Monitoring Monitoring No Mitigation Measures Performance Indicator (Potential Impact) (Source of Impact) implementation of mitigation Responsibility Frequency Parameters Site clearing and the progressive measures and present detail in implementation of site specific the monitoring report. erosion and sediment control plans >> Water treatment system will (ESCP) will generally proceed. be installed on-site. >> Inspect and record the Catch drains and culverts will be installation of permanent stream installed. protection measures, sediment basins, catch drains and culverts. Appropriate location of >> Regularly inspect areas for sedimentation basins to control storage of oils and other runoff. Regularly maintain and review of hazardous liquids. structural measures such as >> Surface water quality will be sediment basins. monitored periodically for the Use temporary and permanent compliance with the local diversion banks and drains based on standard. location and catchment conditions.
Sediment basins (where required) will be installed. Sediment fences will be erected as required around the construction area. Drains will be stabilized for both long and short term stability. Contaminated water will be treated on-site with flocculants or other suitable measures. Asphalt pavement will not be laid in any rainy condition. Works including permanent stream protection measures will be completed in drainage lines as soon as practical. Any temporary platforms constructed within stream beds for bridge construction purposes will consist of solid rock. Regular maintenance and inspection will be undertaken of all erosion, sediment and pollution control devices. Water quality will continue to be sampled and monitored. Areas for storage of oils and other hazardous liquids will be bunded and any spillage will be collected and disposed of off site. Progressive revegetation and short term stabilisation of disturbed areas would be undertaken. Aspect Impact Before Mitigation Lead Monitoring Monitoring No Mitigation Measures Performance Indicator (Potential Impact) (Source of Impact) Responsibility Frequency Parameters 5 Surface water quality Fuels, lubricants, hydraulic fluids and Limiting all refuelling areas to the >> A chemical/ oil spill response LMS and from Spills and Leaks other liquids may cause water quality main construction base camps, with plan needs to be prepared and contractors degradation in downstream surface and primary and secondary containment approved. sub-surface waterways where no for all fuels, chemicals and wastes. >> LMS will contract to licensed mitigation actions are in place. All areas for storage of fuels, facility to collect and dispose chemicals and wastes will be wastes from the site. bunded and any spills will be >> A training on fuel, chemical collected and disposed of off-site at and waste management will be an appropriately licensed facility. hold by LMS or licensed units which are contracted with LMS. Implementation of good >> LMS to prepare a procedures international practice for fuel, to manage fuel, chemical and chemical and waste management, waste. including procedures and training.
Inventory management and control of fuels, chemicals and wastes.
Inclusion of a specific chemical spill component with an Emergency Response plan. Contaminated water will be treated on site with flocculants (or other appropriate means) to an acceptable quality prior to discharge to the receiving environment.
Designated sedimentation basins will be developed as water pollution controls. Basins will be constructed to have an additional minimum water equivalent to a 20,000 litre petrol tanker. Oil baffles to be provided to permanent sedimentation basins to prevent discharge of oil and grease products. Overflow structures are to be designed to accommodate a 1 in 100 year rainfall event to safeguard against structural failure.
Drainage controls and pollution basins described above will be installed at all major traverse crossings and interchange points. Filter strips and vegetation stabilized channels will be used to maximize infiltration and provide natural attenuation for general road pavement along the remainder of the road. 6 Competing Water Contractors need to use water for dust The SWMP will identify the water >> Water demand of the project LMS and Uses from suppression, road base compaction and resource needs of the Project, and will be available in the SWMP contractors Construction Water concrete batching operations. where water resources can be prepared by LMS. Needs extracted in a sustainable manner. >> SWMP will also show the water sources that the project uses in the construction phase. Aspect Impact Before Mitigation Lead Monitoring Monitoring No Mitigation Measures Performance Indicator (Potential Impact) (Source of Impact) Responsibility Frequency Parameters 7 Groundwater Constructing impervious road pavements The SWMP will identify the water >> Water demand of the project LMS and and reducing infiltration. resource needs of the Project, and will be available in the SWMP contractors where water resources can be prepared by LMS. extracted in a sustainable manner. >> SWMP will also show the water sources that the project uses in the construction phase. From spills and leaks Follow to measures proposed in As mentioned in Spill and Leaks section of surface water quality from section above Spills and Leaks. 8 Surface Water Quality The disturbance of stream bed sediments A detailed Soil SWMP for the >> The impacts as well as LMS and during In-stream and exposure erodible soils can have management of all identified mitigation measures in the in- contractors Bridge Construction impacts on downstream water users and waterways impacted by the Project stream bridge construction will aquatic ecosystem. is to be prepared. be availabe in the SWMP. Removal of vegetation and hence expose The SWMP will detail mitigation >> LMS to monitor regularly the the banks to erosion and subsequent and monitoring measures pertaining mitigation measures increase in sediment loads. to the construction of bridges and implementation of contractors. other water crossing structures. >> LMS and contractors periodically monitor surface The construction of bridge piles will result Temporary rock platforms within water quality for assessment of in the production of drill the stream beds will be constructed construction impacts and muds/sediments. Concrete pouring for to support a piling rig. The rig comparison to pre construction piles can impact on water quality. would be placed on the platform to conditions. drive bridge piles. Pipes or box culverts would be placed under any large temporary rock platforms to maintain low flows. The platform, consisting entirely of gabion rock, would be removed following bridge construction Any temporary platforms will consist of solid rock. Flows will be maintained and/or diverted. Fish passage will be maintained in larger water courses and where construction periods exceed the migratory cycles of fish species. Regular maintenance and inspection will be undertaken of all erosion, sediment and pollution control devices. Water quality of water courses will continue to be sampled and monitored. Progressive revegetation and short term stabilisation of disturbed areas would be undertaken. Scour protection will be provided in areas on high velocity flows. Fuels and other chemicals will not be stored in close proximity to water courses. Site specific construction method plans and ESCPs will be prepared for all significant water course crossings. Aspect Impact Before Mitigation Lead Monitoring Monitoring No Mitigation Measures Performance Indicator (Potential Impact) (Source of Impact) Responsibility Frequency Parameters 9 Surface Water Quality Initial project design has not taken into Inform the potential impacr on >> Public consultation in the LMS and during Pavement account any site specific requirements for water quality to the high sensitivity form of Public Awareness contractors Construction the management of water quality during of the receptors and the Campaign and Socialization pavement construction. communities. events, once in each affected area Pavement is to be installed during (24 Sub-districts) during the dry weather conditions. construction phase, are Use of vegetable oil rather than undertaken. diesel. >> LMS to prepare periodical Keeping all cleaning agents and monitoring report on asphalt residues contained and implementation of mitigation conducting cleaning activities away measures and water quality. from water features or drainage structures. Wash-out of concrete trucks will be undertaken in designated wash-out bays, away from water feature and drainage structures. Use appropriate staging techniques to reduce the potential for spillage of paving materials. Covering of stormwater drain inlets and manholes during paving activities. Prepare and follow site specific ESCPs. Use drip pans and absorbent materials to contain spills and leaks of paving materials and fluids. Aspect Impact Before Mitigation Lead Monitoring Monitoring No Mitigation Measures Performance Indicator (Potential Impact) (Source of Impact) Responsibility Frequency Parameters C. Impact to Biodiversity 10 Terrestrial Fauna Removal of habitats within the During all clearing operations and >> A construction LMS and construction corridor. particularly in areas of plantation implementation plan will be contractors and production forest reasonable prepared with attention much care should be taken to avoid injury about avoiding injury or or mortality of displaced fauna. mortality of displaced fauna. >> A plan on collection and Injury or mortality as a result of Injured or trapped fauna should be caring injured and trapped fauna construction activities. collected and placed into nearby will be prepared. habitat area. >> LMS will prepare a terrestrial Habitat fragmentation During design of bridges and fauna movement plan for culvets consideration should be competent authority's approval. given to the movement of terrestrial >> Regulation on hunting fauna through these areas. forbiddance should be stipulated for the site.
11 Terrestrial Flora and Removal of habitats within the Weed hygiene measures during site Regularly inspection of LMS and Vegetation construction corridor. clearing and construction to manage mitigation measures contractors risks associated with alien invasive implementation. plant species. Introduction or spread of Invasive Alien Species. 12 Aquatic Biota Temporary disturbance of habitat during With the implementation of the As mentioned in the surface LMS and construction. mitigation measures addressed for water quality and bridge contractors surface water quality and bridge construction section above. construction section, it is considered that impacts to aquatic biota will be negligible. Alteration of flows and volumes in some areas. Increase in pollutant sources and sedimentation. Aspect Impact Before Mitigation Lead Monitoring Monitoring No Mitigation Measures Performance Indicator (Potential Impact) (Source of Impact) Responsibility Frequency Parameters D. Impact to Noise 13 Noise Operation of well maintained >> Record all equipment and equipment and vehicles at all times. vehicle maintainance times. >> Use notice sign about limited Regular inspection and maintenance speed for areas in the site. of machinery and vehicles. >> Conduct public consultation on slow driving rules in villages. Installation of silencers on certain >> Regularly inspect machinery where applicable. implementation of mitigation Installation of suitable mufflers on measures and present detail in engine exhausts and compressor the monitoring report. components. Use of portable sound barriers around equipment such as generators. Taking advantage of any natural topographic features to shield noise.
Implementation of a 50km/hr speed limit for all vehicles on the construction site. Implementation of a 50km/hr speed limit for all heavy vehicles when travelling on the local road system.
Reducing Project traffic routing through built up and community areas wherever possible. Limiting hours of operation for specific noise generating equipment.
Periodic maintenance of all vehicles and work machinery. Use of the corridor (when of sufficient construction standard) for transportation whenever possible.
Use of dedicated site access roads that avoid routing through villages.
Where routing through villages is required, the hours are to be limited to between 7am and 10pm. If necessary to avoid narrow areas near receptors, consideration of construction of new access roads. Slow driving rules in villages (i.e. 50km and under), particularly near sensitive use areas which will be identified in consultation with the affected villages at least one month prior to the start of construction related activities within the area.
Control of behaviour of drivers at relevant locations and enforced through a penalty policy. Aspect Impact Before Mitigation Lead Monitoring Monitoring No Mitigation Measures Performance Indicator (Potential Impact) (Source of Impact) Responsibility Frequency Parameters Empty trucks will have no loose chains or other noise generating parts on the loading platform. II. OPERATION PHASE A. Impact to Air Quality 1 Exhaust emissions Emissions are predominantly generated Predicted concentrations for all >> Plantation along the road to LMS and from combustion of fossil fuels by the considered parameters, and all minimize impacts of exhaust contractors vehicles using the road. averaging periods at identified emissions on the sensitive areas. sensitive receptors are below the adopted assessment criteria. Based upon this, no additional mitigation measures are considered necessary.
B. Impact to Surface and Ground Water 2 Flooding and Bridge abutments to increase water levels Follow to measures proposed for As mentioned in the construction LMS and Drainage Regimes upstream of the water crossings and construction phase. phase contractors increase flow velocities beneath the bridge itself. 3 Surface water quality Vehicle accidents could result in the Follow to measures proposed for As mentioned in the construction LMS and from Spills and Leaks release of fuels, lubricants, hydraulic construction phase. phase contractors fluids and any other hazardous materials that a vehicle may be carrying. The build up of contaminants on the surface road over time may overflow into stormwater management systems and the surrounding environment. Nutrients and herbicides are also potential sources of spills, leaks and overflows in relation to their use for management of the vegetation on the shoulders and median strip. 4 Surface Water Run- Receiving watercourses from Designated sedimentation basins Regularly inspect off Quality contaminated road pavement run-off or will be retained to function as water implementation of mitigation from spill events. pollution controls to collect run-off measures and present detail in from spillages on the paved road the monitoring report. surface. Basins would be constructed to have an additional minimum volume equivalent to a 20 000 litre petrol tanker Traffic incidents on the Toll Road. Oil baffles will be provided at permanent sedimentation basins to prevent discharge of oil and grease products. Overflow structures would be designed to accommodate a 1 in 100 year flood. Aspect Impact Before Mitigation Lead Monitoring Monitoring No Mitigation Measures Performance Indicator (Potential Impact) (Source of Impact) Responsibility Frequency Parameters C. Impact to Noise 5 Noise Drainage controls and pollution >> A maintenance plan will be LMS and control basins will be installed at all prepared with detail on contractors major transverse crossings. frequency, budget, responsibilites… >> Regularly inspect implementation of mitigation measures and present detail in the monitoring report Implementation of low noise road surfaces such as porous asphalt and modern “thin surfaces”. Landscape screening by adding bunds at strategic locations. Noise barriers adjacent to the highway can reduce noise by up to 15 dBA. Where physical barriers do not have LMS and the desired mitigative effect, or contractors maybe impractical in a certain location, certain indirect measures can be implemented. This includes the installation of noise insulation in affected properties, such as replacing windows. Such measures will be implemented only as a last resort and where high noise levels are predicted.
Working with local regulatory LMS and local authorities to ensure smooth traffic regulatory flow is maintained. authorities Regular maintenance of the road surface to limit the occurrence of potholes and other surface irregularities which may increase noise generation.